United States
           Environmental Protection
            Air and Radiation
March 1999
           Office of Mobile Sources
Community Action
Programs: Blueprint for
Program Design
                                  > Printed on Recycled Paper


                                                                              March 1999
Community Action Programs:  Blueprint for Program Design
                           Regional and State Programs Division
                                Office of Mobile Sources
                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

        This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or positions.
     It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data which are currently available.
             The purpose in the release of such reports is to facilitate the exchange of
           technical information and to inform the public of technical developments which
            may form the basis for a final EPA decision, position, or regulatory action.


1   INTRODUCTION	     1-1
      Scope of Report	     1-1
      Implications of Federal Involvement	     1-2
      Layout of Report	     1-4

      Introduction	     2-1
      Establishing the Need	     2-1
      Organizing a Coalition of Community Partners	     2-1
      Identifying Program Goals	     2-2
      Funding	     2-3

      Introduction	     3-1
      Establish Education Baseline	     3-4
      Develop Outreach Materials	     3-6

      Background	     4-1
      Identification of Available Resources 	     4-2
      Development of a Forecasting Methodology	     4-5
      Test Procedures	     4-8

      Identify Participants	     5-1
      Developing a List of Channels to the Public	     5-1
      Establishing Notification Routes	     5-5
      Developing Materials	     5-6

      Framework for Program Evaluation	     6-1
      Tools Available for Measuring Effectiveness	,	     6-6
      Procedures for Direct Measurement of Program Effectiveness	    6-11
      Procedures for Indirect Measurement of Program Effectiveness	    6-20

      Public Outreach	     7-1
      Notification	     7-1
      Forecasting..	     7-2
      Program Evaluation	     7-2
      Summary	     7-2

Appendix A: EPA Memo:  Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile Source Emission
Reduction Programs in State Implementation Plans (SIPs)
Appendix B: Sample Letters to Community Businesses
Appendix C: Examples of Outreach Material
Appendix D: Examples of Notification Material
Appendix E: Example Survey for Quantifying Public Awareness
Appendix F: Example Survey for Quantifying Changes in Behavior
Appendix G: Example Emission Calculation
Appendix H: Example Ozone Map

                                1  INTRODUCTION
Scope of Report

Community Action Programs (CAPs) are voluntary, community-based programs formed from
locally-identified goals associated with improving air quality and public health. Known
across the country as 'Ozone Action', 'Spare the Air' and many other names, these programs
are designed to address local air pollution problems during the high pollution season. CAPs
emphasize educating the public on important air pollution issues (e.g., good ozone versus
bad) and the impact that individual activities have on air quality.  They define multiple steps
that the public, businesses and industry can take to reduce emissions, and use pollution
forecasting and public outreach mechanisms to notify participants on days when poor air
quality is forecast.  The programs are designed to encourage pollution-reducing actions on
both an intermittent "episodic" basis (e.g., reduce vehicle trips) and on a seasonal or longer-
term basis (e.g., regular car maintenance).

CAPs are typically directed by a coalition of interested government, business and citizens
groups. The programs are locally tailored, taking into consideration the pollutants of greatest
concern, local sources of emissions, and levels of participation by businesses and industry.
There are many different activities required to support and implement a CAP. Areas
operating an ozone alert program, for example, must spend a significant amount of time
during the early part of the smog season distributing educational materials and conducting
workshops for media and employer participants. These activities are crucial to ensure that
the general public and local businesses are aware of the program and understand the
appropriate  steps to be taken during an ozone alert period. The core activities undertaken to
develop and operate a CAP are:

     >  Develop education materials and outreach tools
     >  Coordinate with local grassroots community and business groups
     >  Establish control measures/actions participants take on alert days
     >  Develop accurate forecasting techniques (if episodic)
      > Establish and operate a media and business notification network (fax/phone/internet)
     >  Collect data on impact of the program

 Interest in CAPs has increased dramatically in recent years, as States and MPOs look to
 identify new ways to address local air pollution problems. To date, over 40 programs have
 been implemented in more than 20 states nationwide.  This increasing interest has prompted
 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Mobile Sources (QMS) to
 develop a more thorough understanding of the programs and to assess their effectiveness in
 reducing emissions. In a series of studies, ICF Kaiser has been collecting data on the episodic
 control programs currently implemented across the country and evaluated efforts that the
 areas have made to quantify the impacts of the programs. In addition to determining the
 impacts of the programs, EPA has also been interested in examining what factors contribute
 to development of a successful CAP. Identification of these factors will allow EPA to
 determine what CAPs  could eventually qualify for SIP credit. This document describes the


 major steps needed to put together a successful CAP and provides criteria that agencies can
 use to examine and evaluate their own programs.

 Implications of Federal Involvement

 Why Evaluate Episodic Programs?

 CAPs are often implemented to improve air quality and public health, but there is a need to
 quantify what benefits actually occur. CAPs offer additional emission reductions during
 times when the impact of emission reductions is the most critical.  Furthermore, continuing
 public education may reduce emissions over the long term due to increased public awareness
 of the air quality impacts of changed behavior. The extent to which CAPs actually yield
 significant or permanent emission reductions, however, is not yet clear. An air quality
 planning agency interested in claiming emission reductions from an episodic control program
 must first  be able to quantify those emission reductions before including the program in a SIP
 attainment demonstration.

 While some areas (maintenance, attainment) may not be interested in claiming specific
 emission reductions associated with their CAP, they may be interested in including it in air
 quality planning documents such as a maintenance plan.  Incorporating a CAP in a SEP would
 further legitimize the program and possibly open additional avenues for funding (e.g.,
 CMAQ, EPA funding  mechanisms).  Even though such areas do not need to quantify each
 emission reduction associated with the program, they should be able to measure the basic
 effectiveness of the program to show that it meets minimal standards of performance and
 that the federal air quality planning money is being spent effectively.

 Agencies that operate  CAPs (regardless of their motivations) can gain valuable insight by
 spending a small portion of their resources in evaluating the program's effectiveness. In
 addition to assisting with quantification of program impacts, an evaluation effort can provide
 valuable feedback on the effectiveness of program components. As with any air quality
 planning effort that requires staff time and agency resources, periodic evaluation is useful to
 identify potential improvements for the program. Without an annual comprehensive
 examination of the effectiveness of all program components, it will be difficult for the lead
 agency to  determine if the program is having any impact and where limited or additional
 resources  should be focused.

 What is Being Evaluated?

 A variety of techniques are currently being used to quantify the impact of episodic control
 programs.  The most common methods used include surveys of public awareness and
 knowledge, tracking increased ridership or employer vouchers, examination of congestion
 and parking data, or review of air quality and meteorological data.  These data collection and
 assessment techniques can be categorized into two methods: (1) direct measurement of
 program impacts and program effectiveness and (2) indirect measurement of overall program

 Direct measurement of a program impact is established when a specific parameter (e.g.,
 number of alert days predicted) can be directly used to estimate the effectiveness of a'
program component (e.g., accuracy of forecast procedures). Table 1-2 lists the most

common forms of direct data analysis. Analysis of regional air quality or traffic trends, in
contrast, is an indirect method which can be influenced by factors outside the episodic
program.  Factors such as variation in meteorological conditions or special events such as
professional baseball games, for example, influence these data and must be accounted for
before indirect measures can be used to quantify program impacts. Examples of indirect data
sources and some of their confounding factors are listed in Table 1-3.

TABLE 1-2. Direct data sources.
    Program Component
          Quantifiable Goal
 Quantification Method
  Public Outreach


  Overall Program
•  Public understanding of air quality
•  Number of participants
•  Awareness of program/agency
•  Media hits, accuracy of articles

•  Accuracy

•  Public awareness of alert day

•  Changes in emissions
•  Changes in business practices,
   notification of employees, changes in
Public survey

Track number of participants
Public survey of awareness
Track media participation,
review articles
Track performance

Public survey

Alert day survey of behavior
Business survey, parking lot
counts, traffic counts
 TABLE 1-3. Indirect data sources.
        Program Goal
            Confounding Factors
   Quantification Method
 Improve air quality

 Improve public health

 Long-term lifestyle changes

 Decrease regional congestion

        Other irritants (allergens)

        Other competing choices, periodic
        or episodic changes

        Special events (holidays, sporting
  Track air quality trends

  Track hospital admittance

  Survey / focus groups

  Collect traffic counts
Framework for Program Evaluation

Since CAPs vary considerably in terms of program goals, scope and impacts, mechanisms for
program evaluation must be flexible. To quantify the impacts of these programs, areas
should examine the effectiveness of all actions associated with the operation of an episodic
program. These include the activities that occur on an episode day, as well as the public
outreach activities required to prepare the public prior to an alert day. Figure 1-1 illustrates
the flow of information and actions during an alert day.

In order for a program to be functional and effective, all of the program components (public
outreach, forecasting, notification) need to be working together.  Therefore, to determine the
overall effectiveness of a CAP, program components need to be analyzed individually and as
a collective whole. Doing so  will allow agencies to identify weakness in their efforts and to
focus resources more appropriately.  Evaluating the entire program using a standard set of
performance measures and accepted techniques also allows outside agencies, such as EPA or
FHWA, to support the programs.

                                                  Update Phone line
                                                  Web site
                     Other Agencies  1   j  Gas Stations !
                                  Post pump /
                                  freeway signs  .'
                      FIGURE 1-1. Flow chart of alert day activities.
Layout of Report

The remaining chapter of this report describe the steps required to develop and implement a
successful CAP.  Chapter 2 discussed the initial factors, partners and resources that agency
should consider as they begin to develop these programs.  Steps needed to establish an
educational baseline and develop public outreach materials are presented in Chapter 3.
Chapters 4 and 5 discuss the resource and implementation issues associated with the
development of notification and forecasting components of a CAP.  Methods that can be used
to evaluate all of these components are presented in Chapter 6. Examples from successful
programs across the country are included throughout the document and in the appendices.

                     2  INITIAL PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
One of the key elements of a successful community action program (CAP) is careful planning
up-front. Even the best-intentioned effort will be wasted if time has not been spent
identifying why the program is needed, building support for the program within the
community, and setting realistic goals and limits for the program. Each of these important
program development steps are discussed below.

Establishing the Need

CAPs can be implemented for a variety of reasons. Often, motivation for implementation of
this type of program stems from local government and business concerns about the air quality
attainment status of the area and the restrictions, additional controls, and costs associated
with reclassification.  Many areas are also motivated by public health concerns  and believe
that increasing the amount of air quality information available to sensitive populations raises
awareness and results in significant health benefits. Finally, areas are looking to innovative
programs such as CAPs to educate the public about the negative environmental impacts of
traffic congestion and vehicle pollution, and to encourage alternative means of transportation.
In order for a CAP to be effective, the sponsors of the program and the public at large must
be convinced that the community has specific problems that a CAP can help address, and that
it will be a good investment of time and other resources.
Organizing a Coalition of Community Partners

The most effective CAPs have worked diligently with partners in the community to create an
organization that leverages local government resources with those in the business and non-
profit sectors. CAPs can benefit greatly from teaming with interested government, business
and citizen groups early on in the program development process.  Participating organizations
contribute to the development of a CAP by:

•     Lending additional legitimacy to the program

•     Donating resources (e.g., financial contributions, office supplies, meeting space)
•     Providing community leadership
•     Giving access to core constituencies (e.g., company employees)
•     Communicating the program's messages to employees and the community
•     Providing program design feedback
Coalition partners often represent many, if not all, of the audiences to whom the CAP
messages will be sent, and can provide important ideas and feedback in the design and tone of
CAP messages.  Coalition members may also be able to better identify the most effective
mechanisms for sending CAP messages to various parts of the community. For example, the
Chamber of Commerce may have a newsletter or mailing list for local businesses and could

include a pamphlet or factsheet to its members. Similarly, neighborhood groups or the
schools can be significant message delivery points. Partnering with local transit agencies can
also be beneficial. A coalition operating in Cincinnati, for example, has identified funding to
subsidize their transit system during the ozone season.  The publicity about the reduced fares
is good for the coalition and aids in informing the public about the CAP.  The subsidy has
also helped to increase bus ridership that appears to be continuing after the ozone season and
fares have risen.

Some things to keep in mind when forming a community coalition include:

•  Be inclusive - You never know when you may need some specific expertise.
•  Be creative - Some partners may have two different goals that can both be met via the
•  Identify groups that will benefit from the economic (e.g., business groups), public health
   (e.g., schools, hospitals), and environmental (e.g., environmental groups) goals of the
   CAP and draw partners from their memberships.
•  Identify partners that can lend additional legitimacy to the program (e.g., American Lung
   Association, local universities).
•  Identify partners that can provide specific coalition resources (e.g., meeting space;
   facilitation; graphic design; printing;  survey design and evaluation; media access to TV,
   radio, cable).
•  Regularly recognize your partners in your advertising and other public events (e.g., co-

Once formed, the CAP coalition can be subdivided into workgroups with individual missions.
Commonly used workgroup categories include:

Education     Develops the education and outreach materials and bring them before the
              full coalition

Membership   Expands and maintains the membership of the coalition and partner

Funding       Focuses on grant writing and other funding sources.

Chapter 3 addresses development of educational materials in more detail; establishing
program goals and participation and program funding are discussed below.

Identifying Program Goals

All CAPs begin as a potential solution to locally identified problems.  Depending on the
organization, the coalition members, and the resources they are willing to supply,  CAPs can
address many different kinds of problems simultaneously. Well-defined CAP goals are vital
in order to define appropriate messages which can be designed, delivered, and evaluated
against their ability to solve a defined set of problems.  Programs designed to include self-
evaluation efforts will ensure that the CAP focus their resource in the appropriate areas.

Areas implement CAPs for varying reasons. Figure 2-1 shows the goals identified as number
one by various CAPs around the country.  As can be seen in the figure, of the areas surveyed,
half of the programs stated that public education was the number one goal of the program.
The second and third most important goals listed were "Attain/maintain ambient air quality

standard" and "Health Benefits," respectively. For comparison, Figure 2-2 indicates all of the
goals that were listed as one of the top three in the same survey. While the top three goals
mentioned above are the most common, several programs also noted that economic benefits
and the reduction of traffic congestion and pollutant emissions are important objectives.

CAPs by definition are designed to increase public awareness and affect beneficial behavior
changes on days of poor air quality.  To achieve this, many programs enlist the help of the
general public as well as employers and industry. Areas have found that employer support
was critical to the program's success, since the businesses are in a unique position to educate
their employees about the benefits of participation and have opportunities and mechanisms to
notify them on alert days.  As a result, areas  have found that employer support is critical to
program success.

While most CAPs are designed to reduce ambient ozone (O3) levels, programs can also be
developed to target carbon monoxide (CO),  nitrogen oxides (NOx), paniculate matter (PM),
sulfur oxides (SOx), and lead. From the recent survey of CAPs sponsored by EPA (ICF,
1997), the following is the breakdown of the kinds of participation encouraged by program

•     All of the programs encourage public  participation
•     100% (2 of the 2) programs targeting  CO encourage employer participation
•     20% (1 of the 5) programs targeting PM encourage employer participation
•     97% (30 of the 31) programs targeting O3 encourage employer participation
•     71% (22 of the 31) programs targeting O3 encourage stationary source participation
•    None of the programs targeting PMio or CO include a stationary source component


Historically, areas have used a variety of funding sources to  support their programs. Most
use a combination of the following:

•     State Environmental, Air Quality, or Transportation Agency Funds

•     Taxes and Fees (e.g., state gas tax funds, DMV fees, permit fees, fees on sales of wood
•     Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds from the Department of
      Transportation through TEA21 authorizations and appropriations.

•     EPA grants (section 105)

•     Community outreach and education grants

•     Sustainable Development Challenge Grants

•     EPA regional grants
 •     Local Community or Business Foundation Grants

 •     Support from businesses  in both cash or in-kind support.

 The status and funding levels of each of these programs may vary (or disappear) depending
 on federal or state priorities and Congressional appropriations.

   Public Educatio
                                                                       Health Benefits
                                                                                 Attain or Maintain
                                                                                    Air Quality
Figure 2-1. Goals ranking #1 in existing CAPs around the U.S. (EPA, 1997).
             Public Education
     Attain or Maintain Air Quality
             Health Benefits
           Economic Benefits
 Meet Emission Reduction Targets
       Congestion Management
                       0%     10%    20%   30%    40%    50%    60%    70%    80%    90%    100%

                                            Percent of Programs Ranking Goal in the Top 3
Figure 2-2. CAP Goals Ranked in Top 3.

                                                              available (Phoenix, AZ)
The amount funding required to operate a CAP depends on the scope of the program.  Some
basic pollution advisory programs designed only to forecast pollution episodes and notify the
public through the media, for instance, have been implemented with little or no funding. This
has been possible through the coordination of various organizations (universities, National
Weather Service) to help with the forecasting, the interest and cooperation of the news
media, and the dedication of enthusiastic volunteers. Programs which have more demanding
goals such as increasing forecasting accuracy and maximizing public awareness through
targeted public outreach efforts and media advertising, require significantly larger budgets.  A
recent survey of existing CAPs (EPA, 1997) found 1996 program budgets ranging from
completely voluntary (no funding) to $1 million.  The average cost of the 31 programs which
submitted budget data was $200,000 /yr. The following is a summary of the study's key
findings regarding the levels of funding of CAPs around the nation:

•    Funding amounts for the different programs range from no funding to $1,000,000.
•    The funding level for the only CO program for which data was
     is $3,500/yr.
•    The average funding amounts received by the 26 ozone programs for which data was
     available was $210,000/yr. This average does not include the two programs which
     receive no special funding. The high and low funding values for ozone programs are
     $1,000,000 for the Baltimore program and $15,000 for the Pittsburgh program. On the
     average, programs in severe nonattainment areas spend more on implementation of
     their programs than those in attainment.

•    The average funding amounts received by the four programs targeting PM is $256,946.
     This includes high and low funding values of $900,000 for the Puget Sound
     Woodsmoke Curtailment program and $22,560 for the Northwest program1.
•    Staffing varies widely, from all-volunteer staffs (as many as 9 volunteers) to  10 full-
     time paid staff
It is interesting to note that 62% of the ozone program contacts felt that their 1996 budgets
were inadequate to fulfill their defined goals. When program directors were asked how they
would  spend an additional $100,000 or $200,000 per year, most mentioned improved
forecasting and modeling capabilities, developing additional outreach material, and expanding
advertising campaigns.
1 Note that if the Puget Sound program (which has the second highest funding level in the nation of any
program) is not included, the average for the three other PM programs is $42,594. All of the PM programs
expressed that their 1996 budget was adequate to fulfill the program's goals.



Education and outreach are the most important parts of any community action program
(CAP).  Understanding your audiences and developing targeted messages are key tasks to
pursue prior to the implementation of a CAP.  Building a strong coalition of community
partners and working with them to define the CAP goals is an important first step.

Without a clear definition of the program goals and input from relevant stakeholders on the
best messages to achieve these goals, CAPs risk wasting limited resources on unfocused
education campaigns.  The message  or messages you choose can be informational, funny,
urgent,  immediate, long-term, or a mix of each depending on what problems the
implementing agencies is considering and what messages  can best solve each defined problem
and goal.

As discussed in this section, the basic approach to developing outreach materials involves the
following key steps:

•   Organize key stakeholders to develop and maintain the CAP
•   Identify CAP goals and audiences
•   Develop an Education and Outreach Strategy and supporting messages and materials
    >   Pre-campaign survey to identify the current understanding and awareness
    >    Test the messages with Focus groups or test audiences
•   Develop a Notification network
•   Implement the education and outreach campaign to increase public awareness and understanding
    >   Measure the success of the education campaign with pre- and post-campaign surveys
•   Identify and use incentives to motivate individuals to take action
    >    Use the surveys to test potential incentives and the effectiveness of current incentives
•   Measure individual responses to the messages (i.e., changes in behavior)
    >    Use surveys to measure willingness to change and actual changes made

Who are the audiences?

The audiences for CAP messages  range from everyone in the region to specific subgroups
such as: the general public, large  and small businesses, employees, drivers, non-road engine
users, fireplace users,  school teachers and kids.
The Public

The general public is the main audience for most CAPs. Understanding what they already
know about air pollution and how they "feel" about the problem and potential solutions can
guide the CAP to develop messages that best educate and provide options for the public to


choose from. Many CAPs work with local television, newspapers, and the radio to get the
                   message out to the public. In some areas, Public Service
                   Announcements are used where these media outlets place
                   advertisements about the program for free. In many cases though, the
                   message is played at a less than desirable time.


                   Businesses, especially large employers, offer relatively easy access to
                   tne*r numerous employees. One fax or phone call to a large business can
                   notify hundreds or thousands of individuals. In some cases these
businesses are partners in the coalition and some offer additional incentives to their
employees such as telecommuting options, carpools, or T-shirts. Several businesses have
used their internal e-mail systems to notify employees and survey them to identify changes in
their behavior.
Community Organizations

If community organizations are a participant in a coalition supporting the CAP, one key
audience is already at the table to help in the design and delivery of key messages.
Depending on the community, the message may need to be translated and tested with some
members of the community to ensure that the translated message is meaningful to the local
population and effective.


What is the best way to get the message to drivers?  Some areas use billboards along
roadways to send the message.  In a few, the gas stations are involved and place flags by the
pumps to highlight the ozone episode day and alert drivers.  Radio spots - either purchased,
PSAs, or news stories - are other effective ways to send the message.


For CAPs interested in promoting long-term behavioral changes, outreach efforts to schools
should be an important part of their outreach efforts. Children are the next generation of
individuals that will participate in emission-producing activity (drivers, nonroad equipment
users, etc.).  Kids also offer a secondary mechanism to approach and motivate parents to
change their behaviors.  Mechanisms such as workshops, teacher newsletter/conferences and
classroom visits could be used to approach this audience.
Types of Messages?

The messages that CAPs present can take many forms. Current research efforts on the
effectiveness of various message types are relatively recent and ongoing. CAPs should
decide what type of image and motivational tactics to use in the outreach material.
Audiences should be able to form a consistent image from examining the various material
produced by the CAP. The image can be tied to the program name, logo, and slogans. Once
an image and message has been developed it should be used on all outreach materials and


packages of information (business, media, school information packages).  Listed below are a
few examples of different images presented by program names and motivational slogans.

   Partners for Clean Air - South Bend, IN, Louisville KY and others. (Community action)
   OZONE ALERT! - Dallas/Ft. Worth TX, Tulsa OK and others (Urgent)
   Smog Alert!  - Cincinnati, OH (Urgent)
   There's Something in the Air! - North Carolina Division of Air Quality (Educational)
   Spare the Air - San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, San Joaquin AQMDs (Motivational)
   Lets Clear the Air - West Michigan Clean Air Coalition (Motivational)
   Doing Our Share for Cleaner Air -  Southwest Pennsylvania Ozone Action Partnership
   (Community action)
•  Do Your Share for Clean Air -  Cincinnati, OH , North Central Texas COG & others
   (Individual action)
•   "Make a difference in your life, not in your lifestyle.  Little things you can do to help clean up our
   air"  - Arizona DEQ (Individual action)

Program image is also portrayed in the symbols/icons used by the CAP. Some areas present
a more urgent message by using a more alarming symbol such as the one shown in Figure 3-
 Figure 3-1 Urgent Program Symbol

 The general message portrayed in the symbol is that ozone is bad, today is going to be
 especially bad, and you need to do something to make it less bad. A more even urgent
 message, however, would be portrayed by the slogan "ozone alert". Both of these messages
 attempt to motivate individuals to make immediate behavioral changes, on the episode day.
 Other CAPs have used messages that are more benign.  These messages seem to take a more
 long-term approach to encouraging behavioral change  Example of this approach are shown
 in Figure 3-2.

Figure 3-2. Encouraging Seasonal or Long-term Behavioral Change

Each of these approached can be useful for CAPs. An alarming message may be effective to
alert drivers to change their driving on specific days throughout the season.  It may also be
the message that alerts schools, nursing homes, and other susceptible populations to the need
to limit their outdoor exposure on episode days.  Anecdotal information from focus groups
held  in California that examined various outreach materials raised a number of interesting
issues. Some of the respondents thought that simple messages were "too cute", but others
thought that the short messages were "easy to remember".  Respondents also noted that the
message portray a clear message with regard to what individuals should do to in response to
the program and when should those activities occur.
Establish Education Baseline

Determining the educational baseline of a community is an important early step in developing
a CAP.  An educational baseline is an initial record of the general perceptions and the level of
public understanding of local air pollution issues. It serves as an initial guidepost, or
reference point, to mark what conditions were like when the program started.  It represents a
foundation of information that can be used to refine the CAP prior to implementation and to
measure the impacts of the program years down the road.

Many areas use surveys and focus groups to measure the educational baseline of a
community.  Most programs use telephone surveys, a method that allows them to quickly
collect information from a large sample of the population.  (See Section 6, "Methods to
Evaluate Program Effectiveness" for an in-depth discussion of the various surveying
techniques available.) Typically, programs will survey the general public prior to, or shortly
after, the official start of the program to collect baseline information. Focus groups are used
to supplement telephone surveys by some CAPs to collect more detailed information than is
possible through a survey. Focus groups can be effective because they bring together a
group of people in a forum that encourages discussion and debate between participants, thus
promoting greater reflection on the questions and more thoughtful responses.

In addition to determining the educational baseline of the community, survey data can also be
used to improve program design, increase the efficiency of outreach efforts,  and identify
populations that are likely to be early adopters. Data on which mass media outlets  are used
most frequently by the public could be used to get the most mileage out of limited advertising
funds. Information on the types of actions that the public is willing to make to improve air

quality can be used to identify a collection of pollution episode day action items that the
public will be most responsive to.  Further, data can be collected to determine which
incentives are most effective at encouraging public participation.

Finding Out What Your Audience Has Heard?
                                                       Coordinate with Your Partners

                                                  One CAP ran into a problem when citizens
                                                  started calling into complain that they were
                                                  making changes in their habits while the local
                                                  transportation agency was out mowing all of
                                                  the medians on an ozone action day.
Measuring the level of public awareness of local
air pollution issues gives the program an indication
of how environmentally-conscious the community
is. Since the level of awareness is dependent, in
part, on how much the public hears about air
pollution problems through the media and other
public outreach mechanisms, measuring awareness
will help the program determine whether the
existing mechanisms are actually reaching the population.  Further, the survey effort will
serve as an indication of whether the public education materials (i.e. pamphlets) currently
being by other agencies are effective at increasing awareness levels. A survey can be used to
collect general air pollution awareness information by getting the public's opinion on the
following topics:

•  Is there a problem?
•  Is the problem getting worse/better?
•  Is the problem important to you?
•  Should action be taken to remedy the problem?
•  Which organizations do you trust?
Finding Out What Your Audience Understands?

It is also important to assess the community's knowledge of air pollution, its sources, impacts
and potential solutions.  Data on what the public does and does not know about air pollution
can be used to tailor outreach materials to educate the public on topics where knowledge
gaps exist. A baseline education survey can be used to address the following questions:

•   What causes the problem?
•   What can you do to address the problem?
•   What do you do?
•   Would you do more?
•   What would it take to do more?

