Let $X \sim \operatorname{Normal}(\mu = 8.2, \sigma = 2.4)$. Then we are asked for $$\Pr[5.4 \le X \le 8.0].$$
Standardizing, we obtain
$$\begin{align}
\Pr[5.4 \le X \le 8.0] &= \Pr\left[\frac{5.4 - 8.2}{2.4} \le \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma} \le \frac{8.0 - 8.2}{2.4}\right] \\
&= \Pr[-1.16667 \le Z \le -0.083333], \end{align}$$
where $Z \sim \operatorname{Normal}(0,1)$ is standard normal. Consequently,
$$\begin{align}
\Pr[5.4 \le X \le 8.0] &= \Pr[Z \le -0.083333] - \Pr[Z \le -1.16667] \\
&= \Phi(-0.083333) - \Phi(-1.16667), \end{align}$$ where $\Phi(z) = \Pr[Z \le z]$ is the cumulative distribution function for the standard normal distribution. Since the standard normal is symmetric about $0$, we have
$$\Phi(-z) = 1 - \Phi(z).$$
This is the reason why your table does not have values for negative $z$-scores. Looking up the values in a table*, $\Phi(0.083333) \approx 0.533207$, and $\Phi(1.16667) \approx 0.878327$. Therefore, the desired probability is
$$\Pr[5.4 \le X \le 8.0] \approx (1 - 0.533207) - (1 - 0.878327) = 0.34512 \approx 34.5\%.$$
The reason why the book answer is inaccurate is because it presumably did not compute the cumulative distribution function with sufficient precision; i.e., no interpolation procedure was used for intermediate table values. For instance, if the table lookup were to round to the nearest hundredth, we have $\Phi(0.08) \approx 0.5319$ and $\Phi(1.17) \approx 0.8700$, and the result is $0.3471$, which matches the book's answer.
In the event that you would like to use (linear) interpolation to obtain a more precise result, the way you would do it is to look up the following values:
$$\begin{array}{c|c}
z & \Phi(z) \\
\hline
0.08 & 0.5319 \\
0.09 & 0.5359 \\
1.16 & 0.8770 \\
1.17 & 0.8790 \\
\end{array}$$
Then, the interpolated values are given by
$$\Phi(0.083333) \approx \frac{0.09 - 0.083333}{0.09 - 0.08} \Phi(0.08) + \frac{0.083333 - 0.08}{0.09 - 0.08} \Phi(0.09) \approx 0.533233,$$
and
$$\Phi(1.166667) \approx \frac{1.17 - 1.166667}{1.17 - 1.16} \Phi(1.16) + \frac{1.166667 - 1.16}{1.17 - 1.16} \Phi(1.17) \approx 0.878333.$$
Thus the linear interpolation yields the result $0.34510$, which is much closer to the exact answer than the naive (uninterpolated) computation.
*Note. Now that I can see your table, I should point out that column $B$ corresponds to the calculation $$\Pr[0 \le Z \le z] = \Pr[Z \le z] - \Pr[Z \le 0] = \Phi(z) - \frac{1}{2}.$$ Column $C$ corresponds to the calculation $$\Pr[Z > z] = 1 - \Pr[Z \le z] = 1 - \Phi(z).$$