&EPA
         United States
         Environmental Protection
         Agency
             Office of Air and Radiation
             Office of Policy
November 1999
EPA-410-R-99-001
The Benefits and Costs
of the Clean Air Act
1990  to  2010
         EPA Report to Congress
         November  1999

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                     [This page left blank intentionally.]

-------
Executive
Summary
    Section 812 of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990 requires the Environmental  Protection
Agency to  periodically assess the effect of the Clean
Air Act on the "public health, economy, and envi-
ronment of the United States," and  to report the
findings and results of its assessments to the Con-
gress.  This Report to Congress, the first of a series
of prospective studies  we plan to produce every two
years, presents the results and conclusions  of our
analysis of the benefits and  costs  of  the Clean Air
Act during the period from 1990 to 2010.  The main
goal of this report is  to provide  Congress and the
public with comprehensive, up-to-date information
011 the Clean Air Act's social costs and benefits, in-
cluding improvements  in human health, welfare, and
ecological  resources.

    The first report that the EPA created under the
section 812 authority, The Benefits and Costs of the
Clean  Air Act: 1970 to 1990, was published and con-
veyed  to Congress in October 1997. This retrospec-
tive analysis comprehensively assessed the benefits
and costs of all requirements of the 1970 Clean Air
Act and the 1977 Amendments, up to  the passage of
the Clean  Air Act Amendments of 1990. The re-
sults of the retrospective analysis showed that the
nation's investment in clean air was more than justi-
fied by the substantial benefits that were gained in
the form of increased health, environmental qual-
ity, and productivity.

    The Clean Air Act Amendments  of 1990 built
upon the significant progress made by the original
Clean  Air Act of 1970 and its 1977 amendments in
improving  die nation's air quality-.   The amendments
utilized the existing structure of the Clean Air Act,
but strengthened those requirements to  tighten and
clarify implementation goals and timing, increase the
stringency of some requirements, revamp the haz-
ardous air pollutant regulatory program, refine and
streamline permitting requirements, and introduce
new programs for the control of acid ram precur-
sors and  stratospheric ozone depleting substances.
Because the  1990 Amendments represent an incre-
mental improvement  to the nation's clean air pro-
gram, the analysis summarized in this report was
designed to estimate die costs and benefits of die 1990
Amendments incremental to  those assessed in the
retrospective analysis.  Our intent is that  this report
and its predecessor, the retrospective, together pro-
vide a comprehensive  assessment of current and ex-
pected future clean air regulatory programs and  their
costs and benefits.

   This  first prospective  analysis consists of a se-
quence of six steps.  These six steps, listed in order
of completion, are:

   (1) estimate air pollutant emissions in  1990,
       2000, and 2010;
   (2) estimate the cost of emission reductions aris-
       ing from the Clean Air Act Amendments;
   (3) model  air quality  based on emissions  esti-
       mates;
   (4) quantify air quality related health and envi-
       ronmental  effects;
   (5) estimate the economic value of cleaner air;
       and
   (6) aggregate results and characterize uncertain-
       ties.

   The methodology and results  for each step are
summarized below and described in detail in the
chapters of this report.

Air

   Estimation of reductions in pollutant emissions
afforded  by  the 1990 Clean Air Act  Amendments
(CAAA) serves as the starting point for this study's
subsequent benefit and cost estimates.  We focused
our emissions analysis  on six major pollutants:  vola-
tile organic  compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
(NOJ, sulfur dioxide (SO,,), carbon monoxide (CO),
coarse participate  matter  (PM]0), and fine particu-
late matter (PM2S).  For each of these pollutants we
forecast emissions  for the years  2000 and 2010 un-
der two different scenarios:   a) the  Pre-CAAA  sce-
nario that assumes no  additional control require-
ments would  be implemented  beyond those  that
were  in place when the 1990 CAAA were passed;
and b) the Post-CAAA scenario that incorporates
the effects of controls which, when we formulated
the scenario, we expected would be likely to occur
as a result of  implementing the  1990 Amendments.
Emissions estimates for both the  Pre-CAAA  and
Post-CAAA scenarios reflect expected growth in
population, transportation,  electric  power genera-
tion, and other economic activity by 2000 and 2010.
We compare the emissions estimates under each of
these  scenarios to  estimate the effect of the CAAA
requirements on future  emissions.