Baseline data on public knowledge levels provide a basis from which to measure any future
increases in public knowledge that may be caused by the program and identify early adopters.
Early adopters can be identified by examination of survey results. These subgroups, if
identified in the survey,  are those most willing to change their individual behavior or lifestyle
to result in improved air quality.  If these groups are identified in a baseline survey, the
groups could be targeted by the public outreach efforts.

Using Survey Techniques to Establish Educational Baseline

Each of these topics above represents categories of questions that a program may want to
include in a survey of the general public. Of the many surveying techniques available to


collect this data (including telephone surveys, mail surveys, travel diaries, in-person
interviews, and focus groups), the two used most often are mail surveys and telephone
surveys. There are many important considerations to keep in mind when designing and
implementing an effective survey. Key issues include maintaining a proper survey length,
closely reviewing question wording, maintaining proper question order, incorporating
important survey features (i.e. routing instructions), developing an appropriate
greeting/coverletter, and developing an effective survey implementation schedule.  For a
detailed discussion of each of these  topics refer to Section 6, "Methods to Evaluate Program
Effectiveness". Also, two sample surveys which incorporate these concepts- one focusing
on public awareness issues and the other on travel behavior questions - are provided in
Appendices F and H.
Developing Outreach Materials

Examples of the many different types of outreach materials developed by CAPs are shown in
Appendix C. While many of these materials can be
used with different audiences, some must be tailored
to the specific needs of targeted audiences.  The
following sections begin with a discussion of the
basic messages which must be presented to all
audiences and follow with specific examples of
material which should be developed for targeted
audiences such as schools and businesses.
Universal Messages

Basic Program Information

These materials describe the coalition, the partners,
and the history and goals of the program. A short
description of the problems posed by elevated
pollution levels and a short list of things individual
can do provide the basic information for an
individual to begin being educated and looking for
opportunities to do their part. This information is
often provided in a pamphlet that can be printed in
large numbers and placed throughout the area (e.g.,
Secretary of State, Dept. Of Motor Vehicles) and delivered by partner organizations in their
regular mailings (e.g., utility companies).
      Use Existing Resources Wisely

Several speakers at a recent conference on
Voluntary Programs noted that coalitions
may be best served by buying advertising and
using the public service nature of the
message to make "deals" such as two ads for
the price of one. Designing a public
outreach campaign and working closely with
media outlets can help CAPs efficiently
spend their coalition dollars.  Other speakers
at the conference mentioned:

Work closely with local environmental
reporters; know who they are, talk to them;
and always return their calls.

Make the outreach material "news" and
highlight the importance to viewers and
readers; as news, the CAPs can get
informative articles and TV spots that send
the message without buying advertising time.

Air Quality Information.

                          To motivate individuals to change their behavior, they must first
                          understand that existing air quality levels are, or will be,
                          approaching unhealthful levels.  A number of different
                          techniques, using symbols and different words, can be used to
                          portray the severity of air pollution issues to the public.  In
                          contrast to PMjo or carbon monoxide-based programs, areas
                          trying to explain issues related to elevated ozone levels often
                          have to be particularly careful about the language they use to
                          educate the public regarding air quality issues.  For example, the
                          general public is easily confused by the term "ozone" and the
                          difference between ground-level ozone pollution and the ozone
                          layer in the upper.  To address this, most program literature
                          begins with a description of ozone - the "good" ozone high in
the sky that protects us from UV radiation, and "bad" ozone that is close to the ground and
harmful to humans, animals, and
agriculture. Exhibit 3-1 provides
examples of how a few areas have
tried to answer the question: What is

Answering Their Questions

CAPs which were recently included
in an EPA-sponsored survey
universally use a question and
answer format for at least some of
their documents. These vary in the
level of detail that is provided and
the tone of the problem. Some are
very scientific, while others cater to a
broader audience.  Several areas
have created two sets of information,
one geared to  adults and the other to
young school children.  A number
have developed significant amounts
of educational material that is used
as part of school curricula.

Some of the Q&A materials used in
various regions present very general
ideas about the problem and its origins
           Exhibit 3-1. What is Ozone?
Ozone is a gas and the main component of smog.
Ozone is formed by the reaction of sunlight and
carbon-based chemicals called "hydrocarbons"
acting in combination with nitrogen oxides (NOx).
The "bad" ozone should not be confused with the
protective layer of ozone in the upper layer of the
atmosphere which protects the earth from ultraviolet

Though it acts as a protective layer high above the
earth, ozone can be harmful to breath.  It is the prime
ingredient of smog in our cities.2

Ozone is a colorless gas that can be found in the air
we breathe.  Each molecule of ozone is composed of
three atoms of oxygen, one more than the oxygen
molecule which we need to breathe to sustain life.  The
additional oxygen atom makes ozone extremely
reactive. Ozone exists naturally in the earth's upper
atmosphere, the stratosphere, where it shields the
earth from the sun's ultraviolet rays. However, ozone
found close to the earth's surface, called ground-level
ozone, is considered an air pollutant.3
•   What is ozone?
•   Why is ozone bad?
•   What is ozone pollution and how does it occur?
1 Regional Ozone Coalition, Cincinnati, OH
2 US EPA, EPA-451/F-93-011, January 1994
3 Baton Rouge Clean Air Coalition

•  When and where does ozone pollution occur?
•  Where does ground-level ozone come from?
•  Where do hydrocarbons come from?
»  What causes ozone to accumulate in harmful concentrations near the ground?
•  What contributes to the	area's ozone problem?
•  Does	need to control ozone forming pollution?

Other materials may emphasize the effects of high ozone

•  Why are people concerned about ozone pollution?
•  How does ozone affect human health?
•  Does ozone pollution near the ground pose a serious threat to people?
•  How does ozone affect plant life?
•  Is ozone hazardous to my health?
•  What about children?
•  What about exercising adults?

Q&A can  also be used to summarize strategies for dealing with the problem:

•  How can I protect myself and my family from ozone?
•  What is being done about the problem locally?
•  What is being done about ozone air pollution by scientists and government agencies

As discussed earlier in this chapter, establishing an educational baseline allows you to identify
which of these questions are most important to your audience.

*  What the public can do to reduce harmful ozone every day?
•  What new ozone management strategies are being discussed?
•  Why is it so difficult to manage ozone pollution?
•  Our air doesn't look bad, so what's the problem?
•  How can we check the amount of ozone in the air - The Air Quality Index (AQI)

Answers to these questions should be tailored to your area. Once you decide on a term to
use (e.g., ozone, smog), it should  be used consistently in your materials.
Top Ten Lists

While most programs supply a list of suggested actions that area residents can choose from
during the ozone season and during forecast ozone episodes, most are simple list of actions
with no hierarchy of activities. Some lists are broken up by types of activities and target
audiences.  Example categories and suggested actions drawn from various CAPs around the
U.S. are presented below.

Take a Moment and Think Before You Turn the

•   Postpone errands that can wait until the period
    of unhealthy air passes
•   If you must drive and have more than one
    vehicle, drive only your newest car or truck
    because newer vehicles pollute less.
•   Link all of your small trips into one.
•   Make fewer trips. The word "trip" refers to the
    act of starting your car's engine. Simply
    starting your car and backing out of the garage
    pollutes nearly as much as commuting several
    miles to work. That's because your vehicle
    emits lots of pollution in the first few minutes of
    operation, before the emission control
    equipment has warmed up and reaches peak
•   Share a ride with a friend.  Carpool to work or
    social and recreational activities. Even if a
    Spare the Air day has not been forecast,  get into
    the habit of carpooling once a week or even
    once a month.
•   Walk or ride a bike for short morning trips, or
    when-exertion is unlikely.  Unhealthy pollution
    levels don't usually occur until mid-afternoon or
•   Where available, use public transit buses or
    light rail for some trips.

On the Road

•   Obey posted speed limits.  Your vehicle  will
    operate more efficiently and pollute less.
•   Keep your vehicle's air filter clean.  When the
    air filter is dirty, the engine can't breathe
    properly, causing it to operate less efficiently.
•   Get regular vehicle tune-ups.  This ensures that
    the engine and emission systems are operating at
    maximum efficiency.
•   Get a Smog Check when it's due.

Don't Forget About These Actions
              The Top 10 Reasons
      People Cheer for Spare the Air Days

 It gives the Pizza Delivery Guy a change of scene,
           don't call out for that meal.

 Prove your environmental concerns outweigh your
  materialistic nature:  Call your boss and tell him
  you're working at home today. (Good luck if you
          haven't cleared this already...)

 Put off that painting, it's -waited this long already.

 Show your family how concerned you are for their
 health and -well-being. Make the kids walk to every
 little place they wanted you to  drive them to. (Clean
      Air and Exercise, too!) Bikes work, too.

   It's a perfect time to share a ride with that good
        looking new colleague at the office.

Even on the worst Bad Hair Day you have an excuse,
   "It's a Spare the Air Day, I couldn't use the hair

   You really had been meaning to see how those
  barbecue starter chimneys worked without lighter
 fluid anyway. (They work better than lighter fluid!
              Use them all the time.)

 Squeeze just one more day out of a crucial deadline,
    and make your company part of the clean air
   solution! "I'll drop that by tomorrow, we're not
 driving anywhere today because it's a Spare the Air
      (Just don't volunteer that it isn't done...)

 "Surf The Web!" It's environmentally sound. Contains
 no fumes or aerosols, requires no gasoline, and so
     far, caffeine isn't included in starter fluids

         And the Number one reason is:

 "I can't mow the lawn today, Honey, it's a Spare the
Air Day!" (make sure you hide your sigh of relief and
           whatever you do, don't grin!)
    Don't use gasoline-powered lawn mowers or leaf blowers.  Replace you gas-powered yard tools
    with electric powered models.
    Use chimney-type or electric charcoal starters instead of lighter fluid when you barbecue.
    Use non-aerosol forms of consumer products. Aerosol versions often contain propellants that lead
    to ozone formation.
    Postpone using oil-based paints, which contain smog-forming compounds.
    Postpone outings on gasoline-powered boats and off road vehicles.


Clean Up at the Office
•   Talk to your employer about flexible work schedules and work from home when you can.
•   Talk to co-workers about starting a carpool or vanpool.
•   Reduce trips during lunch by eating at the office or walking to nearby restaurants.
•   Recycle to reduce energy use.
Delivering the Message

Once the CAP has decided what image the program should present and what basic
information they need to present; they should examine what mechanisms exist in the
community to approach the targeted audiences. Shown below is a laundry list of mechanisms
and materials that can be used to send out the message. These are channels that existing
CAPs have been found to be effective to certain audiences.
Media Material
TV/Radio. Print media advertising spots
TV and Radio Weather reports
Public Service Announcements
Newspaper Articles - Regular Weather Page

Channels and Items to the Public
Internet Site
Hot line/Phone number to call
Community Fairs
Refrigerator Magnets
Rolodex insert (with hotline)
Car Window items

Targeted Audiences


In most areas, the media serves as the primary distribution channel to the public.  It is vital
that the outreach material that the media used to develop their own articles and presentations
is clear and emphasizes the most important control measures to the CAP.  Unique material,
such as ozone maps, which can be shown as part of weather forecasts, should be developed
in areas that have strong media cooperation/participation with the CAP.
Paper fans

Items for Business Packages
Business workshops/presentations
Coalition Meetings
Business packages including:
program instructions, employee handouts, posters,
cards, flags, newsletter articles

School Materials
Classroom visits
Coloring/work books (learning tools)
Activity planners

Some businesses have been very supportive of CAPs and use their internal communication
systems (email, flags) to get the message out. They will need standard material describing the
CAP for distribution and materials like flags or posters to fly during alert days. They will
often reproduce materials, support contests to award employees who make behavior changes
such as switching from individual driving to carpooling.  They also do their own part by
postponing groundskeeping or batch processing that day. In some instances, businesses can
offer transit subsidies to their employees.  If encouraged, businesses can also participate in


public education campaigns by cosponsoring media advertisements (which can help the
business's image) and by including standard CAP articles in their company newsletter.


Many areas have programs tailored specifically to schools. As mentioned earlier, children are
often very effective messengers of environmental and health information to their families.
Presentations are created with children in mind should be created and offered to area schools.
Some material should be informational; other material should focus more closely on the
science of air pollution and the environmental and public health benefits of making changes in
habits. Learning tools are often developed and include videos, posters, coloring books,
workbooks, and contests.
 Is the Message being Heard?

 Once the messages have been developed, they should be tested on some audiences. Make
 presentation at a local school and get feed back from the kids.  Work with employers to meet
 with their employees and discuss the information materials and best ways to get the
 information across.  By using a survey at the beginning of their program and repeating the
 survey through several seasons, a CAP can follow the effectiveness of its outreach efforts and
 focus its resources most effectively.  Figure 3-3 was developed from Cincinnati survey data.
 Figure 3-3 - Awareness survey (Cincinnati)
 Surveys and focus groups can also be used to get feedback from the public on the CAP
 program, its message, mascots/logos, and its pollution episode day symbols.  Questions can
 be asked to determine whether the program is recognized and whether it's message is being
 interpreted by the public in the way that was intended. Some of these questions include the

 •  Are you familiar with the CAP program?
 •  Have you heard the CAP slogan?
 •  What does the CAP program mean to you?
 •  Have you seen the CAP mascot?
 •  Do you recognize the Alert Day symbol?

Focus groups are particularly useful for getting input from the public on which symbols and
slogans are most effective at conveying the program's message and motivating people to take
action. This type of data can be used to improve the symbols and slogans which make up the
identity of a CAP. Improving these elements will make the public outreach materials more
effective as well.


This section describes the development of a meteorological and air quality forecasting system
capable of providing information to decision-makers to identify, in advance, potential
pollution alert days for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter. Although some
forecasting programs in the U.S. have
been established to support the issuance
of wintertime carbon monoxide and
particulate matter alerts (e.g. woodsmoke
curtailment), the vast majority of
forecasting programs being conducted
throughout the U.S. focus on
summertime ozone episodes.  The
discussion below touches mainly on this
type of forecasting program.
Forecasting System Development

1.    Identify Resources
      Acquire/Examine Historical Data
      Develop Algorithm/Methodology

      Test, Apply and Evaluate

      Implement in Episodic Program

All short-term episodic pollution forecasting approaches in use today rely on statistical
relationships between observed meteorological conditions and resulting air quality
concentrations1.  To assess and define these relationships, a variety of statistical methods
(e.g. regression techniques, empirical formulas, and binary decision classification techniques,
such as the Classification and Regression Technique (CART)) have been applied using
historical meteorological and air quality data2. Once these relationships are adequately
defined, an algorithm is then developed to "predict" expected pollutant concentration levels
(using measured and forecasted data/information). Using this approach,  air quality planners
have the ability to alert and inform the public (for health reasons) and to implement
procedures (voluntary and mandatory) that are expected to lead to a curtailment of activities
that affect pollutant emissions.

Agencies implementing community action programs (CAPs) have a variety of options to
consider when developing an air quality forecasting system, including:  the complexity of the
forecasting approach, the frequency with which forecasts are made (once per day, weekdays
only?), and the commitment of personnel involved in preparing the forecasts (e.g. in-house
 1 Although not in use today, the application of meteorological/air quality models in "real time" to forecast
 expected pollutant concentration levels is becoming an increasingly viable alternative to simple statistical
 algorithms, given the availability of state-of-the-art personal computers with extended memory and high-
 speed computing capabilities.

 2An inherent assumption in establishing the relationship between meteorological conditions and ozone air
 quality concentrations using a long-term (e.g. 10 year) record is that the magnitude and mix of the precursor
 emissions have remained relatively stable throughout the period. In some areas of the U.S. the effects of
 growth may be offsetting the effects of pollution controls and motor vehicle turnover. However, certain
 national regulatory programs (e.g. the 1992 Federal RVP implementation) may have a relatively large effect
 in reducing precursor emissions and this and other changes in emissions should be kept in mind when
 developing a forecasting algorithm.


staff, cooperative agreement among multiple groups, or contractor assistance). Most
importantly, their options regarding the development, maintenance, and execution of a
forecasting system depend, in large part, on the available resources (historical air quality and
meteorological data, real-time weather forecast information, staff availability and expertise,
and funding).  Major steps that must be undertaken in the development of a forecasting
system include the identification of resources, acquisition and examination of historical data,
development of the specific air quality forecasting technique, and establishment of testing,
application, and evaluation procedures.  This section describes each of these major steps and
discusses some of the choices to be made in developing a reliable system to support episodic
pollution alert decision-making.
                                     Resources Required for Forecasting System
Identification of Available Resources

Agencies need to acquire sufficient funding for the development of the forecasting algorithm
or methodology and to support the implementation of daily forecasting procedures by staff.
Additional resources needed to
establish and carry out the
forecasting program include: a
historical data set of local and
regional meteorological conditions, a
historical air quality data set, a source
of local and regional weather
forecasting information, and a
computer system to retrieve and
store the information and perform
any necessary calculations.
                                     >  Funding for Development

                                     >  Funding for Personnel to Implement and Carry
                                        Out Program

                                     >  Historical Meteorology and Air Quality Data
                                     >  Source of Local Weather Forecasting

                                     >  Computer System

In view of the many tasks involved in developing and implementing a forecasting system, a
decision must be made as to the most effective source of expertise for each task. If the staff
and expertise are available in-house, then the entire forecasting system could be developed
and implemented without outside assistance. For some forecasting systems, the costs of daily
implementation are considerably less than the initial creation of the system. In these cases,
the agency may only need to obtain outside expertise while developing the system.

As an example, in many cases agencies interested in developing a complex algorithm-based
forecasting system do not have the specialized mathematical, chemical, and meteorological
expertise in-house necessary to develop the system.  In this case, it may be more appropriate
to have the algorithm developed by an outside resource specializing in this area, such as a
local university, an alternate government agency, or a private consulting firm.  Agencies using
a more simple forecasting approach, such as analyzing current meteorological conditions with
an understanding of how these variables influence ozone production in the local area, often
do not need outside assistance in system development or implementation. Typically, only one
or more meteorologists or air quality engineers are all that is necessary to operate systems of
this type.

Once established, daily pollutant forecasting can be performed by one individual or through a
team effort of multiple individuals/agencies. For example, staff from the University of


Maryland work in cooperation with staff from the Maryland Department of the Environment
to provide ozone alert day forecasts for the Baltimore and Washington D.C. areas. For the
Cincinnati area, meteorologists from the local television stations work jointly with staff from
the Hamilton County Department of Environmental Services to provide ozone forecasts for
the local "Do Your Share for Cleaner Air" program. A conference call is held each afternoon
to discuss the expected weather conditions for the next day and to make a decision for calling
an ozone alert.

Staffing resource decisions associated with development of a forecasting program should
consider the following:

1)  staff availability,
2)  potential interagency cooperation, and
3)  daily staff demands.

If a program is established, personnel must be made available for a certain length of time
during a certain designated period each day.  A forecasting program, if created as a joint
effort of multiple groups, must establish clear roles for individuals/groups, formalize lines of
communication, and set up a relatively strict daily schedule for conferences/deliberations and
decision making.  Forecast personnel must be provided a formalized schedule to retrieve the
necessary real time and forecast information, execute the forecasting algorithm or otherwise
prepare the forecast, analyze the results, and provide a decision to those in charge of
broadcasting the alert.

Data Availability

As the initial step in the forecasting algorithm development, an assessment should be
performed of the various types of data available, as well  as the sources for these data. The
three types of data needed to develop and implement a forecasting system are:

 1)  historical data,
2)  real-time observational data, and
3)  forecast data
Historical data are used to develop the forecasting methodology (e.g., a statistical forecasting
 algorithm), while the real-time and forecast "data" are used as input to the pollutant
forecasting technique.  The specific technique or algorithm will depend on the availability and
 reliability of the meteorological and air quality data for the area. For both types of data
 (meteorological and air quality), either actual physical observations or forecast values may be
used.  If real-time or near real-time information is not available on-line, it may be difficult to
 provide forecasts in a timely manner. For example, an ozone  forecast must be prepared by
 the early afternoon of the day before the alert day. Consequently, the  reporting time for
 observed (or forecast) data variables must be sufficiently prior to the forecasting time to
 allow for incorporation of these variables into the forecast. If this is not the case, then that
 particular datum is unlikely to be of any utility in the ozone forecast.


Meteorological Data

A major collector of meteorological data is the National Weather Service (NWS), whose data
are archived by numerous agencies. The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) is a major
source of these archived data. In addition, other sources of data may be available. Often, the
local air quality monitoring network also supports the collection of meteorological data.
Real-time data are generally available from the local NWS office or the local air quality
monitoring network, or are obtainable on-line through the Internet. All data must be
available and accessible in time for inclusion in the air quality forecast preparation.

Air Quality Data

The major source of historical air quality data is the EPA Aerometric Information Retrieval
System (AIRS).  More information on the AIRS system is available on the EPA website at
http://www.epa.gov/airs/airs.html. In addition, real-time observational data should be
available from the local monitoring network on-line and may also be  used in the forecasting.

Data Completeness/Applicability

As they develop a forecasting methodology, CAPs should consider the analysis of historical
data, preferably, a long (e.g. 10 years), recent record of meteorological conditions/air quality
concentrations. Analysis of these data provides insight into the causative factors related to
pollution events as well as the basis for the development of conceptual and/or statistical
models. In addition, a long record allows for the "capture" of pollutant trends.  It should be
noted that if a particular variable were historically available but is no  longer available,
inclusion of the variable in the forecasting system would be inappropriate.  (For example,
cloud cover was routinely monitored in the past. As many of the systems have become
automated, cloud cover has been dropped from those variables recorded.) The converse is
also true, even if a particular variable is currently available, if it were not historically
available, it would be difficult to incorporate this variable when designing the forecasting

In addition to examining data availability, CAPs should assess data completeness. Incomplete
data records can cause forecasting systems to incorporate surrogate variables, which in turn
impose possible errors into the system. With the change in National  Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) 8-hour ozone standard, it is crucial that the data be of sufficient
completeness to allow for the computation of an 8-hour ozone average concentration
following EPA guidelines which require seventy-five percent completeness on an annual,
daily, and 8-hour basis. Prior to the use of the data, they should be checked for accuracy and

Computer Resources

An additional consideration in establishing a forecasting program arises from the need for
certain physical resources.  The implementation of the ozone-forecasting algorithm will
minimally require obtaining current meteorological and/or air quality data on a daily basis

Obtaining these data may be as simple as making a series of phone calls, or it may involve the
electronic transfer and processing of data from a number of different sources (requiring
computer hardware, modems, and programming skill).  If an algorithmic system has been


adopted, then .computational facilities will be required.  The complexity of these
computational facilities may run from that of a hand held calculator, to a PC type machine to
a workstation, depending on the complexity of the algorithm adopted.  If meteorological
forecasts are being performed as part of the ozone forecasting procedure,  then additional
computational facilities may be needed.  These procedures generally require work-station or
higher end computing machines. Depending on the in-house available resources, it may be
advantageous to have one or more of the necessary tasks performed by an outside agency or

Development of a Forecasting Methodology

As noted above, the development of a forecasting methodology will depend on the
complexity of the area, the availability of the data, and the availability of resources to support
the program.  For example, a very complex algorithm requiring high-end computer
capabilities could be developed for a particular area, but it would be of little use if the
required computer resources were not available on a daily basis to perform the necessary
calculations. From a practical standpoint, however, most ozone forecasting programs being
conducted today rely on relatively simple statistical algorithms that require only small to
moderate amounts of computing capability readily available on most personal computers

In developing a statistical-based forecasting algorithm,  a principal consideration is the
representativeness of the historical data record. If an unprecedented meteorological/air
quality event occurs that is not recorded in the historical database, then regardless of the
quality and quantity of the data used to develop the forecasting system, those conditions
would not be properly accounted for. Consequently, a representative historical database is
requisite to the successful creation of a predictive algorithm. While complete information is
not always available, a database can be assembled such that the relevant informational content
is maximized.  Specifically, this database should be constructed such that: (1) the spatial
distribution of the data is sufficient to resolve local ozone formation as well as pollutant
recirculation and transport and (2) the data record is of sufficient length to include
representatives of the different types of episode and non-episode days that are likely to occur
within the area of interest. The principal remaining issue is how these  data are used to
construct a predictive algorithm.

The major task CAPs must address is to find an algorithm that determines current and next-
day daily ozone concentration based on available meteorological and air-quality data for the
air basin for the current (partial) and previous days. The fundamental difficulty in this task is
that any data set will include more than one set of variable dependencies (e.g., different
meteorological conditions can give rise to similar distributions of ozone concentrations). A
simple example of this principal involves a simple function of one variable, such as

                                       /(*) =y.

 The functional relation (/) between x andy can be determined from a data set composed of x
and y values, with standard regression and curve-fitting techniques. A more complicated
problem is one where there is a multivariable functional dependence, such as


This type of relationship can be dealt with using multivariable regression techniques since a
vast amount of literature on the effectiveness and robustness of these techniques exists.
Note, however, that a key feature of this relatively complex problem is that there is a single
functional relation assumed between the independent and dependent variables. Regression
  Forecasting Techniques used in the Baltimore-Washington Area

  The University of Maryland (UM) and the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDOE)
  have conducted the ozone forecasting for the Baltimore-Washington area in recent years. The
  current day's surface meteorological data (surface wind speed, wind direction, temperature, sky
  cover, relative humidity) for the Baltimore-Washington International Airport are obtained. Upper
  air observations at the Dulles International Airport for temperature and wind speed at the 850 mb
  level are also obtained for the first step. Next, information from the raw model output of the
  Nested Grid Model, the Medium Range Forecast Model, and the ETA Model for other variables is
  obtained. The local National Weather Service forecast is consulted, particularly to determine
  maximum temperature.  Information on the previous day's maximum ozone concentration is also
  The data are then used in a regression model that predicts the daily maximum ozone concentration
  in ppbv. The regression model was developed using ozone/ surface and upper-air meteorological
  data for the period May-September for the years 1987-1993.  It is important to note that the
  regression model uses statistical procedures to correlate meteorological parameters with ozone
  parameters.  It does not take into account annual increases or decreases in emissions, nor the
  spatial or temporal variations in emissions of ozone precursors.