    The results of the emissions phase of the assess-
ment  indicate  that the 1990  Clean Air Act Amend-
ments significantly reduce future emissions  of air
pollutants.  Substantial  reductions will be achieved
for the two major precursors of ambient ground-
level ozone: volatile organic compounds (YOCs)  and
oxides of nitrogen (NOJ.  Relative to the Pre-CAAA
scenario, estimated VOC emissions  under  the Post-
CAAA case are 35 percent  lower  by 2010.  This
change in emissions is  due  largely  to VOC reduc-
tions  from motor vehicles  and area sources (e.g., dry
cleaners, commercial bakeries, and other widely  dis-
persed sources).

    The NOx emission  reduction under the Post-
CAAA scenario represents the greatest proportional
emissions  change estimated in our analysis.  For the
vear 2010, the Post-CAAA NO  emissions estimate
•                             X
is  39  percent  lower than  the Pre-CAAA  estimate,
representing a decrease in emissions of almost 11
million tons.  Nearly half of this reduction is from
utilities, largely as a result  of the  particular NOx
emissions  cap  and  trading program we assumed un-
der the Post-CAAA scenario.  The remaining reduc-
tions  are  attributable to cuts in  motor vehicle  and
non-utility point source emissions.

    Carbon monoxide  (CO) emissions contribute
directly to concentrations of carbon monoxide in
the environment.  The  2010 Post-CAAA estimate
for CO emissions  is 81.9 million tons, 23 percent
lower than the Pre-CAAA projection.  The reduc-
tion in CO emissions  is mostly due  to motor ve-
hicle emission controls.

    The CAAA also wfill  achieve a substantial re-
duction in precursors  of fine particulate  matter
(PM25).  Sulfur dioxide  (SO,,) is an important  precur-
sor of PM.  By 2010, SO, emissions are 31 percent
lower under the Post-CAAA scenario.  Of  the 8.2
million ton difference between Pre- and Post-CAAA
SO_ estimates, 96 percent is attributable to additional
control of utility emissions through a national cap-
and-trade  program involving marketable SO_ emis-
sion allowances.  Oxides of nitrogen, discussed above,
are also important fine  PM precursors.

    We project  the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
to have more modest effects on emissions  of par-
ticulate material which  is emitted in solid form (i.e.,
"primary" or "direct" PM10 and PM25  emissions).
Overall, emissions of primary PM]0 and PM,g arc
each approximately four percent lower in  2010 un-
der the Post-CAAA scenario than  under the Pre-
CAAA scenario.  Although the incremental  effects
of the Clean Air Act Amendments  on primary PM
emissions  will be relatively small, PM in the atmo-
sphere is comprised of both directly  emitted primary
particles and particles that form in  the atmosphere
through secondary processes as a result of emissions
of  SO,, NO , and organic compounds.  These PM
species, formed by the conversion of gaseous pollut-
ant emissions, are referred to collectively as "second-
ary" PM. Because, as noted above, the 1990 Amend-
ments achieve substantial reductions in these gaseous
precursor emissions,  the Amendments have a much
larger effect 011 PM]0 and PM25 levels in the atmo-
sphere than might be apparent if only the changes
in directly emitted primary particles are considered.



    Our estimate of the costs of the Clean Air Act
Amendment provisions is based on an evaluation of
the increases in expenditures incurred by various
entities to meet the additional control requirements
incorporated in the Post-CAAA case.  These costs
include operation and  maintenance (O&M)  expen-
ditures —which includes research and development
(R&D) and other similarly recurring expenditures—
plus amortized capital  costs (i.e., depreciation plus

-------
                                                                                              Executive Summary
interest costs associated  with the  existing capital
stock).  Relative to the Pre-CAAA case, Post-CAAA
scenario total annual  compliance costs for Titles I
through V are approximately $19 billion higher by
the year 2000, rising to |27 billion by the  year 2010.

    Compliance with Title I, Provisions  for  Attain-
ment and Maintenance of National  Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), accounts  for §14.5
billion,  or  over half, of the estimated increase in year
2010 compliance  costs.   Compliance  with mobile
source  emissions control  provisions under Title II
of the Clean Air Act Amendments accounts for an
additional  30 percent  of the  total costs, or S9 billion
annually by 2010.   Provisions to control acid depo-
sition and emissions  of stratospheric ozone  deplet-
ing substances account for most of the  remainder of
the costs.
                              These direct compliance costs provide  a good,
                          but incomplete, measure of the  total effect of the
                          Clean  Air Act Amendments 011 the U.S.  economy.
                          A complete picture of the indirect impacts of these
                          costs would  include  changes  in  employment and
                          prices  as  well as  impacts that might be  experienced
                          among customers of the firms that must incur these
                          costs.  While these indirect  effects could be  impor-
                          tant, we believe the direct cost estimates  provide a
                          good initial measure of the  effect of the  Clean Air
                          Act Amendments on  the U.S.  economy, as well as
                          an appropriate  metric for comparison with the di-
                          rect benefits reported  here.
      Table ES-1
      Summary Comparison of Benefits and Costs (Estimates in millions 1990$)
                                              Titles I through V
                                              Annual Estimates
                                   2000
                                             2010
Monetized Direct Costs:
Low3
Central
High3
$19,000
$27,000
Monetized Direct Benefits:
Lowb
Central
Highb
$16,000
$71,000
$160,000
$26,000
$110,000
$270,000
Net Benefits:
Low
Central
High
($3,000)
$52,000
$140,000
($1,000)
$83,000
$240,000
Benefit/Cost Ratio:
      Lowc
      Central
      Highc
 less than 1/1
     4/1
more than 8/1
 less than 1/1
     4/1
more than 10/1
      aThe cost estimates for this analysis are based on assumptions about future changes in factors such as consumption
      patterns, input costs, and technological innovation. We recognize that these assumptions introduce significant
      uncertainty into the cost results; however the degree of uncertainty or bias associated with many of the key factors cannot
      be reliably quantified. Thus, we are unable to present specific low and high cost estimates.
      b Low and high benefits estimates are based on primary results and correspond to 5th and 95th percentile results from
      statistical uncertainty analysis, incorporating uncertainties in physical effects and valuation steps of benefits analysis.
      Other significant sources of uncertainty not reflected include the value of unqualified or unmonetized benefits that are
      not captured in the primary estimates and uncertainties in emissions and air quality modeling.
      0 The low benefit/cost ratio reflects the ratio of the low benefits estimate to the central costs estimate, while the high ratio
      reflects the ratio of the high benefits estimate to the central costs estimate.  Because we were unable to reliably quantify
      the uncertainty in cost estimates, we present the low estimate as "less than X," and the high estimate as "more than Y",
      where X and Y are the low and high benefit/cost ratios, respectively.

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    To estimate benefits, the results of the emissions
analysis served as the principal input to a linked se-
ries of models.  We used these models to estimate
changes in air quality, human health effects, ecologi-
cal  effects, and, ultimately, the net economic ben-
efits of the Clean Air Act Amendments.  The goals
of these steps in the analysis were to estimate  the
implications of changes in  emissions resulting from
compliance with the Clean Air Act Amendments
on criteria pollutant air quality throughout the lower
48 states, and the impacts on human health and  the
environment that result from  these changes.

    We focused our air quality modeling  efforts on
estimating the impact of Prc- and Post-CAAA emis-
sions on  ambient concentrations of ozone, PM1(),
PM_., SO,, NOx, and CO and on acid deposition
and  visibility in future years.   We found that  the
majority of the total monetized benefits, however,
is attributable to changes in participate matter con-
centrations and, more specifically, to  the effect of
these ambient air quality changes on  avoidance of
premature mortality.  We estimate that 2010 Post-
CAAA PM10 and PM25 concentrations in the east-
ern U.S. will average about 5  to  10 percent lower
than  2010 Pre-CAAA concentrations, with some
areas of the eastern  U.S. experiencing  much greater
reductions of up to 30 percent.  The air quality mod-
eling also indicates a substantial overall reduction in
future-year PM]0 and PM,5 concentrations through-
out the western U.S., including  most population
centers, following implementation of the  Clean  Air
Act  Amendments.

    The  direct benefits of the air quality improve-
ments we estimated under  the Post-CAAA scenario
include reduced incidence  of a number of adverse
human health effects, improvements in visibility,  and
avoided damage to agricultural crops.  The estimated
annual economic value of these benefits  in the  year
2010 ranges from $26 to $270 billion, in 1990  dol-
lars, with a central  estimate, or mean, of $110  bil-
lion.  These  estimates do not include  a number of
other potentially important effects which  could  not
be readily quantified and monetized (i.e.,  converted
to dollar  terms).  These excluded effects include  a
wide  range of ecosystem changes, air  toxics-related
human health effects, and a number  of  additional
health effects associated with  criteria pollutants.
    In addition, these results reflect the particular
choices wfe made with respect to interpretations of
the available scientific and economic literature  and
adoption of paradigms  for representing health  and
environmental changes  in economic terms.  We re-
fer to these results, then, as our "primary" estimates;
however, in the text of this report we also present
some alternative results  which reflect other available
choices for models or assumptions.