  The regression model requires the input of the  daily maximum and minimum surface temperatures,
  afternoon sky cover, relative humidity (at 0900 UTC), surface wind speed at 1000 and 1800 UTC,
  wind speed and temperature at 850 mb, and the length of the day, to make a forecast of the daily
  maximum ozone concentration. The short-term regression forecast model requires daily maximum
  and minimum temperatures, morning and afternoon sky cover, relative humidity (0900 UTC),
  surface wind speed at 1800 UTC, inversion temperature, wind speed at 850 mb, length of the day,
  and maximum ozone concentration on the previous day. In addition to providing the input vari-
  ables to the model,  the forecaster also makes corrections for any known deficiencies in the
  regression algorithm. The forecast of the daily maximum ozone concentration is actually done
  twice.  One forecast, the long-range (24-hour)  forecast is issued at 1500 EDT. This is updated the
  following morning by the short-range (12-hour) forecast issued at 0900 (EDT).  On weekdays,
  these forecasts are made independently by forecasters at the UM and at the MDOE. The forecasts
  are discussed and a consensus forecast is then  issued.  On weekends, forecasts are prepared at the
  University of Maryland only.
  Once a daily maximum ozone concentration is predicted, a "color coded forecast" is prepared for
  dissemination to the public.  This entails assigning a color to represent the predicted ozone
  concentration. The Code Red forecast is assigned when the predicted ozone concentration exceeds
  125 ppb. This code is equivalent to the "Warning" level in standard forecasts made by the
  National Weather Service.  The Code Orange forecast is assigned when the predicted ozone
  concentration exceeds 110 ppb. This code corresponds to the "Watch" level of the National
  Weather Service. The Code Yellow forecast corresponds to the 60-110 ppbv range, and the Code
  Green forecast corresponds to less than 60 ppb.


techniques employed for this type of problem typically generate some subset of all the
possible functional forms, and then use an optimization measurement to select from all the
possible functions, the one deemed "best" by this measure.

Examples of these techniques go under the names of multivariate analysis, principal-
component analysis, single value decomposition, maximum entropy methods, linear
prediction, etc.  However, even when a single functional relation is appropriate, these
techniques may not be fully effective at elucidating extremely complex functions,  such as
those with extremely sensitive dependencies, or discontinuities (including that which
describes the relationship between meteorology and air quality).

These analytical methods assume that the data set can be characterized by a single functional
dependence. However, the functional dependence on temperature for predicting  ozone
concentration on a hot, wet day, for example, is not the same as that on a hot, dry day.
Humidity fundamentally changes the functional dependence on temperature. A standard
regression technique would just weigh one of the variables by the other,  say
 t = temperature
 q = specific humidity

 so that as specific humidity increases, the temperature dependence decreases. This may work
 provided that the functional relationships remain fairly simple and analytic, but in practice this
 does not work (is not computationally feasible) when the relationships become more
 complex. On the other hand, if the true relationship is something like

                               /= t when q < 8 g/kg , or
                                /= 2t when q > 8 g/kg,
 then the regression derived single function would be something along the lines of
                                       /= l.5t
 for all values of specific humidity, which would always be wrong.  When the dependent data
 set has discrete subsets, the standard tools which apply to continuous sets may be

 Similar problems have been recognized in other fields, and some of the most difficult
 problems in information processing are currently being reexamined fruitfully with algorithms
 which explicitly acknowledge that the data set is composed of discrete classes.  Particularly
 difficult problems, where classification algorithms are providing novel solutions, include
 speech recognition, visual image, data compression, medical imaging,  medical diagnosis, and
 weather forecasting.  The state-of-the-art statistical tools being used to solve these problems
 are decision-tree methodologies, with the prime example being the Classification and
 Regression Tree (CART) algorithms developed by Brieman et al. (Brieman, 1984).  This
 particular set of decision-tree algorithms has been extensively tested, and shown to provide
 nearly optimal classification for a variety of data sets and applications. The CART analysis
 technique was originally applied in the early  1980s to the South Coast Air Basin (Los
 Angeles) to  support ozone forecasting for the area. An ozone-forecasting algorithm
 developed using the CART approach was also recently developed and tested for the Baton
 Rouge,  Louisiana, severe ozone nonattainment area.

                                                         Daily Forecasting Procedure

                                                         >  Acquire Data

                                                         >  Execute Methodology
                                                         >  Make Decision

                                                         >  Send Out Message

In attempting to properly forecast ozone production in a particular region, a balance must be
found between the possibly divergent characteristics of the physics of ozone formation and
the regulatory framework.  Since many ozone forecasting exercises are intended to prevent
the future designation of non-attainment in a region, it may be advantageous in the design of
the forecasting system to focus on less severe ozone        	
concentrations than those which exceed the regulatory
limit. In addition, a typical ozone forecast must be called
at some point prior to the actual daily maximum observed
ozone concentration, which necessitates that the
relationship between the maximum observed ozone
concentration at the time of the forecast and the later daily
maximum be understood.  This also indicates that it may
be advantageous in design of the forecasting system to
focus, or at least account for, maximum concentrations values less than the regulatory limit.

Following the development of an appropriate forecasting algorithm, a remaining task is
transforming this algorithm into a reliable and easy-to-use-forecasting tool. Preparation of a
daily forecast will involve

I)  The acquisition of on-line meteorological and air quality data (real-time and forecast
2)  Execution of the statistical algorithm,
3)  Analysis of results and decision regarding alert, and
4)  Dissemination of results.

The algorithm must be written to efficiently accept input data (on-line or typed) in a timely
manner to meet the established daily schedule set for computation, analysis, and decision
making.  The details of the daily procedures and schedule to be followed in conducting the
forecasting should be established in a formal air quality forecasting protocol so that all parties
involved are aware of the elements of the program, how alert decisions are arrived at based
on the results of the forecast, and the timing of the decisions so that other parties can be
properly notified.
Test Procedures

Testing and evaluation of the algorithm are important before relying on the
algorithm/methodology to accurately predict pollutant events.  Testing and evaluation are
recommended before a newly developed algorithm is put in place as part of an episodic
program.  Evaluation must consider the ability of the methodology to accurately predict non-
episode days (low ozone concentrations) as well as episode days (high ozone concentrations),
Figure 4-1. Two primary concerns are underprediction of peak concentrations for episode
days (resulting in the misidentification of an exceedance day) and overproduction of peak
concentrations for non-episode days (resulting in the false identification of an exceedance
day).   Because of the desire to avoid unnecessarily notifying the public, the latter case is of
most concern.

200 -I
Max Measured Ozone Concentration (p
NJ 01 -si Q K)
o cn o oi o en <
1995 Baltimore Ozone Action Day Forecasting Accuracy on Days that
the Federal Ozone Standard (125 ppb) was Exceeded






— J


                      5  DEVELOP NOTIFICATION SYSTEM

The ability to forecast pollution episodes a day in advance creates a window of opportunity
for CAPs to notify the public about preventative actions that can be taken. Once a forecast is
made, however, an effective means by which to notify the general public is needed - a
pollution alert notification system must be established for this purpose.  A notification system
is a set of established procedures for transmitting a message, through various channels, to the
public and participating organizations. A well-designed notification strategy can be the
difference between large-scale community action on pollution episode days or virtually no
action at all.  It is a crucial element of a program's success since the level of community
action is dependent, in part, on how effective a program is at spreading the word. This
section reviews the key elements needed to design a comprehensive public notification

Identify Participants

Figure 5-1 is a schematic diagram of a typical pollution alert day notification process.  The
boxed items represent participants in the notification system. These include employers,
stationary sources and the media which help to transmit the alert message to their employees
and the general public. The circled items represent the channels of communication through
which the pollution episode day message, represented by the connecting lines, is transmitted.
As seen in the figure, once a pollution alert is declared, the message is sent from the
implementing agency, via various routes, to participating organizations, their employees, and
the general public. Once received, it has the potential to affect behavior at the organizational
and individual levels.

Pollution  alert messages are designed to notify the public (especially sensitive populations
such as children, the elderly and people with respiratory ailments) about poor air quality and
to encourage changes in personal behavior that brings about immediate emission reductions.
Unlike general public education messages, a pollution alert notifies the public about an
immediate public health threat. Alert messages  convey a sense of urgency, making them
effective mechanisms for motivate people to change established behaviors. Programs
typically couple the alert message with suggested actions that can be taken by individuals to
do their part to reduce air pollution.

Developing a List of Channels to the Public

The ultimate goal of a notification system is to convey the pollution episode message to as
many people as possible.  The more channels of communication used the greater the
likelihood that a significant portion of the population will become aware of the pollution
episode.  There are many communication channels through which programs can notify the
public about a pollution episode day.  Some of the main communication channels include:

                               Ei'iSHnic COMKO/ I'lttHtH i MDi'ci iHI'S J'oi i.i no\Ai r:itr
                                      Execute Notification Procedures

1 Stationary
1 Transportation

9 Gas Stations

r  E».u. ",
y pcaters, flag*/
                           Figure 5-1 Routes of Communication
•    Local media outlets (newspaper, radio, TV)

*    Phone hotlines

•    Internet web page

•    Display signs at business, local agencies and gas stations

•    Changeable highway signs

Many mechanisms can be used by the program with limited investment and on-going costs by
coordinating with the controlling authority (i.e.  TV networks, newspapers, highway sign
officials, etc). Others such as web pages, gas station signs and phone hot lines, may require
an initial investment in resources to develop.  The types of channels used by a program will
depend on their availability within a community and the budget constraints of the program.
Even though the types of channels available for use will vary somewhat by locality, most
should be available in every community.  Areas  designing a public notification strategy will
need to consider which communication channels are available, which are feasible given the
agency's resource constraints and which will reach the most people in a timely manner. Each
of these considerations must be weighed to determine which method(s) of communication
should be used by the program.

The communication channels with the greatest potential to reach the most people are the
local newspapers, radio and TV.  One or more of these mass media outlets are regularly
accessed by most citizens making them ideal for exposing a large percentage of the
population to the episode alert message.  Surveys completed by many areas indicate that TV
reaches the most individuals.  The results of a survey indicating which media respondents
recalled hearing about the program is shown in Figure 5-2. To enlist media participation
program staff will need to describe the program to each media contact and discuss
coordinating notification procedures.  The media contacts should be informed of the normal
schedule for forecasting and be notified of any timing issues or problems with the forecasting
team as soon as possible. Other advantages of using local media outlets are that they
frequently transmit the pollution alert message as a public service at no cost to the program.


Mass Media

Each of the mass media outlets (newspaper, radio & TV) informs the
public in different ways as dictated by their medium.  The main ways
a newspaper can communicate the alert message to the public are to
discuss it in an article, or to display an alert symbol on the front page
or on the weather page with the Pollutant Standard Index (PSI)
report. Since newspapers have layout limitations, and episode days
are typically forecast during the afternoon, a predetermined space on
the front page or weather page should set aside with a couple of
simple icons which identify each type of alert day (green symbol - all clear, red symbol- alert
day). Radio stations can broadcast public service announcements, or include an alert
notification in news stories or in traffic reports. TV stations can mention the alert day in the
Source for AQ Message

Highw ay Sign
New spaper


0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Percent of Population
            Figure 5-2 Media Distribution in Dallas (Information on Episodic

news reports or the weather reports. When the alert notification is included as part of the
weather forecast (pollution forecast), colorful maps or animation can be used to visually
indicate which areas are to be 'under alert'.  An example of an ozone map is shown in
Appendix H.
Businesses and Employers

Companies, businesses and other participating government agencies can display signs, flags
and placards to notify the public on pollution episode days.  Notification symbols can be
                                  displayed via ozone flags, stickers and placards in
                                  windows or inclusion on business signs.  Gas stations
                                  can also participate by place signs on gas pumps to
                                  remind people of the pollution alert. How effective
                                  these, display signs are at reaching the public will
                                  depend upon how widely they are distributed to and
                                  displayed by local organizations. Each of these
                                  methods will require monetary expenditure to design
                                  and print the display materials.
Support of the business
community is an important
part of a successful program
since people are more likely
to take action  on episode
days if their employers are
encouraging them to do so.


These organizations can also communicate pollution episode information to their employees.
Many programs have recruited businesses and agencies to participate in spreading the word
to their employee, since they have unique mechanisms (such as company-wide broadcast
messages via email and voicemail) which can reach and influence a large number of people
quickly and efficiently.  The number of people reached will depend upon how many
organizations are recruited to participate and the number of employees at these organizations.
Support of the business community is an important part of a successful program since people
are more likely to take action on episode days if their employers are encouraging them to do
so, (Some employers also offer incentives for their employees to participate, such as offering
free or discounted transit passes, offering free lunches, or coordinating car/vanpools with
other employees.)  These factors make employers an important channel of communication
through which alert information can be disseminated.
Direct Communication

Telephone hotlines, email and Internet web pages and the main communication
channels that allow the implementing agencies to communicate directly to the
public. The main advantage of these channels is that there are no limits to the
amount of information that the agency can make available to the public.
Common topics covered by hotlines and web pages include current air quality
levels, area-specific pollution forecasts for the next day, information on actions
that people can take to reduce pollution, and other pollution and health
information. The internet can also be used to notify telecommuters of alert
days via internet email. The Internet is a versatile medium for distributing
information since it offers an interactive environment with pictures, graphics, sound and
animation.  Web developers can also include links to other sites to take advantage of other
sites with shared educational material or information on available transit options. Some
programs have developed ozone maps to graphically show projected ozone levels in the
region. Web sites can also contain information to support other notification channels. The
sites can be used to explain what the notification symbols displayed by the newspaper or TV
station mean.

                                  Telephone hotlines and Internet web pages are both
                                  'passive' communication channels, meaning that,
                                  compared to  some of the other channels they require
                                  more effort on the part of the public to access the
                                  information they contain. These channels are typically
                                  used by people who have a personal interest in knowing
                                  what the air pollution level is and are willing to make
                                  the efforts to find out by calling the hotline or
                                  connecting to the web page.  In contrast, many of the
                                  other channels (e-mail, TV, radio, etc.) are more
                                  'active' in the sense that they communicate the message
to people who wouldn't normally make the effort to find out what the air pollution situation
is.  The main drawback of passive communication channels is that fewer people are  reached
through this mechanism. One final consideration is that programs choosing to utilize these
channels will require some capital expenditures to  set up these systems and keep the
information current. Despite these issues,  telephone hotlines and web pages are among the
most effective means to communicate detailed up-to-date information to the public. As a


result, they have become standard means by which CAPs convey air pollution alert
information to the public.

A final type of message sign being used with increasing frequency is changeable highway
signs. More and more metropolitan areas are building changeable roadway signs along busy
freeways to provide important traffic information to drivers. Some CAPs have coordinated
with a transportation agency to have the pollution alert message displayed on days of poor air
quality. This method holds promise as an effective, low-cost way to reach the freeway
commute population.
Establishing Notification Routes

Once the means through which to communicate the pollution alert messages have been
chosen, procedures must be developed to ensure that it is transmitted efficiently via all
channels to participating organizations and the general public. Most programs rely on a
phone and/or fax tree to send out pollution alert information simultaneously to all
participating organizations and to the media. Some send the alert off to grassroots groups
and business coalitions that further distribute the alert message via their own fax trees to
other interested parties. These fax and phone trees have proven to be efficient means to
distribute the pollution messages from the episodic control program administrative level
down to the participating groups that are an integral part of the alert notification distribution

As discussed, the local media (newspapers,  TV and radio) are a crucial part of the
distribution system since these are the main channels of communication through which most
of the public can be reached. To  enlist the participation of the media, episodic control
program staff will have to meet with media contacts to describe the program and discuss
what participation in the program entails. Once a commitment from the media is secured, the
implementing agency will need to negotiate with the administrators of the media outlets
chosen about how the alert message will be conveyed.

In newspapers the alert message can be  conveyed by mentioning the alert day in an article, by
declaring the alert day in the Pollutant Standard Index (PSI) section, or by prominently
displaying a recognizable symbol that represents poor air
quality. The later option, displaying a recognizable                  •
symbol, is one of the most effective ways to quickly
convey the pollution alert message through the print
media. (More discussion of alert day symbols is given in
the Chapter 2)  Ideally, a pollution alert symbol should
be placed on the front page of the paper where it is
highly visible. The beneficial results, in terms of public
exposure to the message, yielded from prominent
coverage of the pollution epiaode day in the newspaper
and other media cannot be underestimated.  With this in
mind, program administrators should try to secure the
most favorable media coverage as possible.  This may involve negotiating with the
newspapers over such issues as the placement of the pollution episode day message and
 symbol and the amount of space given to the topic.

The implementing agency will also need to discuss the procedures for notifying the public
with local radio and TV stations. Radio stations have several means by which to relay alert
information to the public. These methods include broadcasting public service announcements
or including alert notifications in news stories or in traffic reports. Disk jockeys and radio
personalities can also mention the status of air pollution alerts during their discussions on the
airwaves.  (On pollution episode days, talk radio stations could devote a segment of the show
to air quality.) CAPs may able to negotiate with radio administrators to influence how
frequently the alert day is mentioned.  Also, the radio stations may be open to suggestions
about the content of the message.  CAPs should see how much information the stations are
willing to broadcast.  Some stations may be willing to mention the alert day at regular
intervals as well as discussing actions that people can take to do their part to  reduce

On television, alert day messages are typically discussed in the weather report and/or in news
reports. Once again, the more coverage given the issue, the greater the number of people
will be exposed to it. Hence, program administrators should negotiate to receive as much
coverage as the station will allow.  Topics such as what the newscasters will say about the
pollution episode during the broadcast may be negotiable. At a minimum, newscasters should
mention that there is a pollution  alert because of forecasted high pollution levels.  Additional
useful information that could be  mentioned includes actions that people can take to reduce
pollution, such as using alternative modes of transportation and postponing landscaping
activities that use small engines.  Finally, if the program has a pollution episode day  symbol
the television broadcasters may agree to display it on-screen (in one of the corners of the
screen) during the broadcast. This would familiarize the public with the symbol and further
help to spread the message.

One final note regarding transmission of alert  day information to employees from
participating companies or via the internet.  As mentioned previously, companies can inform
their employees of a pollution episode day using a company-wide broadcast message via
phone mail, e-mail, or internal memo or by displaying alert day placards or flags throughout
the office in places employees will notice. Staff from the agency implementing the program
should discuss resource limitations with companies to determine if the company wants to take
primary responsibility for notifying their employees or if the agency should use a list-serve to
contact employees through internet email. In  some cases, use of both mechanisms would
help to ensure the distribution of information.  However,  if the company and the agency are
both using email to track employee participation, some double counting could occur if
employees are responding to both systems.

Developing Materials

A final important aspect of creating an efficient notification system is the development of
materials to assist in conveying the program's message.  Many programs have developed an
alert day symbol to inform the public on the air quality conditions, such as a traffic light with
green, yellow and red lights.  In the example of a traffic light, a red light would suggest poor
air quality and would convey the message that the community should 'stop' polluting
activities that day, such as using  gas-powered garden equipment or barbecues.  A green light
means that the meteorological conditions are not conducive to pollution formation and that
all activities can continue unabated. Symbols  such as these are easily recognizable to people
and can serve as powerful tools to convey information to the general public.  Other materials
which can assist in spreading information to the general public include an Internet web page


with links to an ozone map which visually shows where high ozone levels are expected. With
the Internet becoming an increasingly important source of information for people, a web page
can be an efficient way for computer-oriented individuals to learn about local air quality.
Examples of notification systems included on web pages are included in Appendix D. Like
the alert day symbol, the ozone map is another visual tool to quickly convey information that
is easily understood to people. Finally, many programs have developed posters and flags
with the program symbol and logo to increase public awareness of the program and educate
the public about actions they can take to reduce pollution. Consistent use of the same
symbols in these material is important to emphasis the message. Typically these materials are
displayed in public buildings and by participating organizations and agencies.


Framework for Program Evaluation

Increasing interest in CAPs has prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Office of Mobile Sources (OMS) to begin developing a more thorough understanding
of the programs and assessing their effectiveness in reducing emissions. In an October 1997
memorandum, EPA issued guidance on incorporating voluntary mobile source emissions
reduction programs in SIPs.  An important requirement for SIP eligibility is the commitment
on the part of states to monitor, evaluate, and report the impacts  of the program on emissions
and remedy any shortfalls between actual and projected reductions. Table 6-1 lists this and
other major issues that EPA must address before they can consider granting SIP credit to
these programs. Appendix A includes the complete October 1997 memorandum.

Table 6-1 SIP Credit Issues
Issues and Requirements for
Enforceable Measures
.slp...!?redit under^Section110
  No enforceable limitations
  Voluntary compliance / market based
  Emission reductions, but voluntary
  TCMs traditionally granted credit w/o enforceable limitations
Air Quality Data / Emission
  Data collection and methodologies must demonstrate emission
  Inclusion of nontraditional methods (surveys, behavioral change data
  Inclusion of forecasting methodologies	
State Law and Authority
  Framework for local implementation and enforcement
  Federally enforceable when adopted in SIP
  Demonstrates permanence
  Program must be funded and implemented by state
  Must have adequate personnel and program funding to demonstrate
 Minimum Program Criteria
  Being developed
 What are areas interested in evaluating?

 Unlike other regulatory-driven programs, CAPs are community-based programs formed from
 locally-driven needs and goals.  Despite the unique development paths taken by the different
 CAPs, the following are the top three goals consistently reported by programs around the

 1) Educate the public
 2) Attain/maintain air quality standards, and
 3) Improve public health.
 These goals dictate what, if any, monitoring of results takes place and the kinds of overall
 program impacts that are evaluated by each agency.  Many areas are interested in developing
 methodologies to quantify the emission reduction impacts of their programs and have tried several

methods to collect data for use in emission calculations. Other areas, more interested in
continued maintenance of air quality standards or educating the public, focus more of their
resources at monitoring air quality levels or surveying the public.
Program Evaluation

Despite the different goals that agencies can be targeting with their program, it should be
noted that these goals are only achieved as the outcome of all components of the episodic
control program working together.  The four major components of an episodic control
program include:

•     Public Outreach
•     Forecasting
•     Notification
*     Evaluation

There are specific actions and goals associated with each of these major program
components, as shown in Figure 6-1. All of these activities, which support the program and
prepare the public for an alert day, and the activities which occur during episode days need to
be completed competently for an episodic control program to be functional and effective.
The ultimate goal, or impact, of the program can not be achieved unless all of the program
components are working together. Figure 6-2 illustrates how some of goals of CAPs can
finally be achieved on an alert day. We could quantify these impacts by examining the final
outcomes associated with operation of an episodic program on an alert day.  Quantifying
these impacts is desirable when we are interested in measuring performance of specific goals,
such as estimating emission reductions for SIP credit. However, as these programs are quite
complex, performance of the program, as measured by specific goals, could vary considerable
from alert day to alert day. Thus other 'measures of performances' are needed to fully
evaluate a CAP.


                                    Develop awareness \
                                    and understanding  '
                                      in community
                                 Outreach to Comunity     ^"p"
  Predict weather,
    air quality
                                                                       Predict alert days
                                                                        accurately and
  Contact media,    —•-" —
 businesses, public
(fax tree, hotline, web)
                                                                      Transmit message
                                   Examine program,
                                    conduct surveys   -J>
                                    program strengths
                                     and weaknesses
Figure 6-1. Actions and Goals associated with major program components

As mentioned above, an episodic program is composed of many different components which
must work together to influence individual's behavior and achieve program goals.  To
evaluate the effectiveness of the overall program and understand how the program
components interact, we must examine the effectiveness of each program component.
Evaluating the effectiveness of all parts of the program is important to understand the basic
functionality of the program so that the program can be improved. Examining each
component separately allows  agencies to identify weakness in their efforts and focus
resources more appropriately.

In some cases, even though all of the components of a program may be working together, a
program might not achieve its goal of influencing individual's behavior due to the
intervention of outside causes.  To illustrate with the previously mentioned, parent/child
analogy, despite the parents' day-to-day efforts to educate and influence their children to 'do
the right thing', their effectiveness as parents can not always be measured based on their
children's behavior in specific situations.  Sporadic outside influences may affect individual's
behavioral choices.  With episodic programs, as is shown in Figure 6-2, these outside
influences could be associated with special events, such as sporting events or holidays
(Fourth of July).  On these occasions, individuals may increase activities such as driving, even
though they are aware of the  impacts of their behavior on air quality. Thus individual
'standards of performance' for each program component, as well as  overall program
performance goals should be  considered when evaluating a seasonal/episodic control

    Alert Day
                                     Special Events
                                                                          Air Quality
                                                                        .  & Healthier
                                                                        i  Public
and General
Public Hear
Make Changes
in Behavior
Figure 6-2. Alert Day Activities

What can be measured?

Whether we are trying to determine the effectiveness of the individual program components
or trying to measure improved air quality levels, we must first determine which steps or
program components have quantifiable data that can be compared to program goals. A few
examples of questions that can be asked to gather data concerning program activities during
alert days include:

1.    How many media contacts and employers are notified via a fax tree?
2.    How many employees are notified?
3.    What changes in individuals' (general public or employee's) behavior occurred during
      the alert day? (What percent of the general public are changing behavior?  What
      specific behaviors (driving) are being changed?)
4.    How many businesses are changing their business practices?  What are those changes?

While some of these questions can be tied back to program components, additional questions
can be posed regarding some components' effectiveness on an on-going basis. Examples

1.    Is the public  aware of the existence of the seasonal/episodic program? (percent of
2.    Does the public understand what to do during an alert day? (What actions are
      participants prepared to take?)
3.    Is the program being coordinated with all local, significant businesses/employers?
      (Who is participating and ready to receive notification?)
4,    How accurate are the forecasting procedures? (Are bad air quality days missed? Are
      the forecasting procedures too conservative?)
Quantifiable data, where it can be tied back directly to program actions and goals, can serve
as a direct measure of the programs and that's component's effectiveness.  Examples of these

'direct measures' for each component are shown in Table 6-2. Other indirect measures for
both the components and the overall program can not be tied directly back to an agency
action. These measures, such as changes in air quality or transit ridership, are affected by too
many outside influences (e.g., weather) to allow for direct comparison. Many of the
measures that are associated with the overall effectiveness of the program at reaching specific
goals are indirect measures.

TABLE 6-2. Direct data sources,
Program Component Quantifiable Goal
Public Outreach
-Public education Public understanding of air quality issues
-Community outreach Large number of participants
Public awareness of program/agency
-Media outreach Significant No. of media hits,
Accuracy of articles
Forecasting Accuracy
Notification Public awareness of alert day
-fax tree Businesses & media aware of alert day
Program Evaluation
-self evaluation Understand program strengths/weakness
- SIP evaluation Calculate emission/aq impacts
Overall Program Impacts
- alert day activities Changes in behavior/emissions
Changes in business practices, notification
of employees, changes in behavior
Quantification Method
Public survey / questionnaire
Track number of participants
Public survey of awareness
Track media participation,
Review articles
Track performance
Track performance
Public survey
Fax survey
Examine compare survey
data from year to year
Combine alert day survey
data with emission
Alert day survey of behavior
Business survey,
Parking lot counts,
Telecommute info.
 Potential sources of indirect data include indicators of regional travel levels (traffic counts,
 gas sales, transit use), indicators of regional air quality levels (ambient air quality, complaints
 to air pollution hotlines), and indicators of public health (air quality related hospital
 admissions). Examination of these data can be used to corroborate findings from direct
 measures.  While it is difficult to attribute changes in indirect data to specific program actions
 because of the many influencing factors, analysis of the data can provide valuable supporting
 evidence of whether the components of a CAP are working together.

 Seasonal/Long-term Benefits Vs. Episodic Benefits

 Some program components have goals associated with changing behavior on a long-term, not just
 episodic basis. For example, while most programs emphasize  episodic controls that generally
 include a set of recommended actions for participants to reduce pollution on an intermittent or
 "episodic" basis (e.g., reduction of trips, postponement of certain activities), public education
 efforts typically also recommend activities that reduce emissions on a seasonal or longer-term
 basis (maintenance of cars). Furthermore, long-term, consistent behavior change is the ultimate
 goal of many programs.  Thus, where possible, agencies should consider determining the impacts
 of "seasonal" or long-term behavioral changes.
 Areas can disaggregate the emission reduction and other long-term benefits at a qualitative level if
 long-term or seasonal goals are important to the implementing agency. Most of these long-term

 impacts are associated with the public outreach/education components of these programs. Some
 agencies have also reported anecdotal but unproved evidence that implementation of
 seasonal/episodic control programs may assist state and local regulatory agencies with their
 implementation of regulatory programs such as Inspection and Maintenance. Increased levels of
 public awareness - associated with seasonal/episodic outreach efforts - on general air pollution
 issues and their personal role in solutions, may fostered a greater acceptance of regulatory
 programs.  Survey data  on public willingness to participate in certain activities and long-term
 changes in trends in transit ridership, for example, could be used to measure "seasonal"  impacts.

 In contrast to episodic behavioral changes, long-term and  seasonal behavior changes can be used
 to estimate permanent changes in regional emission levels. Long-term behavioral changes are
 associated with reduction and permanent changes in individual or stationary source activities.
 Episodic changes, in contrast, are often associated with delaying activities (such as putting of
 mowing the lawn). Many of these activities, and their associated emission levels, will eventually
 occur in the air basin. Therefore the emission reductions associated with these activities should be
 treated appropriately. Reduction in emissions associated with purely episodic behavior changes
 can only be applied in episode-specific modeling applications. Seasonal or long-term emission
 reductions could, however, be applied to seasonal emission inventories.

National Comparisons

 A comparison of surveys completed by areas across the country showed that surveys differ
 significantly in their approaches; critical factors such as survey timing and survey wording,
 which impact the results of the survey, are not handled in a uniform manner by each agency.
 Because these factors can bias the survey results,  the survey results often cannot currently be
 compared from one survey to another, and certainly cannot be compared from one program
 area to another.  For EPA to be able to compare CAPs or  their impacts, from area to area, a
 national survey or standard questions to be included in behavioral surveys, must be used by
 all areas. Sample surveys and survey questions are presented in the appendices and discussed
in later sections of this chapter that areas could use to help EPA develop a better
understanding of the impacts of these programs across the country.

Tools Available for  Measuring Effectiveness

 Some of the data and assumptions required to quantify the impacts of seasonal/episodic
programs are available to air quality planning agencies, but much of the key data—such  as
the level of public awareness and corresponding levels of emission-producing activity—are
most readily obtained through surveys.  Several survey techniques are used to collect data on
public opinion and changes in people's behavior:  telephone surveys, mail surveys, travel
diaries, in-person interviews, and focus groups. Because seasonal/episodic programs are
voluntary, with no mandatory requirements for individual behavioral changes, no other
techniques exist besides  market research/survey techniques to assess behavioral changes.
Some areas have attempted to use proxy data, such as parking lot counts, to gain some level
of insight into program effectiveness. These efforts have been largely unsuccessful.

It is difficult to attribute changes in trends data, such as ridership, ambient air quality levels,
or public health (e.g., emergency room visits) to the operation of an seasonal/episodic control
program since many factors affect these data. Nonetheless, these data are still valuable to
track since they can provide supporting evidence of the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a
program. The systematic collection of data - regularly and uniformly - will improve the
quality of evaluation  efforts.  In addition, there is  also a high likelihood that  continuing efforts

to collect and evaluate these data will increase their value as evaluation tools and techniques

Survey Instruments

Several surveying techniques are used to collect data on public opinion and changes in
people's behavior: telephone surveys, mail surveys, travel diaries, in-person interviews, and
focus groups.  Determining which surveying instrument to use, however, will depend upon
the data collection objectives, and the project's time and money constraints. The target
group (general public, companies, or employees) that data will be collected from may also
influence which survey instrument is used.  Each of the surveying techniques has strengths
and weaknesses which should be considered before one is chosen. Some of these instruments
are designed for a very limited, specific purpose. For example, travel diaries are effective at
collecting detailed trip data on individual travel behavior but are not useful tools for
collecting information on changes in public awareness levels over time.  Most of the methods,
however, are more versatile, allowing both awareness data and travel data to be collected.
Each of these is discussed briefly here.

Mail surveys and telephone surveys are the most frequently used survey instruments since
they allow a large sample of people to be surveyed in a shorter amount of time and for less
money than other surveying techniques.  Long the industry standard, mail surveys have been
used for years to collect social science data. The main advantages of mail surveys over other
surveying instruments include no interviewer bias, less expensive, allows confidentiality, and
allows more time for respondent to respond.  However, there  are also several disadvantages
of mail surveys such as possible lower response rates, slower response time, administrative
complexities, no control over environment, and inflexible desiga  Telephone interviews have
several appealing features including interaction between interviewer and respondent (allows
questions by the respondent to be answered on the spot), the ability to poll a large sample
quickly, and with the advent of Computer Aided Telephone Interview (CATI) technology
automatic data entry and quicker data analysis.  The main drawbacks of telephone surveys
include limitations on the complexity of questions,  tighter restrictions on the amount  of the
respondent's time that can be taken, and the possibility that the way an interviewer asks
questions can influence how a person responds thereby biasing the results.

In-person interviews and focus groups are typically used to obtain more detailed
information from a smaller number of people. Both methods allow face-to-face contact
between the interviewer and the participants. The  main advantages of these two methods are
that the environment is controlled, interviewer can get a feel for respondents and their
attitudes/biases, questions can be easily answered, props and exhibits can be used to convey
ideas or ask questions, and  more time is available for detailed  responses. Disadvantages with
these approaches include higher cost, more time to implement, limited sample sizes and
possible interviewer bias. Focus groups are unique among the surveying methodologies
because they bring together a group of people so that questions can be asked to individuals or
to the group  as a whole.  The discussion and debate between participants can promote
greater reflection on the questions and may lead to more creative solutions.

A survey of episodic control programs in 1996 by ICF Kaiser showed that of all the
methodologies discussed, the one used most by program's to  collect data on public
awareness and program effectiveness was telephone interviews.  The main reason cited by
many implementing agencies is that more than any of the other survey techniques, telephone
surveying allow the collection and entering of a large amount  of data very quickly. This is a

powerful selling point for implementing agencies trying to perform program evaluations
under tight deadlines.  Several episodic control programs have supplemented data collect
from their telephone interviews with data collected from focus group sessions. The focus
group allows them to obtain more detailed information that was not possible to collect from
the telephone surveying and to use props and exhibits if necessary.

Factors for Improving Response Rate and Data Accuracy

Several steps should be taken in the design and implementation of survey instruments to
ensure that data collected using surveying techniques are as accurate as possible. In the
survey research literature there is much discussion of ways to maximize the survey response
rates, to help ensure that a representative sample of people is surveyed, and to ensure that
participants respond accurately.  Survey techniques have some limitations.  Only a small
portion of the entire population can be included in a survey; the results from a small
subpopulation must be extrapolated to the larger population.  Any non-respondent bias, or
problems from choosing a non-representative sample will be extrapolated in the survey
results. Scheduling and timing issues also occur with survey implementation. Surveys given
on different days of the week can produce different results. A survey given on the same  day,
with a different population subgroup, could also produce different results due to differences
in the subgroup. All of these limitations should be understood whenever survey results are
examined.  While it is beyond the scope of this study to discuss each of these at length, some
key factors which should be considered are discussed here.
Recruiting Survey Participants

Once a representative sample of the population is chosen each prospective participant must
be notified (in-person, via telephone, or by mail) that they were selected and encouraged to
participate.  A greeting or cover letter is typically created for this purpose.  A well thought-
out greeting is an important part of survey research as it can make the difference between
high and low response rates, which, in turn, affects the representativeness of the data
collected. An effective cover letter or greeting is particularly important when recruiting is
performed over the telephone or via the mail.  While the greetings for each surveying
technique differ somewhat, all should include the following basic information:

•     A short description of the research being done and how the information will be used -
      mention the societal benefit expected from the research
*     Let the respondent know that their participation is important since they are one of only
      a small number of people chosen to be interviewed
•     Reassure the respondent that all answers provided are confidential
•     If applicable, mention any incentives being offered for participation

                                                  A well thought-out
                                                   greeting  is key to
                                                     the successful
                                                     recruitment of
                                                  survey participants
Special considerations must be made when
implementing telephone or mail surveys.  For mail
surveys the content of the cover letter is crucial. The
cover letter should convey the information discussed
above in a clear and concise manner. Other
information that is often put in coverlets include a
telephone number that the respondent can call to ask
questions,  a personal signature, and giving thanks and
appreciation for the respondents time.  Another
technique used to increase the response rate of mail
surveys is to include a postage-paid envelope for returning the survey.  Finally, it is best if the
survey is affiliated with a neutral and respected organization and the cover letter is printed on
the letterhead of that organization.

Telephone surveys also require custom greetings to recruit survey respondents. For
telephone surveys, however, keeping greetings very short and to the point is of paramount
importance.  The low tolerance the general public has for telephone solicitation requires that
greetings be concise. This dictates that only the crucial information discussed above should
be included.  The interactivity of the telephone medium, however, allows inquiring
respondents to obtain additional information if it is desired.
Survey Design

The data collected from surveys is only as good as the survey instrument used. Some basic
guidelines on survey question organization and content should be followed to help improve
response rates and ensure that meaningful data are collected. It is widely recognized that the
length of a survey and the corresponding time commitment required for the respondent to
complete it are among the most important factors which determine whether a respondent will
participate or not. Generally speaking, the shorter the survey the greater the likelihood that
people will participate. When designing a survey, however, a balance must be achieved
between keeping the survey instrument short enough so that it doesn't unduly burden the
respondent, and collecting enough data to be able to perform rigorous analysis.  Survey
length is more critical for telephone and mail survey instruments than for in-person interviews
and focus groups. It is believed that respondents are willing to spend more time on mail
surveys (as much as 20-30 minutes) than they are to answer a telephone survey (10 minutes
or less).
Questions content is also an important factor
which influences response rates and the quality of
the data collected.  In general, survey questions
should be designed to be clear and relatively easy
to answer. Questions should not be asked which
require respondents to perform complex
calculations. To maintain a logical flow
throughout the survey, questions on a similar topic
should be grouped together. To maximize the
likelihood that respondents will complete the
survey once started, the question order should
progress from general to specific, easy to more
difficult, and non-sensitive to sensitive. As a
general rule, sensitive issues such as age,
                                                   A balance must be
                                                   achieved between
                                                   keeping the survey
                                                     short enough to
                                                  maximize responses,
                                                 and collecting enough
                                                   data to be able to
                                                   perform  a rigorous

education level and income should be asked last.

The order and wording of questions also greatly influences response rates and the quality of
the data collected.  Some basic guidelines on survey question organization and content should
be followed to help improve response rates, reduce respondent bias, and ensure that
meaningful data are collected.
              Figure 6-3. Examples of Poorly-designed Survey Questions
  Have you taken action or behaved differently based on hearing or reading about the Air
  Quality Index / Ozone Alert?	
  From the wording of this question it is clear to the respondent that they are being asked to
  make a response to reduce air pollution.  Responses to these questions are more likely to
  include actions to improve air quality than those that are worded without bias.  Any
  mention  of the episodic control program should always come at the very end of the survey
  and should never be included in the same question that is collecting information on behavior
  change,  To eliminate response bias, this question should be asked in two parts the evening
  of the Spare the Air day.  The first part asks whether they changed their driving, and if they
  respond yes, the second part asks why they made that change (e.g., did they make it in
  response to  the Spare the Air program?)

  Other questions, such as the following, invite bias by being poorly-worded:

  | Did you drive your car or truck today less frequently than you normally do?             |

  While, at first glance, the built-in bias may not appear obvious, a closer look shows that by
  only asking  whether the person drove less frequently this question hints at the type of
  response that is desired. This question can be re-written, as follows, to eliminate any bias
  as to the preferred answer:
   Did you drive your car or truck today more frequently, less frequently or the same as
   you normally do?	
Survey Implementation

The schedule with which surveys are implemented can greatly affect the accuracy of the survey
results.  Factors such as the time of year that the questions are asked, the day of the week
(weekday or weekend), and whether or not it is a pollution episode day must be considered when
putting together a survey. Many different types of implementation schedules can be used to
collect data for different types of comparisons. To gather information on the effectiveness of the
outreach components of a program, areas can perform a survey early  in the ozone season, which
represents "before implementation" (baseline) data. Another survey can be performed later in the
ozone season, giving an "after implementation" reading and allowing  a before/after comparison.
Data collected from these two surveys can be used to do a before / after comparison.

Similarly, an 'on episode day' / 'off episode day' comparison can be developed to examine alert
day impacts. To quantify changes in behavior (that lead to emission reductions or changes in

exposure levels), surveys should be completed on specific seasonal/episodic days to ensure that
the data are accurate and that respondents' memories do not influence the results of the study.

While many survey implementation schedules are possible, the following examples of survey
comparisons are available to examine program impacts and reduce survey bias.

•    Normal day vs. alert day
•    Beginning of season vs. end of season

•    Single day episode vs. multi-day episode

Procedures for Direct Measurement of Program Effectiveness

Standards of Performance

As stated earlier, agencies implementing CAPs can benefit by completing an internal
evaluation of their programs and using the findings to make program improvements. Outside
agencies, such as EPA, that are responsible for overseeing air quality programs and setting
national guidance, also have a need to evaluate CAPs.  Many agencies have also expressed
interest in obtaining emission reduction credits for their programs. For an area to include the
program's benefits in a SIP or conformity demonstration, EPA would have to accept the
methodology used to estimate the emission impacts. Furthermore, while techniques to
quantify the programs do exist, the accuracy of these estimates over time depends upon
continued implementation of an effective seasonal/episodic control program. Therefore the
remaining portions of this section, presents specific examples for determining program
impacts and ideas on minimum standards of performance that EPA can use to evaluate CAPs.
These standards of performance adopted will be critical to determine which programs have
demonstrated success and deserve official EPA recognition and/or SIP credit.

Program performance standards must provide clear guidance for areas that want to calculate
emission benefits, but  also be flexible enough to allow areas that are only interested in gaining
legitimacy for their programs to meet minimal standards.  To ensure that emission estimates
calculated are realistic, areas interested in calculating emission reductions must have a
program that is sufficiently developed and includes all of the core elements associated with a
successful program (e.g., public outreach, notification, forecasting, program evaluation).
Each of these elements, in turn,  must be evaluated annually to confirm the overall benefit of
the program. Thus, these programs  must include actions to quantify the effectiveness of
program elements.

Generally speaking, the main goal of CAPs is to improve air quality by educating the public
about local air pollution problems and actions they can take to reduce emissions. Several
general criteria can be used to gauge whether a program is achieving these objectives:

1)  Is public awareness of the program and its objectives increasing or continuing at a high
2)  Is public awareness of air pollution issues increasing or continuing at a high level?
3)  Are the program components working together sufficiently well?
4)  Is the public reducing emission-producing activities on an episodic or seasonal basis?

To evaluate the impacts of a seasonal/episodic control program, data must be collected in all
of these areas. Unless the public education and awareness programs continue, behavioral
changes monitored in one year may not continue to future years.  On the other hand, unless
the implementing agency is able to correctly forecast alert days and notify the public in a
timely manner, the program will not reduce emissions. Finally, unless public behavior is
monitored in an unbiased manner, the agency can only guess at potential emission reductions.
Each of the following sections discusses methods to evaluate the performance of these
programs,  Suggested deminimus levels of effort are all given for each major program

Public Outreach

Successful public outreach efforts ensure that all of the members of the community
(businesses, agencies, general public) are aware of the seasonal/episodic control program and
understand what actions they can contribute during seasonal or episodic high pollution
periods.  Since these efforts are typically quite costly (see Figure 6-4), particularly if mass
media (TV, radio, and newspaper advertisements) are used to educate the public about the
program, most areas are interested in determining if the public has 'heard' the message.
Unless the public has heard and understands their contribution to air pollution in the air basin,
it is unlikely that they will take any steps to reduce or delay emission producing activities.
Thus successful implementation of this step is probably one of the most important
cornerstones of a successful seasonal/episodic control program. With this in mind, minimal
efforts needed to support a solid outreach program include:
Outreach (meetings, workshops) with business, media and community groups

Development of a clear,
consistent message,
  >  Program name,
     identifiable symbol,
  >  Suggested actions to
     reduce air quality
  >  Web site with air quality,
     health information
  >  School educational
  >  Business/employer
  >  Media package
Tracking (through annual
surveys, focus groups) of
public awareness and
                                  Public Outreach
                                                Figure 6-4 Budget Breakdown

Tracking Public Education and Awareness Levels

Agencies can collect survey data to track the effectiveness of their outreach and education
programs.  These surveys can be given to the general public and other targeted audiences
included in the outreach (businesses, community organizations, media, schoolteachers, and
employees). Areas usually combine awareness and education surveys together since the
topics are closely related. An example set of public awareness survey questions that agencies
can use to develop their own customized survey is included in Appendix E.  The survey in
Appendix E is designed in a telephone interview format. It includes samples of the many
different types of questions that are used to collect data on public awareness levels by CAPs
around the nation. Programs should not use the survey as is, but rather as a basis for
developing an instrument tailored to their data collection needs.  To accomplish this, a
program can start by selecting the sets of questions are relevant, tailoring the questions and
response choices to local needs,  putting the questions in logical order, and providing the
survey formatting and question routing necessary in order for respondents to easily complete
the form.

For illustration on the types of public awareness questions used, a few examples from surveys
given in Baltimore, Sacramento, San Francisco and Dallas are shown below.  These examples
are given to show the different types of questions that agencies might want to include or
exclude from the example survey. These questions collect information on the public
awareness level of the program (familiarity with the slogan, symbol), public perceptions of
local air quality problems, and the overall effectiveness of the outreach efforts.
    Have you heard of Ozone Alert/Spare the Air/Ozone Action?
    In the past week, have you seen or heard anything about air pollution in our metropolitan area?

    Could you describe what you saw or heard?
    In the past week, have you seen or heard any air pollution slogans or symbols?

    What did the symbol mean?
    Would you say that air pollution or smog is...(serious, somewhat serious, not a problem)	
 Survey questions on public education generally try to determine if the public understands
 what contributes to air pollution problems and what they can do to improve air quality.
     Which of the following (automobiles, trucks, buses, airplanes, industry) do you feel is the biggest
     contributor to air pollution in your area?
     Please tell me the things you could do to keep smog out of the air - Don't prompt - (take the bus,
     carpool, conserve electricity,...)	
 These general awareness and education surveys should be given at least once at the beginning
 and end of the pollutant season (summer time for ozone) on an annual basis.  Since public
 outreach efforts are often the largest in the beginning of the season, completion of a
 midseason surveys might prove useful to determine if the outreach efforts need to be
 maintained at a high level throughout the season. Annual surveys are required to determine if
 education efforts, especially those targeted at children, are having any long-term impacts.
 Consistency in questions (from year to year) is important to be able to estimate trends.

 The survey results from most areas indicate that the public is more willing to participate in
 certain types of control measures than others.  For example, survey results indicate that
 respondents are more willing to curtail use of consumer products1 and lawn and garden tools,
 rather than to curtail driving. It is important to understand whether the public is reluctant to'
 curtail certain activities due to lack of knowledge or inconvenience. To address this,
 agencies should to identify the segments of the population most willing to participate in the
 program and the most effective media channels:
    Where did you hear the slogan "Spare the Air" (radio, TV, newspaper, billboard, employer)?
    Which activities are you willing to change in order for this area to have cleaner air (driving
    behavior, use of gas-powered yard equipment, use of consumer products)?
    If you are not willing to change anything - why?	
 Specific groups (e.g., mothers between the ages of 30-40) can be identified as "early
 adopters" if questions related to age, gender, income level, educational status and
 employment are included.   These early adopters are generally defined as individuals who
 recognize air pollution problems, agree that air pollution has negative consequences, agree
 that they contribute to the problem, and are willing to take action.  Not only can surveys and
 focus groups be used to track the effectiveness of the public outreach material, they're also
 the best tool available for agencies to determine why individuals participate in specific
 behavior changes over others and what incentives can be used to augment this willingness.

 Notification (fax trees, media hits)

 As discussed in section 6, notification efforts typically utilize fax tree services to reach
 business and media participants and telephone hotlines and Internet web sites to reach the
 general public.  The businesses and media then notify the general public using their own
 communication channels (i.e., TV news and weather, email).  Minimal standards for
 notification should include:

 *     Use of a fax tree to notify business and media,

 •     Transmission of a consistent message (using symbols, colors, or words) to clearly
      indicate different levels of air quality,

 •     Routine  transmission of air quality information to all participants.

 Tracking effectiveness of notification procedures

 Areas interested in quantifying overall program impacts (emission reductions) will likely be
notifying many media outlets and businesses  on alert days.  Many programs report business
participation levels ranging from 100 to 1,500 companies.  To estimate the effectiveness of
their notification mechanisms programs can:
Develop and distribute 'fax' surveys periodically to the media and companies to
determine if the fax tree is working and contacts understand the message
 For a program to be effective, especially for areas where area sources are a significant portion of their
emission inventory, the seasonal/episodic control program can have more impact in reducing ozone levels if
emphasis is expanded to include activities other than driving.
2 Businesses or media will be more apt to respond quickly to notification if the procedures are routine (i.e.
daily transmissions).

2.    Include questions on alert day surveys to determine how the general public and
     participating employees are hearing about alert days (e.g., TV, radio, employers),
3.    Include questions on alert day surveys to determine if participants understand the
     meaning of alert day notification symbols.

Since emission reductions from participating companies and prompt transmission of the alert
day information to the media are important to the effectiveness of an episodic control
program, agencies must ensure that all participants (media/companies/employers) are notified
of the episodic event in a timely manner. To measure this, an annual fax survey, concerning
the accuracy and completeness of the fax tree service, could be given.  A survey of this type
was given in Milwaukee to determine if the fax tree service was operating as requested:

•    Using the correct phone numbers,
•    Notifying the correct personnel,

•    Notifying the personnel in a timely manner and
•    Providing all of the information needed by the participating companies.

These types of surveys can be implemented on an annual basis, or more frequently, if the fax,
tree service vendor changes. Deficiencies in the fax tree service were noted in the Milwaukee
survey and improvements were incorporated into the overall program.

Information regarding the awareness and understanding of the general public and secondary
contacts (employees) included in the notification channel can be obtained by the inclusion of
questions in alert day surveys.  Some areas, such as Dallas, have estimated that the episodic
program notification reaches approximately 600,000 employees. These employees are
contacted by their company via email, alert day flags or posters. Since the companies agree
to be responsible for notifying their employees when an alert is declared and agree to educate
the employees about actions they can take to reduce pollution on those days, the agency
doesn't have direct contact with these individuals.
Forecasting Procedures

An accurate method of forecasting must be established for an episodic control program to be
effective.  Meteorological teams from the National Weather Service (NWS), state environ-
mental agencies, and local air pollution control agencies must evaluate historical meteorolog-
ical and ambient air quality data to determine what meteorological conditions are associated
with high pollutant concentrations. In most areas, programs rely on a team of meteorologists
working together to determine which conditions are associated with episodic days and to
predict when those conditions will occur.  While it is difficult to measure the accuracy and
precision  of a forecasting system (see discussion below), several basic requirements are
needed to ensure a minimal level of performance for a forecasting system.

•     Completion of a forecasting protocol,
•     Use of at least two years of ambient data to validate forecasting techniques
•     Periodic validation of the methodology to assess the impact of changing emission

Tracking effectiveness of notification procedures

While it is essential that forecasting be completed accurately both to avoid 'crying wolf to
the general public and to avoid pollutant exceedance days (esp. for areas trying to maintain
air quality standards) an ongoing evaluation of the forecasting system could be complicated
by overall impacts of the episodic control program.  Most areas have tested their predictive
techniques for at least one season before disseminating the information to the public. Both
false positive (Alert called/no exceedance measured) and false negative (No Alert
called/exceedance occurs)  predictions can occur. If the episodic  program is very  effective,
false positives could occur if significant emission reductions result from the program's
control measures. False negatives could occur if certain activities resulting in higher than
normal emission levels (e.g., special events such as the Olympics) occur. Most programs,
especially those in attainment areas, would rather err in the positive direction than the
negative direction. Thus, as a result,  many areas will issue alert day notices which result in
pollutant concentrations at levels below the standard.  Depending upon the criteria set by the
agency implementing the program, measures used to examine the effectiveness of the
forecasting procedures should conform to the goals set by the implementing agency or

Program Evaluation

The inclusion of a feedback mechanism is necessary for maintaining  an effective program.
Surveys of CAPs indicate that there is wide variation in the types of program impacts that
CAPs are interested in evaluating. Even though two areas may both have similar programs
and goals (e.g., both CAPs focus on reduction of vehicle miles traveled), the amount of data
that each area currently collects regarding the impacts of these programs may be significantly
different.  These differences  can be attributed to factors such as budgetary and staff
constraints, significance of the program in overall regional air quality planning, and degree of
program participation.  With these resource limitations in mind, areas interested only in
maintaining a legitimate program (with federal oversight) should  focus their limited resources

*     Annual review of all program components

•     Annual survey of public outreach components, and

•     Submit a program report/review to oversight agency annually

CAPs that expect the program to contribute to achieving air quality improvement goals will
generally be more concerned with the specific impacts of the program on daily emissions
levels and air pollutant concentrations.  These programs should try to determine changes in
behavior associated with implementation of the program and calculate emissions using
assumptions that are consistent with other parts of the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Tracking Overall Program Impacts

Determining Changes in Behavior

Because seasonal/episodic programs  are voluntary,  with no mandatory requirements for
individual behavioral changes, no other techniques exist besides market research/survey
techniques to assess behavioral changes. Some areas  have attempted to use proxy data, such

as parking lot counts, to gain some level of insight into program effectiveness.  These efforts
have been largely unsuccessful.  To quantify changes in behavior and corresponding emission
reduction surveys should be completed on specific seasonal/episodic days to ensure that the
data are accurate and that respondents' memories do not influence the results of the study.
Questions should be worded and ordered to eliminate any bias as to the "preferred answer."

An example set of behavioral survey questions are included in Appendix F.  Example
questions are included for collecting data on travel-related behavior changes as well as
changes in household-related activities which produce emissions (e.g., use of gas-powered
garden equipment, aerosol sprays, and painting).  The survey questions included are the best
identified from a review of the surveys being used by CAPs around the nation.  Programs
should not use the survey as is, but rather as a basis for developing an instrument tailored
to their data collection needs.  To assist in this customization, the survey in Appendix F is
designed in a modular format so that CAPs can pick and choose the appropriate questions
that match control measures suggested by their outreach efforts. The survey includes
sections on changes in travel related behavior and has a section with broadly-worded
questions that can be modified to capture changes in area source activities (e.g., lawn
equipment, consumer products, painting). The last section of the survey contains questions
on program awareness.  These questions have been included so that the agency can determine
if people are changing their behavior in response to the program's outreach efforts.