    One particularly important assumption of our
primary analysis is that correlations between in-
creased air pollution  exposures and adverse health
outcomes found by epidemiological  studies indicate
causal  relationships between the pollutant exposures
and the adverse health effects.  Future research may
lead  to revisions in this assumption as well as other
key assumptions, data,  and models  we use to esti-
mate  the benefits and costs of the  Clean Air Act.
Such revisions may in turn imply significant changes
111 the  estimates of Clean Air Act costs and benefits
presented here and in past and future assessments.
In our judgment, however, the primary results re-
flect the best currently available science and the most
up-to-date tools and data we had at  our disposal —
and  the most reasonable assumptions  we  could
adopt— as each step of die analysis was implemented.

    Cleaner air also yields benefits to ecological  sys-
tems.  This first section 812 prospective analysis de-
votes a great deal of effort to characterizing and,
where  possible, quantifying and monetizing the im-
pacts of air  pollutants 011 natural systems. Our in-
creased effort is 111 part a result of the findings  of the
retrospective analysis, where we identified a  better
understanding of ecological effects  as  an important
research direction for the  first prospective and sub-
sequent analyses.  Quantified benefits of CAAA pro-
grams reflected in the  overall monetized benefits
include: increased agricultural  and timber yields; re-
duced  effects of acid rain on aquatic  ecosystems; and
reduced effects of nitrogen deposited to coastal estu-
aries.  Many ecological benefits, however, remain
difficult or impossible  to quantify,  or can only be
quantified for a limited geographic  area.   The mag-
nitude of quantified benefits and the wide range of
unquantified benefits nonetheless suggest that  as we
learn more about ecological systems and can con-
duct more comprehensive ecological benefits assess-
ments, estimates of these benefits could be substan-
tially greater.
                                                  IV

-------
                                                                                        Executive Summary
    We developed  separate estimates for the  Title
VI  provisions of the CAAA designed to protect
stratospheric ozone.  Stratospheric ozone is the layer
of the atmosphere that protects  the planet from the
harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation (UV-b).  Our
primary estimate of the cumulative benefits of Title
VI  is $530 billion.  Using the same uncertainty esti-
mation procedure as for other parts of the analysis,
we  estimate Primary Low and  Primary High esti-
mates of 8100 billion to $900 billion, respectively.
These estimates partially reflect potential  averting
behaviors, such as  remaining indoors or increasing
use of sunscreens or hats, which may mitigate the
effects of the  UV-b exposure increases estimated in
the Pre-CAAA case.

                             to

    Based on  the  specific tools and  techniques we
employed, our primary estimate of the  net benefit
(benefits minus costs) over the  entire 1990 to  2010
period of the additional criteria  pollutant control
programs  incorporated  in the Post-CAAA case is
S510 billion.  Our results imply that the monetizable
benefits alone exceeded  the direct compliance costs
by four to one.  For many of the factors contribut-
ing to this net benefit estimate (especially physical
effects and economic valuation  estimates), we  were
able to generate quantitative estimates  of uncertainty.
By  statistically combining these  uncertain estimates,
we  were able to develop a range of net benefit esti-
mates which provide a partial indication of the over-
all uncertainty surrounding the  central estimate of
net benefits. This range,  reflecting  a 90 percent prob-
ability range around the mean,  or central estimate,
is negative $20 billion (implying a small probability
that costs could exceed  monetized benefits) to posi-
tive $1.4  trillion.

    The estimates  for Title VI also indicate that cu-
mulative benefits ($500  billion) well exceed cumula-
tive costs  ($27 billion). The time period of our Title
VI  analysis (175 years) suggests  that  these estimates
are  very uncertain.  Nonetheless, the conclusion that
benefits well exceed costs holds  even  at our Primary
Low estimate of benefits (the low end of the 90 per-
cent probability range, or $100 billion), and regard-
less of discount rate used to generate  the cumulative
estimates  from the  perspective of the present.