As areas modify the survey to fit their particular needs, its important to remember a few key
facets of survey design.

     >•  Identification of survey objectives
     >  Determination of the survey mechanism
     >  Specification of the sample size and determination of participants
     >  Development of survey
     >  Survey implementation, data coding/error checking
     >  Examination and interpretation of results
     >  Development of follow-up actions.

All of these are important elements; no steps should be skipped due to limited resources.
Identification of specific objectives must be completed so that the appropriate survey
mechanism and questions are correctly chosen.  Since behavioral surveys need to be
completed on episode days, use of phone surveys, which typically have quick turnaround
times and high response rates, are most appropriate. Established industry standards regarding
sample size3 and question/response wording should be followed to ensure that accurate and
meaningful findings can be made from the data collected. Finally, the results of the survey
should be examined and program changes/improvements, additional surveys, or
recommendations for further studies should come out of the survey findings

It is important to note that survey results and trends analyses must be viewed with a critical
eye and repeated on an annual basis. As mentioned previously, data collected using market
research tools can vary with factors not associated with the seasonal/episodic control
program, such as changes in sample populations.  In addition, over time, most public
education programs are designed to expand the application of the program to a larger
percentage of the population and instill some long-term behavioral changes. Both of these
components will affect behavioral changes. Therefore changes in public behavior should be
3 Sample sizes should be set so that subgroups contain at least 100 respondents (using estimated response
rates and estimated subpopulation percentages).

monitored, at a minimum, on a yearly basis during an episode day. To determine trends in
behavior changes throughout the season and differences due to factors such as
weekday/weekend, behavioral surveys should ideally be given during as many alert days as

It should also be noted that potentially important travel-related issues should be addressed in
any survey of travel behavior. Many surveys currently used by agencies do not ask whether a
vehicle left at home by the respondent on an alert day was used by someone else in the
household during that time, nor do they ask whether people drove their car to a park-and-ride
lot to catch a carpool or transit. If either of these situations occur, then any resultant
emissions benefit may be lessened or may not be realized at all. Suggested additional	
questions to identify these respondents, which will
improve any travel and emissions estimates made
from the survey data, have been included in the
survey in Appendix F. Not including them could
cause overestimation of the travel and emission
reductions attributed to the program, although it is
unclear by how much4. To further refine these
estimates, CAPs might consider corroborating the        emission variables to
                                                   Survey data on changes
                                                    in emission-producing
                                                   behaviors are combined
                                                       with area-specific
                                                     assumptions for key
                                                     generate estimates of
                                                   emission  reductions due
                                                        to the program.
survey results with data on other potential measures
of program effectiveness, such as transit ridership
levels, traffic counts, parking lot counts, HOV lane
use, car/vanpool participation, and ambient air
quality measurements.

Determining changes in Emissions

Using survey data collected on pollution episode days, agencies can estimated the reductions
in mobile source emissions attributable to their alert day programs.  If collected using valid
data collection techniques, these data should indicate a level of awareness, willingness to
participate, and self-reported changes in public behavior. When these data are combined with
area-specific assumptions for key emission variables, a CAP could generate an estimate of
reduced emissions. In Sacramento, for example, estimates of the number of people that have
reduced driving on Spare the Air days have been obtained from survey results. Respondents
were asked how many round trips they reduced by postponing trips or taking an alternative
mode of transportation. From these data, the percentage of drivers in the survey that reduced
trips and the number of trips reduced per driver were determined. Coupled with vehicle
registration statistics and average trip length information, estimates of the number of total
trips and VMT reduced in the Sacramento region were extrapolated and combined with
emission factor data to estimate emissions reduced.

In any evaluation, the quality of the data collected directly influences the quality of the
estimates made using the data. CAPs interested in estimating emissions impacts, especially
those that have spent considerable resources gathering extensive  behavioral change data,
should also ensure that the appropriate emission assumptions (vehicle type, speed, roadway
* Another consideration might be the potential for increased emissions resulting from system-wide speed
increases brought on by reduced traffic congestion. For instance, ozone nonattainment areas with large
amounts of NOx emissions may see increases along corridors with extensive heavy-duty truck travel if speeds
along that corridor increase.  Areas should probably consider which types of trips (local, commuter -
highway) would be reduced to improve accuracy of emission estimates.

type, temperature, etc) are used in the calculations. For obvious reasons, the emission
estimates will be sensitive to the emission rates chosen for the evaluation. An area that uses a
composite emission factor for one average temperature and speed to estimate the impacts of
reducing work travel can be overlooking several key factors.  For instance, light-duty autos
and trucks are the primary vehicles used for work trips. A composite emission factor that
includes the entire vehicle fleet could be overestimating the impacts of the program by
including higher-emitting vehicle classes in the emission rate.  Also, hourly temperature
variation may significantly influence the rate at which emissions are produced.  If a control
program targets work trips  in the AM and PM peak travel periods, it may be more accurate
to calculate emission factors that are representative of the average temperatures occurring
during these particular periods of the day. Finally, emission rates can vary significantly by
speed, and using a single average speed for emission factor calculations could be responsible
for emission impact estimates that are either too high or too low.  CAPs should try to
determine if the trips/VMT  reduced are associated with short, local trip (trip-linking or
delaying) or longer, higher speed commuter trips (telecommuting).

An example of an emission  calculation is included in Appendix G. The general methodology
used in the example is based on data collected from an episode day behavioral survey which
asked people whether they actually reduced emission-related activities on alert days (beyond
that which they typically participate in).  The behavioral study should gather information on
changes in driving behavior and associated emissions (i.e., how many round trips and how
much VMT was reduced by postponing trips or taking an alternative mode of transportation).
From this, the percentage of drivers in the survey that reduced trips and the number of trips
reduced per driver was determined.  Combining these data with vehicle registration statistics,
and average trip length data, estimates of the number of total trips and VMT reduced in the
region (needed to estimate emission factors) produce emission estimates. To obtain the
registration, trip length, and emission factor data needed to complete the emissions estimates,
agencies should contact the local MPO or state air quality planning  agency to ensure that
assumptions match those used in the local SIP. The procedure used to calculate the daily
reductions in mobile source emissions from an alert day is shown in Figure 6-5.
    % of individuals
    reducing activity
   Emission Assumptions
   (temp., speed, vehicle
   type, I/M data, fuel info)
Emission Factor
Model (MOBILE,
Emission    >.
Factor       )
Figure 6-5 Procedure for calculating mobile source emissions reductions

As discussed earlier, reduction in emissions associated with purely episodic behavior changes
should only be applied in episode-specific modeling applications.  However, seasonal or long-
term emission reductions of emission estimates could be applied to seasonal emission
inventories. In contrast to episodic behavioral changes, long-term and seasonal behavior
changes can be used to estimate permanent changes in regional emission levels.  Long-term
behavioral changes are associated with permanent changes in individual or stationary source
activities. Episodic changes, in contrast, are often associated with delaying activities (such as
putting of mowing the lawn). Many of these activities, and their associated emission levels,

will eventually occur in the air basin. Therefore the emission reductions associated with these
activities should be treated appropriately.

Procedures for Indirect Measures of Program Effectiveness

It is difficult to attribute changes in trends data, such as ridership, ambient air quality levels,
or public health (e.g., emergency room visits) to the operation of a seasonal/episodic control
program since many factors affect these data. Nonetheless, these data are still valuable to
track since they can provide supporting evidence of the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a
program.  The systematic collection of data - regularly and uniformly - will improve the
quality of evaluation efforts.  In addition, there is also a high likelihood that continuing efforts
to collect and evaluate these data will increase their value as evaluation tools and techniques

Regional Travel Indicators

Transit Data

Areas such as Cincinnati, Sacramento and Dallas have examined regional transit data to
determine overall program impacts.  Analysis of the bus data by the Cleaner Air Partnership
of Sacramento showed that overall ridership levels did not increase on Spare the Air days
compared to regular days.  The analysis did show, however, that on Spare the Air days a
greater percentage of riders paid with cash (as opposed to using a monthly pass) than
normally. The Sacramento analysts think this may be an indication that more people who
normally drive are using buses on Spare the Air days. This CAP is making efforts to obtain
daily transit data for a more detailed analysis of this data

The Cincinnati area has been examining transit ridership data to estimate seasonal emission
reductions associated with their program. The Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority
(SORTA) provided bus service at a reduced (CMAQ subsidized) fare for the summers of
1994, 1995s and 1996. SORTA tracked increases in ridership over the budgeted ridership
estimates6 to determine if the Smog Alert program had any impact on transit ridership. The
difference between these two figures was assumed to be reduced trips with corresponding
emission reductions. Since SORTA tracked costs associated with the reduced fares, they
could also estimate the cost-effectiveness of the program.

In 1996, the fare reduction program, marketed as the "Clearance Sale" was in effect every
weekday7 from June 1 through Labor Day.  Examination of ridership data by SORTA
indicated that because of the program, during that three month period Cincinnati experienced:

•     533,000 increased transit rides
•     2.6 million fewer vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
•     8.8 fewer tons of hydrocarbons (HC)
•     48 fewer tons of carbon monoxide (CO), and
*     5.7 fewer tons of nitrous oxides (NOx)
5 Low fares were restricted to alert days in 1995.
6 No data was provided by SORTA on assumptions that they used to estimate budgeted
' Fares are already reduced to $0.50 on weekends.

Figure 6-6 shows the change in ridership recorded in 1996.  The lower line indicates the
budgeted ridership projections made by SORTA and the upper line is the actual recorded
ridership during the summer of 1996. SORT A's costs for operating this program were:
$580,000 in lost revenue and $45,000 in marketing and promotion costs. Table 6-3
summarizes SORTA's analysis of the overall impact of the program in 1996. The cost-
effectiveness estimates for the  program were similar to those measured in 1994. The cost-
effectiveness of reducing one ton of CO was estimated at $13,020. Costs for reducing HC
and NOX were $71,023 and $109,649 respectively.
         o. 75000 -
         '•= 70000
         | 65000
         £ 60000 -
            55000 -
      Figure 6-6.  Budgeted (lower line) verses actual (upper line) transit ridership due to the
      Cincinnati transit fare reduction program on pollution episode days (1996).
Table 6-3. Smog alert program impacts on transit ridership, 1996.

HC (tons)
CO (tons)
NOx (tons)
 Traffic Count Data

 State highway traffic count data has been obtained from the California Department of
 Transportation.  A comparison of the 1995 data on normal days and on Spare the Air days by
 SMAQMD revealed that there were no noticeable changes in the traffic flow on freeways on
 Spare the Air days. SMAQMD indicated that there is a fairly high degree of natural variation
 in the freeway traffic flow and that any reductions in flow caused by the Spare the Air
 program are not great enough to be observed. Variation in flow might be controlled in a
 future study if enough resources were made available to analyze several years of traffic flow
 data.  SMAQMD analysts report, however, that even if traffic flow changes were observed it
 would be difficult to attribute any of these to the Spare the Air program because of the large
 number  of other variables which could be causing the changes. CAP analysis reported that
 they are not surprised that no changes are observed in freeway travel since the survey data
 show that few of the trips that are reduced on Spare the Air days are freeway trips.  A more
 revealing study might be to look at traffic count data on local streets to see if there are any

observed changes in flows.  SMAQMD has considered looking at local street traffic flows but
is discouraged by the amount of resources it would take to analyze the large amounts of data.

Parking Count Data

A preliminary analysis of the number of receipts and total revenues from public parking lots
in Sacramento did not show any significant changes on Spare the Air days. As with the
traffic count data, SMAQMD reports that there is too much natural variability in the data to
see any impact caused by the Spare the Air program

Regional Air Quality Data

Few areas have tried to demonstrate program impacts using ambient air quality data.
Examination of air quality trends is closely tied to examination of the accuracy of the
forecasting procedures.  Thus an agency could evaluate their program's effectiveness using
the following logic: if a high ozone day is predicted and an alert day is called but an
exceedance does not occur, then the program is a success.  No control experiments have been
done (i.e., forecast the day and don't call it) to evaluate this technique. Areas could also try
to do a comprehensive analysis of air quality data collected over a long period to be able to
separate air quality trends associated from program implementation from other interferences
(weather, other impacts to regional emissions (decreases in vehicle emissions) due to control
measures included in the SEP).  However, if a CAP were to examine good data from normal
days and alert days with  similar characteristics, they might be able to  delineate some impacts
from the program.

Public Health Trends

CAPs may - in partnership with their local Health Department - initiate a system to track
hospital admissions and emergency room visits on or after announced ozone action days.
Numerous studies have been conducted on the health effects of ground level ozone but these
local studies may be better received by citizens and may provide additional support for the
programs and add an additional measurement of program benefits.  The following section
highlights the results of EPA's review of the scientific literature to support a revised ozone
standard. Based on recent studies, the scientific review highlighted several health effects for
which the previous ozone standard did not provide adequate protection.

Exposure to ambient ozone concentrations has been linked to increased hospital admissions
for  respiratory aliments, such as asthma.  Studies conducted in the northeastern United States
and Canada show that ozone air pollution is associated with 10-20 percent of all of the
related hospital admissions. Repeated exposure to ozone can make people more susceptible
to infection and lung inflammation, and can aggravate preexisting respiratory diseases, such
as asthma.  Long-term exposures can cause repeated inflammation of the lung, impairment of
lung defense mechanisms, and irreversible changes in lung structure, which could lead to
premature aging of the lungs and/or chronic respiratory illnesses such as emphysema and
chronic bronchitis.

Children and the elderly are most at risk from exposure to ozone because of their respiratory
system's vulnerabilities.  Further, children are often active outside, playing and exercising,
during the summertime when ozone levels are at their highest. Summer camp studies in the
eastern U.S. and southeastern Canada have reported significant reductions in lung function in
children active outdoors. Adults who are outdoors and moderately active during the summer

months, such as construction workers and other outdoor workers, are also among those most
at risk. These individuals, as well as those with respiratory illnesses, such as asthma, can
experience a reduction in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms, such as chest
pain and cough, when exposed to relatively low ozone levels during periods of moderate

The scientific review also highlighted concerns associated with ozone effects on vegetation
for which the previous ozone standard did not provide adequate protection. These include
reduction in agricultural and commercial forest yields, reduced growth and decreased
survivability of tree seedlings, interfering with the ability of plants to store and produce food,
increased tree and plant susceptibility to disease, pests,  and other environmental stresses,
reducing the aesthetic beauty of vegetation in national parks, and potential long-term effects
on forests and ecosystems.
The EPA's new ambient air quality standard for ozone is designed to address these health
effects. Implementation of the standards is expected to  significantly reduce respiratory-
related ailments and result in overall improvements in public health.  Specific benefits from
the new standards include:

    •   1 million fewer incidents of significant decreases in children's lung functions per year
    •  Hundreds of thousands of fewer incidences per year of moderate to severe respiratory
       symptoms in children, such as aggravated coughing and difficult or painful breathing
    •  Thousands fewer admissions to hospitals and emergency rooms for respiratory causes

    •  Reduced risks of childhood respiratory-related illnesses
    •  Reduced yield loss of major agricultural crops, such as soybeans and wheat, and
        commercial forests by almost $500,000,000.

For additional discussion of the effects of ozone and the benefits of the new standard, see the
EPA's "Health and Environmental Effects of Ground-Level Ozone" Fact Sheet in Appendix


Many areas implementing CAPs are either interested in achieving SIP emission-reduction
credits or simply EPA recognition for their program. Outside agencies responsible for
overseeing air quality programs and setting national guidance will need to establish minimal
standards of program performance in order to determine which programs deserve recognition
and/or SIP credit. The performance standards established should provide clear guidance for
areas that want to calculate emission benefits, but also be flexible enough to allow areas that
are only interested in gaining legitimacy for their programs to meet minimal standards.

At a minimum, areas seeking recognition must have a program which includes all of the core
elements required for a comprehensive, successful CAP:  public outreach, notification,
forecasting, and program evaluation.  Areas seeking emissions credits must also have a
methodology for monitoring, evaluating and reporting the resulting emissions effect of the
program.  While it is beyond the scope of this project to identify guidelines for making CAP
emission reduction determinations for SIPs, this section does provide a summary of ideas on
minimum standards of performance that EPA can use to evaluate CAPs.  For information on
EPA's policy for granting SIP credit for voluntary mobile source emission reduction
programs, refer to Appendix A.
Public Outreach

Successful public outreach efforts ensure that all of the members of the community
(businesses, agencies, general public) are aware of the CAP and understand what actions they
can take on pollution episode days. Unless the public has heard and understands how they
contribute to local air pollution problems, it is unlikely that they will take steps to reduce or
delay emission-producing activities. With this in mind, minimal efforts needed to support a
solid outreach program include:

•  Outreach (meetings, workshops) with business, media and community groups

•  Development of a clear, consistent message, including:
     >  Program name, identifiable symbol, slogan
     >  Suggested actions to reduce air quality
     >  Web site with air quality, health information
     >  School educational materials
     >  Business/employer materials
     >  Media package

•  Tracking (through annual surveys, focus groups) of public awareness and education


A CAP's  notification system provides the call-to-action that mobilizes a community to reduce
pollution  on days of poor air quality.  Timely notification of mass media outlets (TV, radio,
newspapers) and local business partners and organizations is essential in order to provide the


general public enough time to plan ahead and make behavior change. In order to accomplish
this, minimal standards for notification should include:

•    Use of a fax tree, or equally-effective mechanism, to notify business and media,

•    Transmission of a consistent message (using symbols, colors, or words) to clearly
     indicate different levels of air quality,

•    Routine1 transmission of air quality information to all participants


An accurate method of forecasting must be established for an episodic control program to be
effective.  While it is difficult to measure the accuracy and precision of a forecasting system,
several basic requirements are needed to ensure a minimal level of performance:
      Completion of a forecasting protocol,
      Use of at least two years of ambient data to validate forecasting techniques

      Periodic validation of the methodology to assess the impact of changing emission
Program Evaluation

The inclusion of a feedback mechanism is necessary for maintaining an effective program.
Annual evaluations provide important information on the effectiveness of the program, how
the various elements are working together, and how it can be improved.  Areas interested in
SIP credit for their program can conduct a detailed evaluation to quantify the emissions
impacts of the program. Many areas, however, are only interested only in maintaining a
legitimate program (with federal oversight).  These programs should focus their resources on
the following:

•     Annual review of all program components

*     Annual survey of public outreach components, and

•     Submit a program report/review to oversight agency annually

Studies of CAPs around the nation have documented the core elements that must be included
in a CAP in order for it to be successful.  This guidance document has discussed these
elements and provided suggestions on how to incorporate them into a program.  At the core
of every successful CAP is four core elements: public outreach, notification, forecasting, and
program evaluation. For each of these elements, areas should seek to meet the minimum
standards of performance outlined above.  These criteria can be used by program developers,
administrators and agencies providing oversight to determine whether a program meets the
minimum criteria for demonstrating legitimacy.

Figure 7.1 Minimal Standards of Program Performance
Public Outreach

   Outreach (meetings, workshops) with business, media and community groups
 '  Development of a clear, consistent message, including:
  >  Program name, identifiable symbol, slogan
  >  Suggested actions to reduce air quality
  >  Web site with air quality, health information
  >  School educational materials
  >  Business/employer materials
  >  Media package
 •  Tracking (through annual surveys, focus groups) levels of public awareness and education


•  Use of a fax tree to notify business and media,
•  Transmission of standard (symbol, color, or words), consistent messages related to different levels of air
•  Routine daily2 (or weekday only) transmission of air quality information to all participants.


•  Completion of a forecasting protocol,
•  Use of at least two years of ambient data to validate forecasting techniques
•  Periodic evaluation of the methodology to assess the impact of changing emissions

Program Evaluation

•  Annual qualitative review/examination of effectiveness all program components
•  Annual survey of public outreach components
•  Submission of program report/review to oversight agency	
 1 Businesses or media will be more apt to respond quickly to notification if the procedures are routine (i.e.
 daily transmissions).
 2 Businesses or media will be more apt to respond quickly to notification if the procedures are routine.


                      Appendix A

                      EPA MEMO:




SUBJECT:   Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile Source Emission Reduction
             Programs in State Implementation Plans (SIPs).

FROM:      Richard D. Wilson,
             Acting Assistant Administrator
               for Air and Radiation

TO:          EPA Regional Administrators, 1-10

       This memorandum provides guidance and sets forth the Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) policy and interpretation regarding the granting of explicit State Implementation
Plan (SIP) credit for Voluntary Mobile Source Emission Reduction Programs (VMEPs) under
section 110 of the Clean Air Act.  Voluntary mobile source measures have the potential to
contribute, in a cost-effective manner, emission reductions needed for progress toward attainment
and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA believes that
SIP credit is appropriate for voluntary mobile source measures where we have confidence that the
measures can achieve emission reductions.  This memorandum announces EPA's intent to grant
emission reduction credits for VMEPs, the terms and conditions for establishing and implementing
VMEPs, and the requirements for approvable VMEP SIP submittals.

        The establishment of this policy pertains solely to voluntary mobile source programs and
is not intended to establish precedent for other air emissions source categories. Guidance on
emission reduction credits for voluntary activities for other source categories may be established
through future guidance documents. This policy also does not change existing EPA policy on
credits for mobile source measures in the context of emissions trading programs or Economic
Incentives Programs.

Policy Summary

       The  Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 increased the responsibility of States1 to
      'Throughout this document, the term "State" refers to any state or local government body or agency with
the authority to submit SIPs to EPA for approval.

demonstrate progress toward attainment of the NAAQS. At the same time, air pollution control
programs in the U.S. have had difficulty regulating the emission reduction potential of smaller or
unconventional sources. EPA supports innovative methods in achieving air quality goals and
wishes to promote the creation of viable voluntary mobile source air quality programs.  The desire
to recognize the emission reductions from these sources has led the Agency to develop policies to
support an increasing variety of innovative approaches. EPA recognizes that emission reduction
credit toward SIP air quality demonstrations can be a positive factor for gaining political and
institutional support for program development and implementation.  The demonstration of air
quality benefits is also desirable for program assistance through EPA's section 105 grants and is a
requirement for project eligibility under the Department of Transportation's Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program.

        This  memorandum is intended to  clarify the basic framework for ensuring that VMEPs
become eligible for SIP credit.  Generally,  a State  would submit a SIP which 1) identifies and
describes a VMEP; 2) contains projections of emission reductions attributable to the program,
along with relevant technical support documentation; 3) commits to monitor, evaluate, and report
the resulting emissions effect of the voluntary measure; and 4) commits to remedy in a timely
manner any SIP credit shortfall if the VMEP program does not achieve projected emission

        EPA anticipates that this policy will generate additional interest and resources toward
VMEP development and data collection. EPA wishes to ensure that the potential benefits of
VMEPs are properly quantified and that these benefits are sustained as successful components of
the SEP.  As experience and information regarding the effectiveness of VMEPs becomes available,
EPA intends to provide further technical guidance and assistance to the States.  As States and
EPA gain more experience with VMEPs in quantifying emissions benefits, more precise
information will be available in determining the effectiveness of a range of programs. The type of
information that EPA expects to gain from evaluating VMEPs includes emissions benefits, public
response and education, cost of implementation, secondary indicators\benefits, quantification
methodologies, and data collection.

       EPA hopes that the effect of this policy will be to generate sufficient information and
programmatic experience to warrant  a wider application of VMEPs for progress toward
attainment under the new NAAQS policy framework.  EPA believes that States should benefit
from this policy by having a wider range of programmatic options to consider. This policy will
ultimately support the creation of new, cost-effective air quality programs and market-based


       Historically, mobile source control strategies have focused primarily on reducing emissions
per mile through vehicle and fuel technology improvements. Tremendous strides have been made
resulting in new light-duty vehicle emission rates which are 70 to 90 percent less than for the
1970 model year. However, transportation emissions continue to be a significant cause of air
pollution due to a doubling of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from 1970 to 1990, and tripling since
I960. In some quickly developing urban areas, the more recent VMT growth rate is even more

dramatic.  In San Diego, California, VMT tripled between 1970 and 1990.  VMT in Las Vegas,
Nevada, increased 160 percent from 1981 to 1991, and nearly doubled in Phoenix, Arizona,
during the same time period.

       The increasing cost of technological improvements to produce incrementally smaller
reductions in grams per mile or grams per kilowatt hour emissions in the entire fleet of vehicles
and engines, along with the time it takes for technological improvements to penetrate the existing
fleets, suggests that supplemental or alternative approaches for reducing mobile source air
pollution are necessary.  Mobile source strategies which attempt to complement existing
regulatory programs through voluntary, nonregulatory changes in local transportation sector
activity levels or changes in in-use vehicle and engine fleet composition are being explored and

       A number of such voluntary mobile source and transportation programs have already been
initiated at the State and local level in response to increasing interest by the public and business
sectors in creating alternatives to traditional emission reduction strategies.  Some examples
include economic and market-based incentive programs, transportation control measures, trip
reduction programs, growth management strategies, ozone action programs, and targeted public
outreach. These programs attempt to gain additional emissions reductions beyond mandatory
Clean Air Act programs by engaging the public to make changes in activities that will result in
reducing mobile source emissions.


       The following definitions apply to VMEPs as described in this memorandum.

       Voluntary Measures: Emission reduction programs that rely on voluntary actions of
       individuals or other parties for achieving emission reductions.

       Seasonal Measures: Emission reduction programs that are in effect only during the
       season in which the area experiences high pollutant concentrations.

       Episodic Measures: Activity-based mobile source  programs that are implemented
       during identified periods of high pollutant concentrations, varying by meteorological
       conditions.  These measures may or may  not be continuous in nature depending on
       program design. The statutory authority  for approval of episodic measures in SIPs
       applies only to activity-based mobile source emission reduction measures as explained

Clean Air Act Authority

       EPA plans to use its authority under the Clean Air Act to allow SIP credit for new
approaches to reducing mobile source emissions.  This policy represents a flexible approach
regarding the SIP requirements set forth in section 110, and economic incentive provisions in

      2The requirements regarding emission reductions needed to achieve attainment of the NAAQS.

 section 182 and 108 of the Act. This policy responds to State and local government interest in
 gaining SIP credits and funding for VMEP programs which will count  toward their State's plan
 to make progress toward attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and builds on EPA's history
 of approving measures that rely to some degree on voluntary compliance, such as provision of
 mass transit. Recognizing that only a limited amount of implementation experience currently
 exists, and that information on VMEP effectiveness will be evaluated and reported as a result of
 this policy, EPA plans to re-evaluate this policy in the future.

 Authority to approve of voluntary measures in SIP

       EPA believes that it has authority under CAA section  110 to approve voluntary measures
 in a SB? for emission reduction credit.  However, EPA believes that as part of its SIP submittal a
 State must commit to monitor, evaluate, and report the resulting emissions effect of the voluntary
 measure, whether the measure is implemented directly by the State or another party, and to
 remedy in a timely manner any credit shortfall.