    The assumptions necessitated by data limitations,
by the current state of the art in  each phase of the
analytical approach, by the need to  predict future
conditions, and by the state of current research  011
air pollution's effects imply that both the mean esti-
mate  and the 90 percent probability range around
the central estimate are uncertain.  While alterna-
tive choices  for data, models, modeling assumptions,
and valuation paradigms  may  yield results outside
the range projected in our primary analysis, we be-
lieve based on the magnitude of the difference be-
tween the estimated benefits and  costs that it  is un-
likely  that eliminating uncertainties or adopting rea-
sonable alternative assumptions  would change the
fundamental  conclusion of this study: the Clean Air
Act Amendments' total benefits to society exceed
its costs.

    The uncertainties in the primary estimates and
the controversies which persist regarding model
choices and  valuation  paradigms nonetheless high-
light the need for a variety of new and continued
research efforts.  Based on the findings of this  study,
the highest priority research needs are:

    •   Improved emissions inventories  and inven-
       tory  management systems
    •   A more geographically comprehensive  air
       quality monitoring network, particularly for
       fine particles and  hazardous air pollutants
    *   Use of integrated air quality modeling tools
       based on  an open, consistent model  archi-
       tecture
    *   Development of tools and data to assess the
       significance of wetland, aquatic,  and terres-
       trial  ecosystem changes associated with  air
       pollution
    •   Increased basic and targeted research on the
       health effects of air pollution, especially par-
       ticulate matter
    *   Continued development  of economic valu-
       ation methods and data,  particularly valua-
       tion  of changes in risks of premature  mor-
       tality associated with air  pollution

    Properly  directed and  funded, such  research
would improve the results of future analyses of the
benefits and  costs of the Clean Air Act.




    The CAA requires  "EPA to  consult with an out-
side panel of experts during the development and
interpretation of the 812 studies.   This panel of ex-

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
perts was organized in  1991 under the auspices of
EPA's  Science Advisory Board (SAB)  as the Advi-
sory Council 011 Clean Air Act Compliance Analy-
sis (hereafter, the Council).   Organizing the review
committee under the SAB ensured that highly quali-
fied experts  would review the section 812 studies in
an objective, rigorous,  and publicly open manner
consistent with the requirements and procedures of
the Federal Advisory  Committee Act  (FACA).
Council review of the present study began in 1993
with a review of the analytical design plan.  Since
the initial June 1993 meeting, the Council has  met
many times to review proposed data, proposed meth-
odologies, and interim results.  While the full  Coun-
cil retains overall review responsibility for the  sec-
tion 812 studies, some specific issues concerning
physical  effects  and air  quality modeling were re-
ferred to subcommittees comprised of both Council
members and members of other SAB committees.
The Council's Health and Ecological Effects Sub-
committee (HEES) met several times and provided
its own review findings to the full Council.  Simi-
larly, the Council's Air  Quality Modeling Subcom-
mittee  (AQMS) held in-person and teleconference
meetings to review methodology proposals  and
modeling results and conveyed its  review recommen-
dations to the parent committee.

    An interagency review was  conducted, during
which a number of analytical issues were discussed.
Conducting  a benefit/cost analysis of a major stat-
ute such as the Clean Air Act requires scores of meth-
odological decisions.  Many of these issues are the
subject of continuing discussion within the  economic
and policy  analysis communities and within the
Administration.   Key issues include the treatment
of uncertainty in the relationship  between particu-
late matter exposure and mortality; the valuation of
premature mortality; the  treatment of tax interac-
tion effects; the assessment of stratospheric  ozone
recovery; and the  treatment of ecological and wel-
fare effects.  These issues could not be resolved  within
the constraints of tins review.  Thus, this report re-
flects the findings of the EPA and not necessarily
other agencies of the Administration.
                                                  VI

-------
Table   of  Contents
               Summaiy[[[ /
       Air Pollutant Emissions	i
       Compliance Costs	ii
       Human  Health and  Environmental  Benefits	iv
       Comparing  Costs  to Benefits	v
       Review  Process	v

             1:  Introduction[[[ 1
       Background and  Purpose	 1
       Relationship of This Report to Other Regulatory Analyses	1
       Requirements of the  1990 Clean Air Act Amendments	2
       Analytical Design  and  Review	3
               'Target loanable [[[ 3
               Key Assumptions	3
               Analytic Sequence	4
       Review  Process[[[ 6
       Report  Organization [[[ 7