       In light of the increasing incremental cost associated with additional mobile source
 emission reductions, the lead time required for new technologies to penetrate fleets, and the
 increasing need to target mobile source use to realize reductions, where voluntary measures meet
 the requirements of this policy, EPA believes that it is appropriate and consistent with the Act to
 allow a limited percentage of the total emission reductions needed to satisfy any statutory
 requirement, as described below, to come from voluntary measures. In the event the voluntary
 measure does not achieve the projected emission reductions, the State, having previously
 committed in its SIP to remedying such shortfalls, will pursue appropriate follow-up actions in a
 timely fashion including, but not limited to: adjusting the voluntary measure, adopting a new
 measure, or revising the VMEP emission credits to reflect actual emission reductions,  provided
 overall SIP commitments are met. EPA believes that voluntary mobile source measures, in
 conjunction with the enforceable commitment to monitor emission reductions achieved and rectify
 any shortfall, meet the SIP control measure requirements of the Act.

 Establishment of a cap on SIP credits allowed for VMEPa

       Under this policy, in light of the innovative nature of voluntary measures and EPA's
inexperience with quantifying their emission reductions, EPA is setting a limit on the amount of
emission reductions allowed for VMEPs in a SIP. The limit is set at three percent (3%) of the
total projected future year emissions reductions required to attain the appropriate NAAQS.
However, the total amount of emissions reductions from voluntary measures shall also not exceed
3% of the statutory requirements of the CAA with respect to any SIP submittal to demonstrate
progress toward, attainment of,  or, maintenance of the NAAQS . EPA has analyzed a number of

      3For example, an ozone area classified as severe needing reductions of 200 tpd of volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and 100 tpd of oxides of nitrogen (NO,) from the projected year 2005 baseline inventory could
rely on VMEPs for up to 3% of the required reductions from each pollutant, or 6 tpd of VOC and 3 tpd of No*.
The area could also use all or a portion of these same reductions for purposes of meeting interim rate-of-progress
(ROP) milestones, but again the 3% limit would apply. Thus, if the area needed 25 tpd of creditable VOC
reductions to meet the 1999 ROP target, no more than 0.75 tpd of the VOC reduction in the 1999 ROP plan could
come from VMEPs.

voluntary mobile source programs which could be incorporated into a SEP.  The emission
reduction potential of these programs is generally a fraction of one ton per day.  A three percent
limit on emission reductions from VMEPs will allow areas to implement and claim SIP credit for a
significant number of voluntary mobile source programs.  This cap still provides a sufficient
incentive for developing and implementing VMEPs, while setting a limit on the extent to which a
SEP can rely on innovative programs with which we have had limited experience.

Relationship to Economic Incentive Programs

        The 1990 Amendments statutorily required the Agency to develop Economic Incentive
Program (EIP) rules4. The EIP provides general SEP guidance for the adoption of incentive and
other innovative programs. Some programs that depend on voluntary actions also require either
State or local government authorization to implement the program.  In these cases, which include
certain transportation control measures such as congestion pricing programs, it may be more
appropriate to use the EEP authority to  incorporate the measure into the SEP. Further, where
emissions reductions are expected to exceed the 3% limit, EPA would anticipate the State could
use the EEP to incorporate measures. If a State wishes to have a VMEP approved under the EEP
program rules, EPA is willing to work with the State to develop such a program.

Approval of Voluntary Measures  into the SIP - Kev Criteria

       This section sets forth minimum criteria for approval of VMEPs into SEPs. These criteria
require that the VMEP not interfere with other requirements of the Clean Air Act, be consistent
with SEP attainment and Rate of Progress requirements, and that emission reductions be:

1. Quantifiable - VMEP emission reductions must be quantifiable. The level of uncertainty in
achieving emission reductions must be quantified, and  this uncertainty must be reflected in the
projected emission reductions claimed by the VMEP.  VMEPs must also contain procedures
designed to both evaluate program implementation and to report program results as described in
the section "Technical Support for VMEPs" of this guidance.

2. Surplus - The VMEP emission reductions may not  be substituted for mandatory,  required
emission reductions.  States may submit to EPA for approval any program that will result in
emission reductions  in addition to those already credited in a relevant attainment or maintenance
plan, or used for purposes of SEP demonstrations such as conformity, rate of progress, or
emission credit trading programs.
      4In accordance with the Act language (section 182 (g)(4XA)), the EIP applies to "incentives and
requirements to reduce vehicle emissions and vehicle miles traveled," including TCM's contained in section 108 of
the Act. In addition, the EIP defines mobile sources to mean on-road (highway) vehicles (e.g., automobiles, trucks
and motorcycles) and non-road vehicles (e.g., trains, airplanes, agricultural equipment, industrial equipment,
construction vehicles, off-road motorcycles, and marine vessels). In certain cases. States are required to adopt EIP
provisions into their State Implementation Plan (SIP).  The EIP also serves as guidance for all other States that
choose to adopt EIP provisions into their SIP as non-mandatory EIPs. In 1994, the Agency issued EIP rules and
guidance (40 CFR pan 51 subpart U), which outlined requirements for establishing these programs.

 3.  Enforceable - A State's obligations with respect to VMEPs must be enforceable at the State
 and Federal levels. Under this policy, the State is not responsible, necessarily, for implementing a
 program dependent on voluntary actions. However, the State is obligated to monitor, assess and
 report on the implementation of voluntary actions and the emission reductions achieved from the
 voluntary actions and to remedy in a timely manner emission reduction shortfalls should the
 voluntary measure not achieve projected emission reductions. As stated earlier, EPA anticipates
 that the State will take the steps it determines to be  necessary to assure that the voluntary
 program is implemented and that emission reductions are achieved so that corrective SEP actions
 are not required. For example, the State may want to sign a Memorandum Of Understanding
 (MOU) with the VMEP sponsors.

       Any uncertainty in the emission reductions projected to be achieved by the VMEP must be
 estimated and reflected in the emission reduction credits claimed in the SEP.  As part of this
 submission, the State must commit to conducting program evaluations within an appropriate time-
 frame. The State must also  report the resulting information to EPA within an appropriate time-
 frame in order to document  whether the program is being carried out, and emission reductions are
 being achieved as described in the SEP submittal.  Through the program evaluation provisions
 contained in this policy EPA anticipates that States will  discover any potential emission reduction
 shortfall in  a timely manner and appropriately account for such shortfall either by changing the
 program to address the shortfall, adopting a new measure, or  revising the VMEP's emission
 credits to reflect actual emission reductions achieved, provided overall SEP commitments are met.
4. Permanent -  Emission reductions produced by the VMEP must continue at least for as long
as the time period in which they are used by applicable SEP demonstrations.  The VMEP  need not
continue forever to generate permanent emissions reductions, but must specify an appropriate
period of implementation in the SEP. Voluntary actions in such a program, and the resulting
emission reductions, can be discrete (temporary) or continuous, depending on the nature of the
program.  For example, an ozone action day program which takes effect over an ozone season,
but calls for specific actions on days when exceedences of the ozone standard are likely (i.e.,
episodic measures) is considered a continuous program producing discrete (temporary)
reductions, and therefore the reductions are SEP creditable.

5. Adequately Supported - As with all SEP creditable programs, VMEPs  must demonstrate
adequate personnel and program resources to implement the program.

Approval of Episodic Measures

      EPA has concluded that episodic transportation control measures and other mobile source
related market response measures may be approved for SEP credit under the Act. Prior to the
1990 amendments to the Act, EPA believed that section 123 of the Act, which bars the use of
dispersion techniques in calculating emission limitations, might apply to all control measures,
including transportation and mobile source market controls. However, new  language was added

to the Act in the 1990 amendments that EPA believes indicates a clear congressional intent to
allow and even require the incorporation of episodic transportation and mobile source market
response programs in SIPs.

       Several new  requirements added to the Act in 1990 specifically require adoption of
transportation control measures as listed in section 108(f)(l) of the Act under certain
circumstances. See, for example, section 182(c)(5) - Transportation Controls and section
182(d)(l) - Vehicle Miles Traveled. Section 108(e) and (f) authorizes EPA to issue guidance on
various types of transportation control measures available for selection in the control programs
required under section 182.  Section 108(f)(l)(B) identifies methods that contribute to reductions
in mobile source related pollutants during periods in which a primary NAAQS  will be exceeded.
Episodic transportation and market response measures designed to operate during periods when
ambient pollution levels are anticipated to exceed the NAAQS clearly fall within the scope of
these types of programs that Congress has authorized areas to include in their section 182
transportation and vehicle miles traveled programs.

       EPA therefore concludes that any implication that section 123 may have applied to
transportation and mobile source market response programs under the Act as amended in 1977
has been clarified by the Act as more recently amended in 1990 by the addition of the specific
authorization for adoption of any program identified in section 108(f) under the transportation
control programs required under section 182.

Technical Support for VMEPs

       A State may take credit in its SIP for VMEPs only if they are quantifiable. VMEPs which
are thought to be directionally sound, but for which quantification is not possible cannot be
granted credit. EPA believes that carefully designed and implemented VMEPs are quantifiable to
the extent necessary to grant SIP credit.

       All VMEP submittals must include documentation which clearly states how the sources
from which the reductions are occurring, are currently, or will be addressed in the emissions
inventory, ROP plan, and attainment or maintenance plan, as applicable.  This documentation
should include a description of the assumptions used in estimating and tracking emissions and
emissions reductions from affected sources.

       The following sections are intended to provide general  guidance on the elements of
emission reduction calculation and evaluation procedures that must be addressed in a VMEP SIP

Emission Reduction Calculation

       To receive  SEP credit for a VMEP, the SIP submittal must contain a good faith estimate
of emission reductions, including technical support documentation for the conclusion that the

 measure will produce the anticipated emission reductions.  VMEP emission reduction calculations
 must account for and be adjusted to reflect uncertainties in the program. The calculations must
 be adjusted to account for two types of uncertainty:

              compliance uncertainty - the extent to which the responsible party (a public or
              private entity)  will fully implement the VMEP program, and

       programmatic uncertainty - the extent to which voluntary responses actually occur and/or
              the inherent uncertainties of program design.

       The State must adjust the VMEP calculation for compliance and programmatic
 uncertainty, based on program design elements, and on the predictive quality of the information,
 data, and analytic methodology used by the State to develop the projected emission reductions.
 The State must justify the appropriateness of the adjustments in its VMEP SIP submittal, usually
 as part of the technical support document.

       The adjusted emission  reduction estimate should be developed and justified by the State
 by taking into account various elements of the VMEP program design. These elements could
 include, but not be limited to:  the voluntary mechanism upon which the program is based, such as
 public outreach or reduced fares; the variability in emission rates from affected mobile sources;
 the extent of uncertainty in the emissions quantification procedure; and the frequency and type of
 program evaluation, monitoring, record keeping and reporting.

 Evaluation Reporting Procedures

       States which use  VMEPs in their SIP must describe how they plan to evaluate program
 implementation and report on program results in terms of actual emissions reductions.  Program
 evaluation provisions for VMEPs must be accompanied by procedures designed to compare
 projected emission reductions with actual emissions reductions achieved. The timing of the
 evaluations must be specified in the VMEP SIP submittal. The States and program sponsors will
 benefit from accurate and complete evaluation reports.   EPA expects that program evaluations
 and experience gained over time will result in VMEP modifications to increase effectiveness.

      The State must provide timely post-evaluation reports to the EPA relevant to the SIP
 time-frame in which the emission reductions are being used.  These reports may be used by EPA
 for the purpose of reviewing subsequent SIP submissions required by the CAA, including but not
 limited to: periodic inventories, rate  of progress (milestone compliance demonstrations),
attainment demonstrations, and maintenance demonstrations.

      EPA is working with State and local government representatives to develop
methodologies which would provide sufficient technical support for VMEP SIP submissions.  As
results become available, EPA will provide technical guidance to assist in the development of
 VMEP emission reduction estimates and program evaluation procedures. However, EPA's policy

is to recognize the experience of State and local voluntary programs in quantifying emission
reductions and evaluating program results. Acceptable methodologies and procedures will not be
limited to those developed by EPA, and programs are encouraged to discuss technically sound
alternative methods with EPA Regional Office staff.

VMFP Emission Reduction Use

       As explained above, under Title I of the Clean Air Act, EPA is permitting a limited
amount of voluntary mobile source measures to be included in SIPs and FIPs and to be adopted
for any criteria pollutant in both nonattainment and attainment areas.  VMEP emission reductions
shall be limited in use as determined by existing applicable SIP policy including offsets, Rate of
Progress, attainment demonstrations, baseline determinations, redesignation and maintenance

Future Guidance and  Regional Coordination

       It is incumbent upon EPA Regional Offices and Headquarters to coordinate the
implementation of this policy through consultation and exchange of information.  It will be
necessary to determine the appropriateness of individual VMEPs, applicability of emission
reductions, development of methodologies to estimate emission reductions (including the
appropriateness of uncertainty adjustments), peer review, and standardization of policy. To the
extent that issues cannot be resolved through ongoing coordination efforts between Regional and
Headquarter offices, issues may be ultimately raised through the SIP consistency process.  EPA
encourages early consultation between project sponsors, planners, and EPA's Regional offices
during the development of VMEPs.

       For further information on EPA's policy on VMEPs or the guidance set forth in this
memorandum, contact Michael Ball of the Office of Mobile Sources, at 313-741-7897.


                                    Attachment 1
                      Examples of Voluntary Mobile Source
                          Emission Reduction Programs
The following are some examples which are representative of voluntary mobile source emission
reduction programs (VMEPs) that could be implemented and credited with emission reductions
for SIP related purposes. These programs can and have been designed to be implemented on an
episodic, seasonal, or a continual basis.  More program examples and ideas may be found on the
following websites:
EPA Office of Mobile Source Smart Travel Resources Center web site
Market Incentive Resource Center (www.epa.gov/omswww/markethtm)
Episodic Measures Database (www.epa.gov/oniswww/reports/episodic/study/htm)
      Employer Based Transportation Management Programs
             Various programs implemented by employers to manage the commute and travel
      behavior of employees, such as: van pooling, car pooling, subscription buses, walking,
      shuttle services, guaranteed rides home, alternative work schedules, financial
      incentives(transit passes and subsidies) and on-site TDM support.

      Work Schedule Changes
             Changes in work schedules to provide flexibility to employees to commute outside
      of peak travel periods, such as: telecommuting, flextime, compressed work weeks,
      staggered work hours.

      Area-wide Rideshare Incentives
             Promotional assistance aimed at encouraging commuters to use alternatives to
      single occupant vehicles, such as: marketing of ridesharing services, transit station
      shuttles, computerized carpool matching, vanpool matching, program implementation

      Parking Management
             Management of parking supply and demand, such as: preferential parking locations
      for carpools and vanpools, preferential parking prices for carpools and vanpools, fee
      structures that discourage commuter parking, reduced parking for new developments.

      Special Event Travel Demand Management
             Special plans to manage travel demand in effect during special events, defined as

destinations for a large number of vehicle trips which occur on a one-time, infrequent, or
scheduled basis(such as athletic events, festivals, and major entertainment performances).
These measures could include parking management, remote parking connecting with
transit or shuttle services, efficient traffic routing efforts, public information and
communications systems.

Vehicle Use Limitations/Restrictions
       Techniques to limit vehicle activity in a given geographic area or specified time
period, such as: auto restricted zones, pedestrian malls, traffic calming, no-drive days,
commercial truck restrictions on parking and idling.

Reduced Vehicle Idling
       Measures to reduce the amount of time which vehicles spend in idle modes as part
of their overall operation, such as: reduced operations of drive-thru facilities such as banks
and fast-food restaurants, reduced construction of drive-thru facilities, programs that
facilitate reducing idling at truck stops, transfer facilities and loading docks at commercial

Small Engine and Recreational Vehicle Programs
       Measures targeted at reducing the frequency and duration of small engine and
recreational vehicle use. Other programs aim to shift the time period in which emissions
producing activities, such as lawn and landscape maintenance, take place so that the
negative impact on air quality is reduced. These measures are usually associated with
episodic or seasonal control programs with a significant component of public education
and outreach to encourage the voluntary change in activities.

                                    Attachment 2

                         Example of a Voluntary Program

       Program scenario: A State air quality agency is approached by a public utility to begin
a lawn mower buy back program. The State would like to take credit for the emissions
reductions from this private sector activity in it's 15% plan.

       Up-front credit: The State would like to take credit predicting the effect of the program
in reducing emissions associated with replacing uncontrolled lawnmower emissions with
electric — non polluting lawnmowers.


General Process
0      State notifies EPA of it's intent to take credit for voluntary lawnmower program.
Includes program information and technical support documentation and commitment to
remedy any emission reduction shortfall in a timely manner.
0      Regional Office reviews and approves up-front credit after comments.
0      Activity is conducted by the public utility.
0      State verifies that the program achieved the predicted benefits and generates
       information for EPA review.
0      Regional Office reviews the State SIP submission and determines that the credits have
       been achieved as predicted. Also approved under milestone compliance.

Program Identification: State submits to EPA  its intent to conduct or take credit for the
voluntary lawn mower buy back program in the SIP. The State will describe how the program
or activity will work in practice. In the submission,  the State will describe the following
program elements.

Program participants
How the program works
Activity effects
Emission effects
State commitment for evaluation, reporting, remedying emission credit shortfall
Technical support documentation

Program Participants  The State will identify the sponsors of the program. In this case the
public utility.

How the Program Works As part of the submittal the State will include a description of the
basic program, predicted effect of the program on a given NAAOJS criteria pollutant and a

 commitment to evaluate the program over the desired period of implementation and remedy
 any emission reduction shortfall in a timely manner.

 In the submitted, the State describes the basic program including how the utility intends to
facilitate the activity— buy back of lawn mowers.  On three consecutive Saturdays, the utility
 customers and employees are able to bring in their gasoline powered lawnmawers and receive
 a voucher toward the purchase of any new electric lawnmower.

 Activity Effects The State will submit predicted and observed activity effects.  Data will be
 generated and analyzed which examines the predicted and actual effect of the program.

 In this case, using information provided by the utility, the State estimates that 2000
 lawnmowers would be replaced by non-polluting electric mowers.

 Emission Effects Activity effects ultimately are translated into emissions benefit calculations
 (usually in tons per day\per year).

 The State would be given up-front credit for emission reductions in terms ofHC,  CO and
 other NAAQS criteria pollutants for 2000 mowers being replaced by electric mowers.

 State Commitment for Evaluation, Reporting, and Addressing Credit Shortfall The State will
 be responsible for ensuring that data will be collected regarding participation and the
 effectiveness of the program.  In addition, the State must commit to remedy any SIP credit
 shortfall in a timely manner if the voluntary measure does not achieve projected emission

 The State, as part of the evaluation and reporting commitment, submits to EPA a comparison
 of the predicted effect of the program with the actual observed levels. In this example the
 utility finds that 2000 mowers were replaced.  Thus, the predicted reductions were achieved.

 Technical Support Documentation The State will submit Technical Support Documents
 describing the program and the methodology for predicting emissions benefits.  Where
possible the State should identify data collection methodologies and information necessary for
 describing implementation, compliance, effectiveness and other relevant information.  This
 information should account for the following:

      Proerammatic Uncertainty- Because the program will be voluntary in nature, the State
 will be responsible for submitting to EPA the predicted and, eventually, the actual
participation levels.

      Analytic Methodology- The State will describe how they estimated participation levels
 and the effect of the activity on emissions

                Appendix B



            Motor Oub
Xmariean Lung

rf Matrooetttan Chicago
frwvporeatfen CCAT53

    County Oaptof
^lamng CommlMien
Unoii Stata Otamear of
                              aaa a. NIVERSIOC FLAZA. SUITE isee CHICAGO. IL. «o«o« ceoo) 4*i-iaaa
                                 March 30, 199S

                                 city, state, zip

                                 Dear CEO,

                                 The greater metropolitan Chicago and northwestern Indiana region has a
                                 serious problem with summertime ozone aiz pollution, the main compooem 01
                                 what is commonly termed'smog."  Ozone is a significant health threat to us
                                 all and is especially threatening to children, the elderly, people who
and those with respiratory and bean conditions.  Because of these health
concerns, ozone is a regulated pollutant. As such, ozone also poses a threat
to further economic development to our region.

Partners for dean Air is a recently formed voluntary coalrdon of regional
businesses, health and environmental organizations, and local governments,
          to cleaning our air.  Our initial efforts an focused on voluntarily
                                 reducing ozone on summar Oiooe Acsioo De^i when unheaimfbl levels are
                                 predicted, on avenge approximately 10-13 days a year.  In joining Pvtnen
                                 for Gem Air and amiememing a simple strategy that works far you, (your
                                 uompaay) can make a conmbution to cleaner air when it is needed meet.
                                 Participants are notified by rax the day before such an Ozone Action Day
                                 would occur.

                                 We invite you to join Putaan for CUin Atr. Doing so is snpie.  First,
                                 identify and commit to one or mere simple strategies that your company will
                                 voluntarily  inBtanent on Ozone Action Dtya. Enclosed art a umpk of
                                 •divides others have implemented. Second, sign and ream the enclosed
                                 Partner's pledge-not a legal 47ei""**n but an <*^g*»<^ of your voluntary
                                              The summer ozone season is closing in fast, so we would
                                 sppnriafe your response by (April IS). Call 1-gQO-not-xxa in Illinois or
                                 (815)2194060 in Indiana if you have any further qiueerions or want more
                                 informadco on Partners for Oem Air or done Action Dtyi.  A  *
                                 representative of the orgsmzarlon wul call back to answer any questions you
                                 may have.
                                       you for your

                                 The Partners
               *0« CkCAM AIM 1C A C«AL4T1«H COMMlTTCa T» IM»K«VIM« AIH «UAUTT TH*«V«M

 *•  , I

 Ridefintim Commuter Center • 1011 £ Main Street • Kdmoml, Virginia 23219 • (804) 643-KIOE • FAX (804) 649-2513 • (800) 693-KIDE

                      MEMORANDUM                            Thursday, November 09, 1995
 »T»lf Alt*
?9rtK ill*) tittnilifii

bnmtn Lun| AUKXMI 
          The Bourse Building, 111  South Independence Moll East
          Philadelphia, PA 19106-2515
Telephone: (215) 592-1800
    Fax: (215) 592-9125
July 15, 1996


Dear FffiLD(Salutation),

On behalf of the Ozone Action program and its current participating organizations, I'd
like to welcome you to the circle of Ozone Action Partners, and to thank you for your

You've joined an important program for our region, and an impressive coalition of
concerned corporations, environmental groups and governmental agencies who are
working to help improve air quality in a  14-county region. Through these efforts, we
hope  to reduce the number of times we exceed the national air quality health standards
as measured through the dairy amount of ground-level ozone present in our air this
summer.  As a result, we hope to see fewer exceedances during the crucial  ozone season,
which means less chance of increased emissions controls.  Additionally, we  hope to see
some of the beneficial changes in routine continue throughout the rest of the year,
helping to improve air quality and alleviate growing traffic congestion problems.

Enclosed  in this folder are several key tools to help you spread the word to your
employees and to other business  contacts you deal with. Please take a moment to  review
all the components.  If you have  any questions, do not hesitate to contact our staff.
Again, we appreciate your efforts and dedication, and will work with you  every way we
can to tackle and overcome this continuing problem.

Executive Director

    Commonweolth of Pennsylvania • Bucks County • Chester County • Delaware County • Montgomwy County • City of Ptiilodetohia • City of Chesre<
       Store of New Jersey • Burlington County • Comden County • Gtoucestw County • Mercer County • City of Comden • City of Trenton

                                                                  April 21,  1995
       Dear Bay Area Employer,

       Welcome to the 1995 Spare the Air program! Your organization's involvement in this
       campaign is an important part of the effort to keep the Bay Area's air clean and healthy.
       In this "How To Spare the Air" kit, you will find everything you need to launch a
       successful Spare the Air campaign, including:

       1) A Spare the Air program calendar with important milestones and deadlines about the

       2) Information on our Spare the Air kick-off breakfasts and workshop (please sign  up
         by May 1);

       3) Sample articles for your company newsletters;

       4) Sample brochures that you can order from the Air District (free of charge);

       5j An order form for free brochures, posters, videos and signs from the Air District
         (please return to Community Focus by June  1);

       6) Sample signs for you to use in notifying your employees on Spare the Air days;

       7) A list of our Spare the Air partners; and

      8) Tips on motivating your employees.

      If you have any questions about the Spare the Air program, please call Community
      Focus (the consultant helping to organize the employer program) at (415) 956-1811. If
      you have any questions about air quality or other Air District outreach programs, please
      call the Air District's Public Information Office at (415) 749-4900.

      Again, thank you for helping to Spare the AM

      Best regards,
      Air Pollution Control Officer
      Bay Area Air Quality Management District
939 ELLIS STREET  •  SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA 94109  • (415) 771-6000 •  FAX (415) 928-8560

            Appendix C




 What is ozone?

 Ozone is a gas and the main component of smog. Ozone is formed
 by  the  reaction of  sunlight and carbon-based chemicals  called
 "hydrocarbons" acting in combination with nitrogen oxides (Nox).

 The "bad" ozone should not be confused with the protective layer of
 ozone in the  upper atmosphere which protects the Earth from
 ultraviolet rays.

 What do hydrocarbons come from?

 Vehicle emissions create approximately 44%  of all hydrocarbons.
 Industry sources like factories account for only about 20%.

 Surprisingly, gas powered lawn equipment, oil-based paints and
 stain, dry cleaners, pleasure boating and other everyday sources
 account for about 36% of hydrocarbons. In  general,  the term
 hydrocarbon is interchangeable with volatile  organic compounds

Why la ozon« bad?

Ozone can irritate mucous membranes and cause coughing, choking
and impaired lung functions with prolonged exposure.  Children, the
elderly and people with bronchial conditions are apparently at risk.
Ozone also injures vegetation and has adverse effects on materials
(rubber and fabrics).
                 to th
                                                                     O2on< robl
                             Ozone is formed when pollution from can, trucks, industry and other
                             sources combines in sunlight.  The sun "bakes" these pollutants,
                             turning them into ozone, or smog.
on&ottons and
      • uiHt in

                                                          Regional Ozone Coalition. 801 -B West Eighth Stree'
                                                                    Suite 400, Cincinnati. Ohio 45203-160

About Ozone

The word "ozone" has prompted a lot of
confusion and debate over the past few
years. This confusion persists in part
because ozone conjures both good and
bad images and in fact both perceptions
are correct. From a beneficial standpoint,
we know that the ozone layer in the
upper atmosphere is essential because it
filters harmful ultraviolet radiation from
the sun, reducing the amount reaching
the earth's surface. On the other hand,
high accumulations of ozone in the
lower atmosphere near ground level can
be harmful to people, animals, crops and
other materials. The ozone gas in both
the upper and lower atmosphere is the
same; the difference is that one benefits
and one harms.
The Ozone Layer
High in the stratosphere surrounding the
earth, a layer of ozone gas forms an
important and effective protective
barrier against the sun's ultraviolet rays.
News reports and articles in professional
journals in recent years have
documented a growing international
concern, with many research studies
suggesting that chemical pollutants are
depleting this lifesaving ozone layer.
Am QUALITY NKPCMKNCC Ouioc ron THK HOU«TOM- and manufacturers have
              developed substitutes that are much less
              damaging toth*st»tospheric ozone layer.