            2:                    [[[ 9
       Overview Of Approach[[[ 9
       Scenario Development	11
       Emissions Estimation Results[[[ 11
       Comparison of Emissions Estimates With  Other  Existing  Data	18
       Uncertainty  In  Emission  Estimates [[[ 19

            3;                      [[[ 23

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
         Air Quality Model  Results[[[ 39
                   O^one	39
                   P articulate Matter[[[ 41
                   Visibility	42
                   Acid Deposition[[[ 45
                   S02, NO, N02, and CO	45
         Uncertainty in the  Air Quality Estimates	47

               5:                                           of                                  .......................... 51
         Analytical  Approach  	51
                   Air Quality [[[ 51
                   Population	52
                   Concentration-Response  functions	52
         Key Analytical  Assumptions [[[ 52
                   Exposure Analysis	54
                   Selection  and Application
                             of C-R Functions	55
                   PMAlelated Mortality	57
         Health Effects Modeling Results [[[ 60
                   Avoided Premature Mortality  Estimates	60
                   Non-Fatal Health  Impacts [[[ 62
         Avoided  Health  Effects  of Other  Pollutants [[[ 62
                   Avoided Effects oj Air  Toxics	62
                   Avoided Health  Effects for Provisions  to  Protect Stratospheric  O^one........................................... 6?
         Uncertainty in the Health Effects Analysis [[[ 65

                                                                                          Effects....................... 69
         Valuation of Benefit Estimates [[[ 69
                   Valuation oj  Premature  Mortality	70
                   Valuation of Specific  Health 'Effects[[[ 72
                   Stratospheric  0%pne Provisions	74
         Results of Benefits  Valuation	74
         Valuation  Uncertainties	75
                   Mortality Risk  Benefits Transfer[[[ 76

               7:                      and                                         .................................... 81

-------
                                                                                                              Table of Contents
Summary of Quantitative  Results [[[ 97
Uncertainty	98

      8:                           of             and Benefits,,,,,,,,,,,,,......,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,... 99
Monetized Benefits of  the  CAAA[[[ 99
          Overview of Benefits Analyses	99
          Summary of  Monetised  Benefits  for Human Health  and Welfare Effects.................................... 100
          Annual  Beneji/s Estimates	101
          Aggregate  Monetised  Rene/its [[[ 103
          Aggregate Benefits of Title  VI Provisions	103
Comparison of .Monetized  Benefits  and  Costs	104
          Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation[[[ 106
Major Sources  of  Uncertainty	106
          Quantitative Analysis of Physical  Effects and  Valuation  Uncertainties	107
          Measurement Error  and Uncertainty  in  Direct Cost Inputs	109
          PM Mortality Valuation Based on  Life-Years  East	109
          PM Mortality  Incidence  Using the  Dockery Study[[[ 110
          Uncertainties in  Title  VI Health Benefits Analysis	110
          Uncertainties in  Emissions  and  Air Quality Steps[[[ / / /
          Omission of Potentially  Important Benefits  (Categories	113
          Alternative  Discount  Kates[[[ 113


Scenario  Development[[[ A-2
          Comparison  of the Base  Year Inventory  and Emissions  Projections
                     with Other Existing  Data[[[ A-7
          Posl-C-AAA Emissions Estimates and EPA Trends Data	A-7
          Prospective  Analysis  and GCVTC Emissions  Estimates[[[ A-12
          Prospective Analysis  PM2.5 Emissions Estimates and  Observed Data	A-13
Industrial Point  Sources	A-14
          Overview of Approach [[[ A-14
          Base  Year Emissions	A-15
          Growth  Projections[[[ A-15
          Control  Scenarios	A-16
          -Emissions  Summary [[[ A-18

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                    Growth  Projections	A-30
                    Control Scenarios	A-30
                    Emissions Summary	A-31
          Area  Sources	A-35
                    Overview  of Approach [[[ A-35
                    Base  Year Emissions	A-35
                    Growth  Projections	A.-36
                    Control Scenarios	A-37
                    Emissions Summary [[[-A-37
          Reasonable  Further  Progress  Requirements	A-41
          Mercury  Emission  Estimates [[[ A-48
                    Medical Waste Incinerators (MW1)	A-48
                    Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs) [[[ A48
                    Electric Utility  Generation	A-49
                    Hazardous Waste  Combustion[[[ A-49
                    Chlor-alkali Plants	A-49
          Uncertainties  in  the  Emission  Estimates	A-51
                    Base  Year Emission  Estimates[[[ A-51
                    Growth  Forecasts	A-52
                    Future  Year  Control Assumptions[[[ A-5'3
          References[[[A-55