              Unless we ta&tf aetkii to protect the ozone
              layer, some scientist* believe that an increase
              in ultraviolet radfctkm will cause a
              corresponding incrtis* In human health
              hazards, such as the incidence of skin cancer
              and eye damage from exposure to sunlight.
              Studies have suggested plant life also could
              be seriously affected, even to the point of
              altering world food supplies;        *

              Efforts to protect the stratospheric aztme
              layer now involve many
              and industries. Anagrementknovmasthe
              Montreal Protocol was signed by many
              countries to help control production and use
              of CFCs. The Federal Clean Air Act
              amendments of 1990 also include the phase-
              out of ozone depleting substances in this
              decade and the recycling of refrigerants from
              motor vehicle air conditioners, which began
              in 1992. The Texas Natural Resource
              Conservation Commission (TNRCO is
              working with various industries and the
              public to see that recycling and other
              innovations help end the use of these
                                                                           PWtMT** ON ••»'!«!.•» P


      Ground Level
What is ground-level ozone and where doe& ft
come from?

Ground-level ozone is the main ingredient in
urban smog. In the presence of sunllgirt and
heat, gaseous air pollutants react to produce
ground-level ozone. These pollutants have
many sources. Some are obvkni$ like aatoawx
biles, trucks, buses and industrial smokestacks,
Others are not, like gasoline stations,, outboard
motors, lawn, garden, farm, and construction
equipment, oil-based paints and households;

Is ozone hazardous to my health?

Yes. High concentrations of groundrlevel
ozone can cause shortness of breath, coughing,
wheezing, and pain with deep breaths. People
who suffer from lung diseases like emphy-
sema, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma and
colds have even more trouble breathing .widen.
the air is polluted These effects can be worse
in anyone who spends significant periods of
time exercising or working outdoors on high
ozone days.

What about children?

Children often play outside for long periods
during the summer. Their lungs are still de-
veloping, and they breathe more rapidly and ;
inhale more air pollution per pound of body
weight than adults. On days when ozone
smog levels are high, these factors put children
at increased risk for respiratory problems.
Wrui$ about exercising adults?

Adults take more than 10,000 breathes
each day. During exercise, or strenuous
                      ten and draw air
           il^ the lungs. When we exer-
                    crease our intake of
air oyatriMJdl«» fen times. The interac-
tlocibeiwteivifr pollution and exercise is
SOJ&ojag that health scientists typically
use exercising volunteers in their research.
       Common Symptoms
            of Irritation
      From Ozone Pollution

                        GROUND-LEVEL  OZONE
      Ground level ozone presents a significant air quality problem in the Baton Rouge area during the summer
      months. During 1990 thorough 1995, the Baton Rouge area experienced between 2 and 16 days each
      summer when federal air quality standards were violated.
      Ozone is a major element of urban smog. Ozone can lower resistance to diseases such as colds and
      pneumonia, damage lung tissue, intensify heart and lung disease, and cause coughing and throat
      Elevated levels of ozone can also harm vegetation, farm crops, and forests.
Whit is tziftt?

Ozone is a colorless gas that can befbund,in-theair
we breathe. Each molecule of ozone is composed
of three atoms of oxygen, one more than  the
oxygen molecule which we  need to breathe to
sustain life.  The additional oxygen atom makes
ozone extremely reactive.  Ozone exists naturally
in the earth's upper atmosphere, the stratosphere.
where it shields the earth from the sun's ultraviolet
rays. However, ozone found dose to the earth's
surface, called ground-level ozone, is considered
an air pollutant
Whtrt daas
                         aia«a eai»a
Ozone is formed by a chemical reaction between
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nrtrogen (NOX) in the presence of sunlight.  The
primary sources of VOCs and NOx are automobile
and industrial emissions. Other sources of VOCs
include dry  cleaners, bakeries, and  consumer
products  such  as  paints,  insecticides^ and
household cleaners.  Ozone concentrations can
reach unheaithfui levels when the weather is hot
and sunny with littie or no wind.  Elevated ozone
levels usually occur between  1 p.m. and 7 p.m.
from May through September.
                                                     Haw «"••« azana affae* human haaltb?

                                                     Higrt concentrations  of  ozone  may  cause
                                                     inflammation and irritation of the respiratory tract,
                                                     particularly during heavy physical activity.  The
                                                     resulting symptoms may include coughing, throat
                                                     irritation, and breathing difficulty.  Inhaling ozone
                                                     can  affect lung function  and  worsen asthma
                                                     attacks. Ozone may increase the susceptibility of
                                                     the lungs to infections,  allergens, and other air
                                                     pollutants.  Medical studies have  shown that
                                                     ozone damages lung tissue and that unheaithfui
                                                     effects may continue for days after exposure has
Htw faa aza«a affaat ftlaat Ufa?

There is  dear evidence  that  ozone  harms
vegetation and forests.  A 1988 study conducted
by the EPA  found that ozone  pollution  was
reducing American crop yields by  $3 billion each
year. The study showed that in the hot summer of
1988, ozone reduced crop yields in experimental
plots by as much as 30 percent. Ozone pollution
also harms forests because it causes early leaf
drop and lower growth rates.
                        BATON  ROUGE CLEAN AIR COALITION
                     Air Quality Information (504) 765-0905

                    United States

                    Environmental Protection
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
January 1994
                     Ozone is the same whether
                     it is high altitude or ground-level.

                     However, it protects us high above
                     the earth but can be bad for us
                     to breathe near the ground.

5 O
                       £'1  AIR
          TOP 1O TIPS

On Ozone Action Days, use this list and help
      reduce ozone (smog) formation.

 1. Defer lawn and gardening chores that use
   gasoline-powered equipment.

 2. Limit driving. Rideshare, carpool, walk
   or bike. Combine errands.

 3. Take public transportation.

 4. Postpone using oil-based paints
   and solvents.

 5. Do not refuel on an Ozone Action Day.
   If you must refuel, do so after dusk.

 6. Avoid excessive idling.

 7. Keep your car well tuned.

 8. Defer use of household consumer prod-
   ucts that release fumes or evaporate  easily.

 9. Start charcoal with an electric or chimney-
   type fire starter instead of lighter fluid.

10. Conserve energy and recycle.
                                       .   r,T?n Things You Can Do    .
                                       to Reduce Ground-Level Ozonl
                                                     Ride the bus
                                                            a ride to work
          Walk or ride*Wcycle

     Combine errand* into one trip

           Wling iH drive-through
                                            ,, .-•» ".          *  •
                                            Wp your veNei* properly tuned
                                            -   to keep «
 tonal OXOCM
 tlitfon    •
 o/untory astodation
 cof governments,
 Mzotiofts ono
 dudnf ttnof in

                                 Summer 1996

            The Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce has a comprehensive
            tipsheet of things that businesses can do to reduce ozone pollution
            especially on "Smog Alert Days," including:
                  Encourage or provide incentives for employees to take the
                  bus, car-pool, bike or walk to work.

                  Plan meetings in the early morning, use conference calls, car-
                  pool to meetings.  Choose meeting locations that require the
                  least total amount of driving.

                  Consider telecommuting, four-day work weeks and flex-time
                  so employees avoid driving during 3:00-6:00 p.m. rush-hour.

                  Refuel fleet vehicles in the early morning or after 6:00 p.m.
                  and don't top off or spill fuel.
                                  Minimize bulk loading and unloading of fuel, solvents, and
                                  volatile chemicals; do this work in the early morning of after
                                  6:00 p.m.

                                  Mow corporate lawns after 6:00 p.m.

                                  Use only water-based paints, cleaners, sealants, etc.

                                  Conserve electricity by turning the A/C warmer, deferring
                                  copying, turning out lights, turning off copiers and computers
                                  while not in use.

                                                        Regional Ozone Coalition. 801 -B West Eighth Street.
                                                                  Suite 400, Cincinnati. Ohio 45203-1607

  Do your  share  for  cleaner  airl
                          In order to increase public awareness when an ozone action day
                          is called, the North Texas Clean Air Coalition is making
                          available Ozone Action Day flags. On ozone action days, our
                           goal is to have these bright yellow flags on the flagpoles of
                           police and fire stations, libraries, city halls, post offices, schools
                           and area businesses. With the November 1996 deadline
                               reaching, it is crucial that we work together to remind the
                                >ns of the Metroplex of the need to reduce emissions in
                              __. to maintain the economic viability of the region and to
                            •otect the health of us all. If your organization would like to
                             in this effort, please complete the form below and fax or mail
                        it to:

                           North Central Texas Council of Governments
                           P. O. Box 5888
                           Arlington, Texas 76005-5888
                           attn: Ozone Action Day Rags/Lynn Hayes

                           Fax: (817) 640-3028
Ozone Action  Day Flag Order Form

 Flag description: 3' by 5' bright yellow nylon with black imprint of the Ozone Alert emblem
 and brass grommets.
 Donation requested — $15.00 (please make checks payable to NTCAO)

 Name of Company:	
 Contact person:	
 Phone: (   )	
 Number of flags needed:	
 Would your company like to donate a flag to a local school, library, police or fire station?
      (   )  Yes        (   )  No
 If yes, have you identified a specific organization or location?
      (   } No, provide it to a location of your choice on our behalf
      (   ) Yes, please send it to:
            Phone: (   ).
Fax:(   ).


 We/come to the Ozone Action program I  In order to make your efforts as easy as possible,
 we've induded information and tools for you to use and distribute to your employees. Due to
 budget constraints, we ask for your cooperation in reproducing some of these materials.

 I.  TENT CARD: there are two of these induded in your Wt  They are designed to be placed
    at a reception desk or common point of entry to  your site, to alert your employees about
    impending Ozone Action Days.  If you cannot use them as standing cards, please punch a
    hole in the top, tape the bottom ends together inside (so the card is Hat), and use them to
    hang on doors or by elevator banks. Additional cards are available at $ I each (see Order
    Form, included).

2   OZONE ACTION BROCHURE: we have induded five of these, for your reference, and
    for distribution to appropriate employees directly involved with your OA effort. These can also
    be reproduced on a color copier, or, for best quality, greater quantities can be ordered (see
    Order Form).

3.   EMPLOYEE FACT SHEET: this is designed as a genefai information vehfcfe for your
    employees, especially If you cannot order additional brochures. This can be reproduced on
    any copier.

4.   EMPLOYEE ACTION RECORDS this is to allow your employees to record their action*
    on designated Ozone Action Days. While this is not mandatory for Business Partners, we ask
    for your cooperation in distributing and gathering these from your employees, to help us
    track eflbfts.

5.   SHARE-A-RIDE BROCHURE: this explains the free service available to southeastern PA
    employers to have your employees matched to transit or in car and vanpoofe. NJ and DE
    employers can call  the SAR number for information on  similar services in their states.
    Please consider this opportunity for this summer, and the rest of the year.

6.   ORDER FORM: this allows you to order oddftfenof motertefe, above, and to order OZONE
    ACTION FLAGS and T-SHIRTS. Please take a minute to review these options.

7.   SAMPLE  NEWSLETTER ARTICLE: this is meant to serve as a model to include in your
    internal and/or external communications. Please feel free to modify it as necessary, and to
    call DVRPC offices with any questions.

8.   LOGO: A camera-ready logo and tagline have  been induded for use in publicizing the
    program. These can be cut and pasted or scanned for future use. If you wish o use color,
    the red behind the "O" in the logo is PMS 192.

9.  CHILD'S WORK SHEET: this is designed to be distributed to employees to pass it on to
    important children in their lives. This allows many employees to keep an OA reminder in
    the home. This can also be used as a contest item to generate interest at your worksite.

  We/come to tne Ozone Action pro from! By becoming a Business Partner, you Join a group
  of committed Delaware Valley companies and organizations which are helping to make our dm
  season a success. We'd like to know what activities your business plans to undertake as part
  of this effort so please take a minute to fill out this form and return it as soon as posttole.
  Check the actions that your company or organization plan to take this Ozone season:
  D    Distribute program literature to employees.
 Q    Announce OA Days at work (via signs, PA announcement, e-mail, etc.).
 D    Fax OA announcements to other offices and businesses, as part of fax notice "chain."
 D    Postpone refueling fleets and/or commercial mowing on OA Days.
 D    Voluntarily reduce other industrial emissions on OA Days.
 O    Sponsor employee or corporate contests to encourage OA awareness and participation.
 D     Offer employee transit or carpooi incentives (see attached MAP Information sheets).
 D     Include information about the program in company/customer newsletters and billing
 D    Support public  information and education campaign through editorial letters and
      columns, communications with government officials and other business peerr.
 O    Serve as a resource or reference for news interviews, public meetings and speeches.
D    Other.	

Beyond the call of duty
O Contribute funding for additional program educational or promotional materials or PSAs.
O Sponsor radio or television ozone forecasts and/or promotions.
Please send/fax your response to:
Ozone Action Program
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
HIS. Independence Mall East
Philadelphia. PA 19106
Phone: 215/592-1800      Fax  215/592-9125

                                                            Ozone Action! Grades 6-8 - Introduction
 The West Michigan Clean Air Coalition's Ozone Action! Education Packet is designed to
 help students learn about ozone as a scientific and social issue and to teach them what they
 can do to improve our air quality. The packet is part of the Coalition's Ozone Action! Pro-
 gram, which monitors potential high ozone days (Ozone Action! Days) and encourages indi-
 viduals and organizations to take actions that will reduce West Michigan's air pollution.

 There are actually three packets, graded for different educational levels.  This packet, for
 Grades 6-8, includes:                                                 	
  /   Background Fact Sheet for Teachers

  /   Learning Activities for Students

  /   A List of Actions That Students (and Others) Can Take
      to Reduce Ozone

  /   A Glossary, Poster, and Suggestions for Additional
With this packet, students will leam about the makeup of the atmosphere, including the major
gases and the problem of ozone pollution.  The lessons will focus on the role of ozone (03) in
the atmosphere and as a primary component of urban air pollution. Students will also  learn
how weather affects air pollution problems.

The packet is designed to be used alone as a drop-in unit or as a supplement to other  cur-
ricula. Although the packet contains five learning activities, with associated supplementary
materials, teachers are encouraged to adapt the material and activities for their individual
         For further information, additional materials, or other assistance, teachers can call
         the West Michigan Clean Air Coalition at 1-800-65-OZONE (656-0663) or at 616-

    Ozone Action! Program
  Teacher Education Packet
           Grades 6-8
Classroom Activities #1-5
    & Ancillary Materials
  Activity #1: Three Newspaper Articles (pp. 1-3.a)
  Activity #2: Atmosphere Fact Sheet (p. 4)
  Activity #3: Two pages and Six Data Sheets (pp. 5-11 .a)
  Activity #4: What is your AQ?-Quiz & Answer Sheets (pp. 12-13)
  Activity #5: Community Survey Form & Ozone Action! Tips for
      Students (pp. 14-15)
  Ozone Action! Tips Card
  Ozone Action! Poster

   VI /
Dolour Share For Cleaner Air

       Coloring Book.

         How you can help
  on Ozone Action days and year-round.

DOING      OUR      SHARE      FOR      CLEANER     At
                 ANSWER  SHEET
1 J H A 8 K
x o z (2
K ' N K.
IE Y E Csi
8 Z
0 L
-R <3

^e N T
P 1 H
AT 1 L E) M
A. N 1 Cl R V
o 0
0 1
M 0 E Q A



0 R G V
F T Y 1
                             N G
1 ,,  }
>/ j  K
                                      F  0 8    C  I  E  A N  £
                                                                                        A '  ?
        Eit s an OZOMC ACTION DAY, but Coach
        Ozone s hat is too tight, and ha can't
        think straight  Can you halo Coach
        Ozone daoda what na ought to do?
iiiiiKll n  Setow are soma prootams and pomda
        answars. Cnack (•'I tna arawar that
        you nka baati Soma probtams nava
        more than ona good amwar.
                                                            0. Whan Coach Ocena «• up lha oa» tar*.
                                                              •Mould ha gat N w Ml a* poaafeia, «v«n it it
                                 l cr more frund*.
                        B* Takt me ous or suoway.
                        3  Onvejion*.
                        6* Skateooard.

                      a Coac«iOzonah«todrt««toweik»oh«can
                        pick up ttw pbza en hto «My hema (VUMQ.
                        Whfch auto atwiM Coach drtv*?
                        WOituD now, during (ha oootv
                          out tomorrow
                                                              - Cw«owit1! You
                                                                don't want to hava
                                                                to coma back too
                                                                soon. now. do you?
                                     E. Coach Ozone* wtfattw** ma graaaia way too
                                        tai, but Coaeh thWa that tha gaa t
                                        apawa a lot of fumaa.
                                        B* Coach >nouU gat a tuna-up on
                                          that gas mowar. and then mow
                                        O Coach *cuM mow n tha  ,„•
                                          antrnoon, and work on
                                        H* Usa that old manual puarrmowar.
                                                           F.  Coach WBJ* to p*Mfw TV mm. VWwtMnd
                                       otharOtona Action PaAnanj
                                       ahortd atway« Hva *ia thai?
                                                             ^n wouU ba nca. out., gat i»al!
                                                             fe*No.)U8t on OZONE ACTON QAYS.
                           COACH   OZONE'S  QUIZ
                                                  TEACHER RESOURCE

0  0
IV  G     OUR     SHARE     FOR     C  I  E  A   K  £  I
                                                                                           I  R
    The Education Committee of the Southwest PA Ozone Action Partnership is very interested in your
    response to the "Know Your Ozone" Education Package. Please respond to the following questions,
    adding comments if you have them, and return completed form to:

                       Betsy Mallison
                       Chairman, Communications Committee
                       Southwest Ozone Action Partnership
                       400 Waterfront Drive
                       Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4745
      Did you have a clear understanding of ground-level and
      stratospheric ozone issues before reading this package?
      Did this package increase your understanding of ozone issues?
      Is the subject matter clear and easy to understand?
      Are the materials age-appropriate?
      Did you use any of the materials in your classroom this year?
      Will you use any of the materials in your classroom next year?
      Which materials were your favorites? Why?
      Which materials did you like the least? Why?
     Any additional comments?


                           United States Environmental Protection Agency
                                    Office of Air & Radiation
                             Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards

                                         FACT SHEET
      July 17,  1997


      Whv are We Concerned about Ground-Level Ozone?

        • Ozone is the prime ingredient of smog in our cities and other areas of the country. Though it occurs
          naturally in the stratosphere to provide a protective layer high above the earth, at ground-level it is
          the prime ingredient of smog.

        • When inhaled, even at very low levels, ozone can:

            o  cause acute respiratory problems;
            °  aggravate asthma;
            o  cause significant temporary decreases in lung capacity of 15 to over 20 percent in some healthy
            o  cause inflammation of lung tissue;
            «  lead to hospital admissions and emergency room visits [10 to 20 percent of all summertime
               respiratory-related hospital visits in the northeastern U.S. are associated with ozone pollution];
            °  impair the body's immune system defenses, making people more susceptible to respiratory
            "''illnesses, including bronchitis and pneumonia.

      Who is Most at Risk from Exposure to Ground-Level Ozone?

        • Children are most at risk from exposure to ozone:

            o  The average adult breathes 13,000 liters of air per day. Children breathe even more air per
               pound of body weight than adults.
            o  Because children's respiratory systems are still developing, they are more susceptible than
               adults to environmental threats.
            o  Ground-level ozone is a summertime problem. Children are outside playing and exercising
               during the summer months at summer camps, playgrounds, neighborhood parks and in

        • Asthmatics and Asthmatic Children:

            °  Asthma is a growing threat to children and adults. Children  make up 25 percent of the
               population and comprise 40 percent of the asthma cases.
            °  Fourteen Americans die every day from asthma, a rate three times greater than just 20 years
               ago. African-Americans die at a rate six times that of Caucasians.
            °  For asthmatics having an attack, the pathways of the lungs become so narrow that breathing
               becomes akin to sucking a thick  milk shake through a straw.

              o Ozone can aggravate asthma, causing more asthma attacks, increased use of medication, more
                medical treatment and more visits to hospital emergency clinics.

         •  Healthy Adults:

              o Even moderately exercising healthy adults can experience 15 to over 20 percent reductions in
                lung function from exposure to low levels of ozone over several hours.
              o Damage to lung tissue may be caused by repeated exposures to ozone ~ something like
                repeated sunburns of the lungs — and this could result in a reduced quality of life as people age.
                Results of animal studies indicate that repeated exposure to high levels of ozone for several
                months or more can produce permanent structural damage in the lungs.
              ° Among those most at risk to ozone are people who are outdoors and moderately exercising
                during the summer months. This includes construction workers and other outdoor workers.

       How does Ground-Level Ozone Harm the Environment?

         •  Ground-level ozone interferes with the ability of plants to produce and store food, so that growth,
            reproduction and overall plant health are compromised.

         *  By weakening sensitive vegetation, ozone makes plants more susceptible to disease, pests, and
            environmental stresses.

         •  Ground-level ozone has been shown to reduce agricultural yields for many economically important
            crops (e.g., soybeans, kidney beans, wheat, cotton).

         •  The effects of ground-level ozone on long-lived species such as trees are believed to add up over
            many years so that whole forests or ecosystems can be affected. For example, ozone can adversely
            impact ecological functions such as water movement,  mineral nutrient cycling, and habitats for
            various animal and plant species.

         •  Ground-level ozone can kill or damage leaves so that they fall off the plants too soon or become
            spotted or brown. These effects can significantly decrease the natural beauty of an area, such as in
            national parks and recreation areas.

         •  One of the key components of ozone, nitrogen oxides, contributes to fish kills and algae blooms in
            sensitive waterways, such as the Chesapeake Bay.

       What Improvement Would Result from EPA's New Standards?

       EPA's new ozone standards will provide increased protection beyond that provided by the previous
       standard from the following effects:

         • Reduced risk of significant decreases (15% to over 20%) in children's lung functions (such as
           difficulty in breathing or shortness of breath), approximately 1 million fewer incidences each year,
           which can limit a healthy child's activities or result in increased medication use, or medical treatment,
           for children with asthma

         • Reduced risk of moderate to severe respiratory symptoms in children, hundreds of thousands of
           fewer incidences each year of symptoms such as aggravated coughing and difficult or painful
2 of 3

         • Reduced risk of hospital admissions and emergency room visits for respiratory causes, thousands
           fewer admissions and visits for individuals with asthma

         • Reduced risks of more frequent childhood illnesses and more subtle effects such as repeated
           inflammation of the lung, impairment of the lung's natural defense mechanisms, increased
           susceptibility to respiratory infection, and irreversible changes in lung structure. Such risks can lead
           to chronic respiratory illnesses such as emphysema and chronic bronchitis later in life and/or
           premature aging of the lungs

         • Reduce the yield loss of major agricultural crops, such as soybeans and wheat, and commercial
           forests by almost $500,000,000.

       Background: What is Ground-level Oztme?

         • Ozone is not emitted directly into the air,  but is formed by gases called nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
           volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that in the presence of heat and sunlight react to form ozone.
           Ground-level ozone  forms readily in the atmosphere, usually during hot weather.

         • NOx is emitted from motor vehicles, power plants and other sources of combustion. VOCs are
           emitted from a variety of sources, including motor vehicles, chemical plants, refineries, factories,
           consumer and commercial products, and other industrial sources.

         • Changing weather patterns contribute to yearly differences in ozone concentrations from city to city.
           Also, ozone and the  pollutants that cause  ozone can be carried to an area from pollution sources
           located hundreds of miles upwind.
3 of 3


              Appendix D



                               ACTION GUIDES.

Several areas have developed ozone or air quality-related materials packaged as "action
guides."  These educate the public about ozone alert levels and provide suggested actions
that can/should be taken at the various levels. As noted in Chapter 5, ozone levels are
commonly communicated by categories that are based on predicted or observed ozone
concentrations. For instance, the Georgia Department of Environmental Protection uses
the Red, Yellow, and Green color system to notify residents when there is an ozone
Warning, Watch, or when the-air quality is Good.  Several other areas use four categories,
although the precise definition and terminology varies from region to region. The
following Table outlines these notification levels.
Baton Rouge
Delaware Valley
Category Names
Code Red
Code Red
and Concentration
Code Orange
Code Orange
Ranges (ppm)
Code Yellow
Code Yellow

Code Green
Code Green
The four basic categories and color schemes presented above can be used to categorize
types of actions included in guides for specific regions. The following is an example.
Good (Code Green)

Throughout the ozone season, residents should make an extra effort to:
   Carpool, use transit, telecommute, bike or walk
   Use environmentally safe paints and cleaning products.
   Keep cars lawn equipment and boats tuned up.
   Keep gas tank full but don't overfill
   Drive on radial tires that are properly inflated.
   Use electric or natural gas grills instead of charcoal and lighter fluid.

Moderate (Code Yellow)

When air quality is moderate and a Code Yellow is issued, residents are urged to:

•   Conserve energy and set air conditioners to 78°
•   Plan ahead to consolidate trips or errands.
•   Plus those in Code Green

Approaching Unhealthful (Code Orange)

When air quality approaches or is forecast to reach unhealthful ozone levels and a Code
Orange is issued, residents are urged to:

•   Refuel after dusk to limit daytime pollution releases
•   Avoid mowing lawns with gasoline-powered mowers
•   Share a ride or drive alternative fuel vehicles or the newest best maintained vehicles.
•   Plus thos- -n Code Green and Code Yellow

Unhealthful. Code Red)

When air quality reaches or is forecast to reach unhealthful ozone levels, a Code Red is
issued and sensitive populations are specifically alerted:

•   Children and elderly individuals should reduce outdoor activities.
•   Healthy individuals should  limit strenuous outdoor work or exercise
•   Individuals with heart or respiratory ailments, emphysema, asthma, or chronic
    bronchitis should limit their outdoor activities. If breathing becomes difficult move

All residents are strongly urged to:

•   Limit idling when possible, avoid jack rabbit starts, and drive within the speed limits.
•   Share a ride to work or work at home
•   All Code Green, Yellow, and Orange actions

   '        idlOH  PMCItW
     Air Quality
  (Pollutant Standard
    Index (PSI) and
    Weather Conditions

      Recommended Actions
       100 +
     Un healthful
                     Hot (mid 90's to 100's) and
                     Stagnant air, little or no wind
                   •  Little chance of rain
                   •  Stationary high pressure
                     system with sunny skies
                         A. When air quality reaches unfaithful fevefe;
                         « Children and elderly individuals should reduce outdoor
                         • Healthy individuals should limit strenuous outdoor work or
                         • Individuals with heart or respiratory ailments, emphysema.
                           asthma, or chronic bronchitis should limit their outdoor
                           activities. If breathing becomes difficult, move indoors.
                         S. When air quality Is foncast to nach unheaVtfifuf levels,
                           residents an strongly urged to;
                         • Limit driving and, when possible, idling.
                         • Share a ride to work, or work at home.
                           (Plus items feted in C, D, and E)
 Approadhing Uj*ealthful
                   •  Temperatures in the upper
                     80's to low 90's
                   •  Light winds
                     Slow-moving high pressure
                     system with sunny skies
                         C. When air quality approaches unltealOiful levels,
                           residents an urged to;
                         • Refuel cars after dusk to limit daytime pollution releases.
                         • Avoid mowing lawns with gasoline-powered mowers.
                         • Share a ride or drive only their newest best maintained
                           (Plus items listed in D and E)
       51 -
 •  Mild summer temperatures
   (upper 70's to mid 80's)
,«  Light to moderate winds
 •  High pressure system with
   partly cloudy or sunny skies
                                           D. When air quetty Is In the moderate range,
                                           • Consolidate trips and errands.
                                           • Conserve electricity and set air conditioners to 78° F.
                                             (Plus items listed in E)
                   •  Cool summer temperatures
                     (mid 70's to low 80's)
                     Windy Conditions
                   •  Rainfall
                     Passing cold front
Air Quality Information (504) 765-0909
                         £ Throughout tfw ozone smog season (May through
                                  ?, nMJdentt should me*e an ex*« effort to:
                         • Carpool, use transit bike or walk when possible.
                         • Keep cars and boats tuned-up.
                         • Use environmentally safe paints and cleaning products.
                                       Daily PSI Report (504) 295-8541

                          For more air quality information, call MDE's Air
                                    Quality Hotline at (410)  631-3247
                     Scroll down to see what you can do to help clean the air!
       The Maryland Department of the Environment uses a color-coded scheme to forecast ground-level
       ozone levels in the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas. The color scheme used is listed

               CODE GREEN: good air quality— ozone levels to be less than 61 parts per billion (ppb)
                              : moderate air quality-ozone levels to be between 61 and 1 10 ppb
               COOL ( )R \\GE: approaching unhealthy -ozone levels to be between 1 1 1 and 124 ppb
               CODE RED: unhealthy air quality-ozone levels to be equal to or greater than 125 ppb
      Throughout the ozone smog season (May through September) and
      when air quality is CODE GREEN, residents are urged to:

         * Carpool, use transit, bike or walk when possible.
         9 Keep cars and boats tuned-up.
           Use environmentally safe paints and cleaning products.

      When air quality is moderate and a < ''" I  •  :        is issued,
      residents are urged to:

         9 Consolidate trips and errands.
         9 Limit vehicle idling when possible.
           Conserve electricity and set air conditioners to 78 degrees Fahrenheit.

      When air quality approaches or is forecasted for unhealthful ozone
      levels and a CODE ORANGE is issued, residents should:

         0 Refuel  cars after dusk to limit daytime pollution releases.
         0 Avoid mowing lawns with gasoline-powered mowers.
           Share a ride or drive only the best maintained vehicle.

      When air quality reaches or is forecasted for unhealthful ozone
      levels and a CODE RED is issued, residents are strongly urged to:
I of 3

    * Limit driving and, when possible, combine errands.
    * Use area bus and rail lines, or share a ride to work.
      Avoid mowing lawns with gasoline-powered mowers.
      Refuel cars after dusk.
Also, the Maryland Department of the Environment reports air quality using the Pollutant Standard
Index (PSI). The PSI converts measured pollution concentrations to a number on a scale of 0 to 500.
Today's Pollution Standard Index can be found under Today's Weather in the Baltimore Sun and the
Washington Post, or by calling the Air Quality Hotline at (410) 631-3247. A conversion of PSI to the
Color Coded Forecast is found below.
                                   Pollutant Standard Index
Reading (PSI)
                                   Code Green

Good Air Quality
                    Code Orange       \pproachinu L'nhealthful Levels
                      Code Red	" UnhealthfuT Air Quality"
For additional air quality information, check out:
                    the Metropolitain Washington Council of Government's Air Oualitv Pace
                    the University of Maryland's Ozone Forecasting Pace
Ground-level ozone pollution is a serious problem in urban areas such as the Baltimore and Washington
regions. To find out more information on ground-level ozone visit the Ozone Information Page .

                               Bay Area Air Quality Forecasts

                                       May 22,  1997
                                               the. fl
                                         HOME PAGE
             Employers: Register for electronic notification of Spare the Air days this summer!
  C'oast &
Central Bav
Central Bav
Santa Clara
                      Unless otherwise noted, the above referenced pollutant is ozone.
      If a Spare the Air day is predicted this page will announce it by 1:30 PM. The actual numbers will
      be posted by 4:30 PM.  This page is updated daily, except on those weekends when air quality is
      predicted to remain healthful and a three-day forecast is made.

           N £A> Clean Air Champions Homepage
           What to do on a Spare the Air day
           The Pollutant Standards Index - What the numbers mean
           A dav in the life of ozone
           Air quality forecasting - How it's done
           1997 Box Scores - Ozone Excesses
           Comprehensive links to Bay Area transit and commute alternatives
           Spare the Air in Sacramento

                  This page is maintained by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

      E-mail comments/questions regarding the Spare the Air website to wmtaylor(2),baaqmd.gov

I of I

Central Delaware Valley: Burlington and Mercer Counties
This chart shows the highest reading in the region for each pollutant and the monitoring site at which the
reading was recorded. The tallest bar determines the overall rating in the region. Values over 100
represent unhealthful levels.
                       Current data as of 11:00 an. Hay 23, 1997
    Highest Site
  Nunber of Sites
D i ox i de
Rider U.

Rider U.
                                                                     • UnheaIthf uI
                                                                     • Approach ing
                                                                     Unhea I thf u I
Parti cut ate* Sulfur
Central Delaware Valley sites:
Select one of the site names from the
list below to get current readings for
that site.
Rider University

                         Ozone Action Partnership
                         Ground-Level  Ozone
                       Forecast for period

                       Forecast issued

                       Forecast range

                       Forecast Discussion
September 3.

September:. 19%. 1420 EOT

                       Summer has finally arrived with only three weeks to spare. Expect warm
                       conditions Tuesday with ozone in the upper moderate range.

                       Tuesday will be another tine summer day with conditions ripe tor higher
                       ozone. Temperatures will climb to the mid-upper 80's with light winds
                       becoming southerly The limits on ozone production will be low, late
                       summer sun angle and a chance for upper level clouds to take the edge off
                       both temperatures and sun.

                       LONG RANGE OUTLOOK:

                       The remainder of the week will be partly to mostly sunny and warm as the
                       region basks on the western fringes of the Atlantic high. Ozone will  remain
                       in the upper moderate range with daily concentrations depending on cloud
                       cover particularly clouds associated with the cutoff low over the southeast
                       By Friday, we will again have to closely monitor conditions to our south as
                       Fran follows the track of Edouard around the Atlantic high and then north
                       along the coast.

                       *** For the latest hurricane information see:
                       http,//www.neosoft.com/citylink/blake/tropical. html
                       http //www.nrlmry.navy.mil

         CODE GREEN - GOOD
     125 ppbor more
      110 to 124 ppb
      63 to 109 ppb
      62 ppb or less

    Sine of Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality
    Air Qujlitu Division
               Although the OzoneAction! season has
	_,_ ^    begun.ozone levels are expected to
ACTION! remain  low for the immediate future.
    State &Zone


    Query Database
      for 03 by:
     DATE or SITE

    Tables & Maps
    of Exceedances

    Attainment Map

    Monitoring Site

    Days- Previous
              zone (ppb)
               Data Subject to Verification
Clicking on a site will show hourly measurements. To see modified maps showing the next hours data,
  be sure to refresh/reload the screen. Meteorological data is not collected at ALL sites. The buttons
                  below display daily maximum values for the previous week.
         'Monday |Tuesd:iy .|Wfi?mv.;!t:iy jj Thursday    Friday  [ S-.iturdfe kwla be* with:
                                   RevisedMay 15, 1997
                                   by Mary Ann Heindorf

        OZ   *PE  ACTION   DAYS
        cdo  ujQuir  shairg  fair  cleaner  air
                                             RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

              • Temperatistij
                to low r
• Mild summer temperatures
  (upper 70's to mid 80's)
• Light to moderate winds (IS
  knots or less)
• High pressure system with
  partly cloudy or sunny skies

• Cod
 Windy i
  knots or!
• Heavy or
• Passing cold ftati
                    THE AIR QUALITY INDEX

    The Air Pollution Control District of Jefferson County issues a POLLUTANT STANDARD INDEX 4
    times daily during the weekdays. The Air Quality Index provides the current index, the elevated
    pollutant, the current category, and a short term forecast.

 j The Latest \.».rQualii\ Index for Louisville


                        PREVENTION COALITION

 We often hear a lot about the depletion of the ozone layer in the atmosphere. This kind of ozone protects
 us from harmful radiation. Stratospheric ozone is good, but ground-level ozone is harmful.

 When people think of ground-level ozone, they usually picture a thick layer of smog over Los Angeles.
 They don't usually think of a Midwest summer day, typically hazy, sunny and hot.


 Ground-level ozone is formed by a chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
 oxides of nitrogen in the presence of sunlight and warm temperatures. The primary source of these are
 automobiles and industrial emissions. High ozone levels pose significant health risks to the elderly and
 young children, but even healthy adults may be affected. Here in Kentuckiana, ground-level ozone is a
 particular problem during the afternoons and early evenings between June and September.

 Most of the pollutants that form ozone come from cars. Large factories account for another portion of
 the emissions. Small businesses such as printing plants, service stations, and auto body shops, and
 people using lawn mowers, paints,  and cleaning solvents account for another portion of the emissions.


 High gjound-level ozone directly impacts our health and our economy. When ozone is breathed into the
 body, it reacts with the lung tissue. It can harm breathing passages, making it more difficult for the lungs
 to work, It also can cause eye and throat irritation and cause a greater susceptibility to infection.

 If Kentuckiana continues to exceed federal standards, numerous costly restrictions - which will affect
businesses and private citizens alike - will be required in our area.  By making a few simple changes in
our daily habits, we can maintain healthy air and a healthy economy.

When weather forecasts show favorable conditions for high ozone levels, the Kentuckiana Ozone
Prevention Coalition will issue an Ozone Action Day advisory asking you to do your share for cleaner

                        The Ozone  Forecasting Program

L'sinu a formula developed by the University of Maryland, the Maryland Department of the
Environment forecasts ozone levels for the Baltimore and Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. MDE
also aives current ozone levels which are measured at MDE monitoring sites throughout the state. The
information is communicated to outside parties immediately, by fax, throughout the summer ozone
season (May - September).

Based on the forecasts, the public can take measures to protect themselves from exposure if they're
vulnerable and contribute to reducing emissions by actions such as: keeping cars well tuned, mowing
less with a gas mower, or using an enviromentally friendly mower, refueling after dusk to prevent the
davtime releases of pollution, using water-based paints and citrus-based cleaners.

Each day, MDE will fax pre-approved "green." "yellow," "orange," and "red" labeled messages at 4:30
P.M.. depending on the level of ozone.  If the forecast changes, a subsequent forecast will be issued at
11.30 the following morning. The faxes will be distributed by computer to local media. When a
violation occurs, an immediate "Notice of Unhealthful Air" is issued and faxed to all parties.

The Maryland Department of Transportation also reports MDE's ozone messages on the overhead
highway signs throughout the state.

The Maryland Department of the Environment maintains a toll free telephone number to answer the
public's questions on the ozone levels. The number is 1-800-539-6656. The Department's Air Quality
Hotline, (410) 631-3247, gives the current pollutant standard index readings, and its color coded
correspondent, a color coded forecast, and preventive measures for people to follow.
                                   Pollutant Standard Index
Standard Index
 Reading (PSI)
                                                   Code Green
                                                  Code Yellow
                                                  Code Orange
                                                    Code Red
                              ^^ Cod* Grten: good air quality—ozone levels to be less thin 61 parts per billion (ppb)

                              /" Cod* Yellow: moderate air quality-ozone levels to be between 61 and 110 ppb

                              £ Code Orange: approaching unhealthy -ozone levels to be between 111 and 124 ppb

                              ^& Code Red: unhealthy air quality-ozone levels to be equal to or greater than 123 ppb
  A—,  Back to the Ozone Information Paue


                     Appendix E



                                                                      EXAMPLE PUBLIC AWARENESS SURVEY

 Hello, my name is	with	.  We are conducting a  	minute survey on
 import public policy issues in [insert name of city].  Your participation is important to us and we ensure that any
 responses you provide will be STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.  Would you mind answering a few questions?

 Screening Question (e.g., employment status, driving status, age)
                             • Public Perception of Air Pollution Problem  •

 I am going to read you a list of local public policy issues. Which of the following is the most important issue to
         -public education

 Now. I am going to read you a list of local environmental problems. Which of the following is of most concern to
         -disposal of solid waste
         -water pollution
         -air pollution
         -habitat preservation/preserving biodiversity

 In general, how would you rate [insert name of city]'s overall air quality?
         -very good
         -very poor

 Do you consider air pollution to be a problem in [insert name of city]?

 How serious a problem is air pollution in [insert name of city]? Would you say that air pollution is...
	-very serious 	

                                                                       EXAMPLE PUBLIC AWARENESS SURVEY
        -somewhat serious
        -slight problem
        -not a problem at all

Over the past five years, do you think that air pollution in [insert name of city] has improved, gotten worse or stay
about the same?

During the next five years, do you expect air pollution in [insert name of city] to improve, get worse or stayed the
                                Public Knowledge of Air Pollution Issues
Which of the following weather conditions , if any, do you believe lead to poor air quality in [insert name of city]?
        -hot,still weather
        -cold, still weather
        -don't know

Do you think that air pollution affects public health? Would you say air pollution is...
        -not at all   harmful to public health?
        -not very    harmful to public health?
        -somewhat  harmful to public health?
        -very        harmful to public health?

What would you say is the major cause of air pollution in [insert name of city]?
        - automobiles
        - agricultural burning
        - trucks/buses/diesel vehicles
        - location/weather/pollutant transport from other regions
        * industry/manufacturing
        - gas-powered garden equipment (lawnmowers, leaf blowers etc)
        - aerosol sprays and other consumer products
        - outdoor barbeques

What things can residents of [insert name of city] do to reduce pollution on days of poor air quality?
    - drive less
    - ride with someone else (car/vanpool)
    - combine multiple trips throughout the day
    - use transit instead of driving
    - walk or bike instead of driving
    - work at home (telecommute) instead of driving to the main workplace
    - refuel after 6pm
    - use of electric-powered garden equipment (lawn mowers, leaf blowers, etc)
    - refran from using aerosols and other consumer products
    -tune-up car	

                                                                       EXAMPLE PUBLIC AWARENESS SURVEY
                        •  Awareness of the Program and Us Outreach Efforts   •
In the past (week/month/year), have you seen or heard anything about air pollution in [insert name of city].
        - on the radio?
        - on television?
        - in the newspaper?
        - where you work?
        - from friends or neighbors?
        - from community or environmental groups?
        - other?
Could you describe what you saw or heard?  [open-ended question]
In the past (week/month/year) have you seen or heard any air pollution...
        slogans?                 Name of slogan:	
        mascots ?               Describe mascot:	
        air quality symbols?      Describe symbol:	,_
Are you familiar with the Ozone Alert! program or its slogan:  'Ozone Alert!'?
What does Ozone Alert! mean to you?
•don't know
-limit driving
-limit use of gas-powered garden equipment
-limit use of barbecue
-limit use of aerosols/consumer products

[ Tell the respondent the goals of the program - reduce pollution on poor aq days ]
                             •  Recognition Level of Implementing Agency  •
 What agency or agencies do you think is/are responsible for keeping the air clean in [insert name of city]?
        - health department
        - state government
        - [insert name of city] Air Pollution Control Agency

 Have you ever heard of the [insert name of city's Air Pollution Control Agency] ?

 To the best of your knowledge, what does the [city's Air Pollution Control Agency] do?
        - monitor air pollution
        - issue burn bans
        - give warnings on air pollution to the media
        - educate/ inform the public
        - regulate/control/enforce emissions from industry
        - don't know

                                                                     EXAMPLE PUBLIC AWARENESS SURVEY
What is your impression of the [insert name of city's Air Pollution Control Agency]?
        -very positive
        -somewhat positive
        -somewhat negative
        -very negative
        -don't know
                                        Statistical Information
                                                                               Statistical Information
Finally a few questions for statistical purposes.

What is your...
        Educational level
        [Employment status]

This completes our survey.  Thank you very much for participating.


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (if requested by respondent)

Survey conduted by:
Survey funded by:
For further information contact:
Additional Questions which could be included:
            reasons for maintaining good air quality (health, visibility, environment etc.)
            reasons for allowing pollution (businesses, economy, personal freedom, etct)
            motivations for using auto less
            personal responsibility to clean up air
            what respondents feel they can do

                      Appendix F



                                                                         EXAMPLE BEHA VJOR SURVEY
Hello, my name is.
.. We are conducting a	minute survey on import
public policy issues.  Your participation is important to us and we ensure that any responses you provide will be
STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.  Would you mind answering a few questions?
Screening Question (e.g., employment status, driving status, age)
                                       •  Travel Behavior •
Now I would like to ask some questions about the travel you took today.

Did you make trips outside the home today? [ No, skip to XX]
                                                                            Survey Day's Auto-use
Did you travel by automobile? [No, skip to XX]
How many automobile trips did you take...
       ... in the morning (6am - 11am)?
       ... in the afternoon (1 lam - 3pm)?
       ... in the evening (3pm - 8pm)?

Definition: A trip is defined as travel from one place to another by any means of transportation.  For example, a
stop at the grocery store after work and then going home counts as two trips.
Approximately how many miles did you travel by automobile?
Did you refuel your vehicle today? [No, skip to XX]

At what time of the day did you refuel?
       - (3pm - 8pm)?
       - (8pm -5am)?

                                                                               EXAMPLE BEHAVIOR SURVEY
Why did you not refuel your vehicle today? [ unprompted]

Do you recall being asked to refuel your vehicle after 6pm or on another day because of bad air quality?  yes/no

In response to this request, did you actually postpone refueling until after 6pm or until another day?
                                                                          Change in Behavior / Causality

 Did you drive your automobile more frequently, less frequently, or the same today as you usually do? [Skip to XX if
 more or the same is chosen!       ...more, less, the same

 Why did you make that change?  (only ask to people who respond that they drove less} [unprompted]

 Do you recall being asked not to drive today because of bad air quality? yes/no

 In response to this request not to drive, did you ACTUALLY reducing your driving?   yes/no

 What did you do instead of driving?
        -delay trips to another day
        -ride with someone else (car/vanpooi)
        -use transit
        -work at home (telecommute)

 {If transit or carpool/vanpool} Did you drive to  a Park-and-Ride lot and then take (transit or carpool/vanpool}?

How many vehicle trips/VMT did you not take by...
 {insert the alternative travel mode responses) from previous question}
Was your vehicle used by someone else within your household while you were ...
{insert the alternative travel mode response(s) from the question before last}
.Vow / would Ilia to ask you somg questions about your typical travel patterns.

Do you have access to an automobile?

On average, how many miles do you drive per week by automobile?

What is the approximate one-way distance (in miles) from your home to your workplace?
                                                                                       Typical A uto-use

                                                                                 EXAMPLE BEHA VfQR SURVEY
 What mode of travel do you typically use to get to work?

 Did you travel by other means of transportation? [No, skip to XX]

 Which alternative modes of transportation did you take?

 {If transit or carpool/vanpool} Did you drive to a Park-and-Ride lot and then take {transit or carpool/vanpool}?

 How many trips did you take by {insert mode(s) chosen in question above}?
                                          Household Activities  •
                                                                                Area Sources of pollution1
Now I would like to ask you several questions about your household activities.

Did you use {insert area source category1} today?

Did you use {area source category} more or less frequently today than normally? [Skip to XX if more or the same
is chosen]  Choices:  same [skip to ..] more, less

Did you intentionally choose to use {area source category} less today?

Why?  [unprompted]

Do you recall being asked not to use {area source category} because of bad air quality?  [prompted]

In response to this request not to do these activities, did you ACTUALLY reduce the use of {area source category}?

[' Examples of area source categories of pollution that a region may want to collect data on include painting, gas-
powered garden tool use (e.g., lawn mowers) and use of consumer products that affect air quality (e.g., aerosol
sprays) ]

                                                                            EXAMPLE BEHAVIOR SURVEY
                           Awareness of the Program and its Outreach Efforts
In the past (week/month/ycar), have you seen or heard anything about air pollution in [insert name of city].
        - on the radio?
        - on television?
        - in the newspaper?
        - where you work?
        - from friends or neighbors?
        - from community or environmental groups?
        - other?

Could you describe what you saw or heard?  [open-ended question]

In the past (week/month/year) have you seen or heard any air pollution...
        slogans?                Name of slogan:	
        mascots ?               Describe mascot:	
        air quality symbols?      Describe symbol:	

Are you familiar with the Ozone Alert! program or its slogan: 'Ozone Alert!'?
What does Ozone Alert! mean to you?
        -don't know
        -limit driving
        -limit use of gas-powered garden equipment
        -limit use of barbecue
        •limit use of aerosols/consumer products
                                      •  Statistical Information
Finally a few quest ions for statistical purposes.

What is your...
        Age. Gender,  Income.  Educational level. Employment status
                                                                               Statistical Information

This completes our survey. Thank you very much for participating.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (if requested by respondent)

Survey conducted by:
Survey funded by:
For further information contact:
Include definitions of key terms (i.e. trip, VMT) so the interviewer can clarify issues which may be confusing to the

           Appendix G



Calculating Emission Reductions

Areas may need to quantify the emissions impacts of their CAP for evaluation purposes
or for documenting emission reduction claims included in a SIP.  The overall objective of
this type of an exercise is to compare the amount of emissions produced under normal
conditions with the amount produced on a pollution episode day to see whether emissions
are being reduced in response to the CAP. To perform this comparison, an emission
reduction calculation can be completed for each emission-producing activity that a
program is designed to target. For example, a program targeting summertime ozone
pollution may be designed to encourage the general public to reduce the following types
of activities:  personal vehicle use, use of gas-powered lawn maintenance equipment
(e.g., lawnmowers), and use of consumer products that affect air quality.  To quantify the
total emission impacts of a program, the emission reductions associated with each of
these categories of activities will need to be calculated. A schematic of the basic
procedure for performing these emissions calculations is shown in Figure G-l.

As seen in Figure G-l, emission reduction calculations are completed by multiplying the
level of activity reduced (e.g., number of vehicle miles traveled reduced) by the
emissions factor associated with that activity (e.g.,  grams of pollution per vehicle mile).
Emissions factor data are available for many types  of emission-producing activities.
These data are highly variable, however, depending upon many factors such as the engine
type, how it is being used,  and the ambient temperature. To ensure that the appropriate
emission assumptions are used in a calculation, areas should consult with the local MPO
or state and local air quality planning agency. While emission factor data are readily
available through local, state or federal agencies, activity data often need to be collected
on a program by program basis through surveying or another method.  Note that
determining the level of activity reduced on an Alert day requires having activity data on
both an Alert day and a normal day. Therefore, many areas collect data before the
pollution season starts to get a baseline measurement of activity, and then again on a
pollution episode day. If the data are collected correctly and are deemed reliable, the
differences in measurements taken under these two conditions represents the travel
behavior change that results from the program.
   % of individuals
   reducing activity
Level of Activity
                                       f    Emission    >^
                                       I    Factor       )
Figure G-l. Procedure for calculating emissions reductions

Example Emissions Calculation

There are several different approaches that can be used to estimate the changes in activity
necessary for conducting an emissions calculation. For example, areas can ask
respondents whether they reduced their travel on a pollution episode day, and if so, by
how much.  This method, however, relies on the respondent having accurate recall and
being able to do a relative comparison of their travel on the episode day compared to their
normal travel patterns.  An alternative method that avoid this problem is to survey
respondents on two different occasions, asking them about their travel on a pollution
Alert day and then again on a normal day to see whether there are any differences. The
following example calculation demonstrates the later method.

The following example is provided solely to demonstrate a frequently-used emissions
calculation method. The sample data used to complete the calculation do not represent
actual data from any particular program.  Areas performing emissions calculations may
need to collect travel behavior data (e.g., using a survey) and make adjustments to the
following approach based on data availability.  Further, programs should consult with
the local MPO or state and local air quality planning agency to obtain the necessary
data and to ensure that any assumptions used are appropriate.

To complete the example calculation, the following assumptions are made:

•   Program objective - summer ozone program designed to reduce ozone precursor (HC
    & NOx) emissions on pollution episode days by encouraging reductions in personal
    vehicle use.

•   Sampling — A single group of 1,000 drivers are randomly sampled from a total
    population of 500,000 drivers (Table G-l). Travel activity data from the sample
    group is collected on two occasions: (1) before the ozone season (Baseline), and (2)
    on an ozone episode day during the summer (Alert day).

•   Data collected are separated into two groups for comparison: (1) Participants - those
    people who on the Alert day survey indicated that they reduced their vehicle travel in
    response to the program's request to reduce pollution. For this calculation, we
    assume that 5% of the sample population (50 of the 1,000 sampled) are participants;
    (2) Non-participants - those people who did not change behavior in response to the

For the participant group, baseline travel data (the number of trips) collected can be
compared to data collected on the pollution episode day to assess any differences in travel
behavior in response to the program (Table G-2).  Differences in the number of trips
taken on a normal day and a pollution episode day can be multiplied by local average trip
length data to estimate the difference in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This comparison
can be repeated for data from the non-participant group which can serve as a control
measure with which to compare findings.
As shown in Table G-3, the travel reductions measured for the participant group on
pollution episode days can be extrapolated to the total driving population at large to
estimate the region-wide travel impacts of the program.  The resulting travel reductions

are then multiplied by the appropriate mobile source emission factors (EF) to yield the
total emission savings from the program.
Table G-l. Example populations and sample sizes
Total driver
# drivers
% drivers
sampled that
# drivers
sampled that
Total # drivers
that will
1 Calculated by multiplying the driver participation rate (5%) by the total driver population. This
extrapolation assumes that the random sample of drivers is representative of the population as a whole.
Table G-2. Comparison of participant's vehicle travel before the ozone season (Baseline)
and on a pollution episode day (Alert day) (n=50)

# vehicle trips per
# trips per person-
Alert day
between (1) & (2)
% Difference
between (1) & (2)
Table G-3.  Calculating participant's emissions reductions on the ozone Alert day and
extrapolating results to the general population
Total #
# trips
Total #
(1) x (2)
per mile)
per mile)
reduced (kg)
(4) x (5)
reduced (kg)
(4) x (6)
 Assumes an average trip length of 6 miles.


     Appendix H



                          Summer  1997 High Ozone Day
                 June 21 1997
• cvscatxhrn
                The map above is based on an interpolation of the actual maximum daily
                hourly values at approximately 200 ground-level ozone monitoring sites
                from Maine to North Carolina . Note that values over water may be
                inaccurate due to a lack of monitoring data.

                The key to the map is based on EPA's Pollutant's Standards Index.
                Based on EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for
                ground-level ozone, air quality is considered unhealthiul when hourly
                monitoring values of 125 parts per billion (ppb) or more are recorded.