                   B:              Costs[[[ B-1
          Introduction[[[  B-1
          Summary of  Methods [[[  B-1
                    EKCAM  Model	B-1
                    IPM Model[[[ B-2
                    Additional Methods	B-2
                    Annali'^ation  of Costs[[[ B-2

-------
                                                                                                Table of Contents
        C: Air                             [[[ C-1
Introduction[[[ C-1
Overview of Section 812 Prospective Modeling  Analysis[[[C-2
        -Air Quality Models and Databases	C-2
        Methodology for the Combined Use  of Observations and .Air Quality  Modeling Results......... C-3
Estimating  the Effects  of the CAAA on  Ozone  Air  Quality	C-4
Overview of the UAM and UAM-V Photochemical Modeling Systems.............................. C-5
         UAM	C-5
         UAM-V................................................^^^
        Regional-Scale Modeling of the Eastern  U.S	C-6
        Regional-Scale Modeling  of the Western U.S. [[[ C-12
         Urban-Scale Modeling  of the San Francisco Bay Area	C-15
         Urban-Scale Modeling  of the Los Angeles Area	C-18
         Urban-Scale Modeling  of the Maricopa County  (Phoenix Area)	C-20
Calculation  of Ozone  Air  Quality  Profiles	C-23
         Overview  of the Methodology [[[ C-23
        Description  of the Observation  Dataset	C-23
         Calculation  of Percentile-Based Adjusted factors	C-24
         Use  of Adjustment Factors to Modify Observed Concentrations	C-25
         Calculation  of 0-^one  Profiles[[[ C-25
Estimating  the Effects  of the CAAA on  Particulate  Matter	C-38
         Overview of the RADM/RPM  Modeling System	C-38
        Application of RADM/RPM for the Eastern U.S	C-38
         Overview of the REMSAD Modeling System	C-41
        Application of REMSAD for the Western U.S.  [[[ C-44
         Calculation of PM Air Quality  Profiles	C-48
Estimating  the Effects  of the CAAA on  Visibility	C-64
RADM/RPM  and Visibility	C-64
         'RADM/'RPM Modeling RW//&T[[[ C-64
REMSAD and Visibility[[[ C-66
        REMSAD Modeling Results	C-66
Acid  Deposition	C-69
         Overview of the RADM Modeling System [[[ C-69
        RADM Modeling Results	C-69
Estimating  the Effects  of the CAAA on  Sulfur Dioxide,

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
          Types  of Health  Studies [[[ D-5
                    Chamber Studies [[[ D-5
                    Epidemiological  Studies [[[ D-6
          Selection  of  C-R  Functions [[[ D-7
                    C-R Function  General Issues [[[ D-7
                    C-R  Function Selection  Criteria [[[ D-12
                    Mortality [[[ D-16
                    Chronic illness [[[ D-26
                    Hospital Administration [[[ D-30
                    Minor ///KWJ-[[[^
          C-R Functions Linking Air Pollution and Adverse Health Effects  .................................... D-58
                    Carbon Monoxide [[[ D-58
                    Nitrogen  Dioxide [[[ D-61
                    Osyne [[[ D-64
                   P articulate Ma^r [[[ ..D-70
                   Sulfur Dioxide [[[ D-80
          Modeling  Results [[[ D-82
                   Uncertainty [[[ D-82
                   Sensitivity  Analyses [[[ D-83
          References [[[ D-93

                   E;                                    of Criteria Pollutants.. ..........................  E-1
          Introduction [[[  E-1
          Ecological  Overview of the  Impacts  of Air Pollutants Regulated  by  the CAAA ...............  E-3
                   Effects of Atomospheric  Pollutants  on Natural Systems [[[ E-3
                   Acidic Deposition [[[ E-4
                   Nitrogen Deposition [[[ .E-4
                   Hazardous Air Pollutant  Deposition [[[ E-5
                   Troposheric  O^one [[[ "Fi-7

-------
                                                                                                          Table of Contents
Timber Production  Impacts  From Tropospheric Ozone [[[ E-45
          Ecological Effects of O^pne	E-45
          Modeling  Timber Impacts from  0-^one[[[ E4-6
          Ecological Results	E-47
          Economic Impacts[[[ E-48
          Caveats and  Uncertainties	E-48
          Carbon Sequestration  Effects	E-50
          Caveats and  Uncertainties	E-52
Aesthetic Degradation of Forests	E-52
          Forest Aesthetic Effects front Air 'Pollutants[[[ E-53
          Economic  Value  of Changes in Forest Aesthetics	E-58
          Extending Economic Estimates to  a broader Area	E-59
          Caveats and  Uncertainties	E-61
Toxification  of Freshwater Fisheries	E-61
          Impacts of Toxic Air Emissions[[[ E-62
          Illustration  of Economic  Cost  to Anglers	E-63
          Caveats and  Uncertainties	E-65
(Conclusion and Implications [[[ E-65
          Summary  of Quantitative Results	E-66
          R£commendations of Future Research [[[ E-68
References[[[ E-70

         F:                                                      on                       ..................... F-1
Introduction[[[F-l
Ozone Concentration  Data [[[F-l
          Calculation  of the SUM06  Statistic	F-2
          October to April O^one  Concentration  Data[[[ F-2
Yield Change Estimates	F-3
          Exposure-Response  Functions	F-3
          Calculation of O^one  Indices	F-5
          Calculation of County Weights	F-5
          Calculation of Percent Change in  Yield[[[ F-6
Economic  Impact Estimates 	F-7
Conclusions  [[[F-8
References	F-9


-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
         Cost and Benefits  Results with Adjusted Parameters[[[ G-25
                 Five  Percent Discount Ra/e	G-26
                 Three Percent and Seven 'Percent Sensitivity  'Vests [[[ G-27
                 Two  Percent Discount Rate	G-30
                 Undiscounted  "Benefits[[[G-30
         Limitations and  Uncertainties[[[ G-34
                 'Long-Term  Discounting	G-34
                 Corfj[[[^
                 Benefits	G-37
         References	G-39

                H:                 of                                                          of
         Pollutants[[[H-1
         Methods  Used to Value  Health and  Welfare  Effects	H-1
         Valuation  of Specific Health  Endpoints	H-3
                 Valuation  of Premature Mortality Avoided [[[ H-3
                 Mortality   Valuation Methodologies	H-6
                 Valuation  Strategy  Chosen for  this Analysis[[[Vi-11
                 Valuation  of Hospital Admissions Avoided	H-14
                 Valuation  of Chronic Bronchitis A voided[[[ 11-15
                 Valuation  of Chronic Asthma Avoided	H-16
                 Valuation  of Other .Morbidity  Endpoints Avoided	H-17
         Valuation  of Welfare Effects [[[ 11-18
                 Visibility  Valuation	H-18
         Results of Valuation of Health  and Welfare  Effects	H-27
         Uncertainties  in  the Valuation  Estimates	H-31
                 Relative Importance  of Different Components of Uncertainty[[[ 11-3 /

-------
 Tables
Table .ES-1  Summary Comparison of Benefits and Costs (Estimates in millions 1990$)	in

Table 2-1    .Major Emissions Source Categories	10
Table 2-2    Summary of National Annual Emissions  Projections	12
Table 2-3    Summary of Source Category of National Annual Emission Projections to 2010
            (thousand tons)	14
Table 2-4    Airborne Mercury  Emission Estimates	15
Table 2-5    Key  Uncertainties  Associated with Emissions Estimation	21

Table 3-1    Summary of Direct Costs for Titles 1 to V of CAAA, By Title and Selected
            Provisions	26
Table 3-2    Results of Quantitative Sensitivity  Tests	32
Table 3-3    Key  Uncertainty Associated with Cost Estimation	33

Table 4-1    Overview of Air Quality Models	37
Table 4-2    Comparison of Visibility in Selected Eastern Urban Areas	43
Table 4-3    Comparison of Visibility in Selected Eastern .National Parks	43
Table 4-4    Comparison of Visibility in Selected Western Urban Areas	44
Table 4-5    Comparison of Visibility in Selected Western .National Parks	44
Table 4-6    Median Values of the Distribution of  ratios of 2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA
            Adjustment Factors	46
Table 4-7    Key  Uncertainties  Associated with Air Quality  Modeling	48

Table 5-1    Human Health Effects of Criteria  Pollutants	53
Table 5-2    Summary of Considerations  Used in Selecting C-R Functions	56
Table 5-3    Change in Incidence of Adverse  Health Effects Associated
            with  Criteria Pollutants in 2010  (Pre-CAAA minus Post-CAAA) - 48 State  U.S.
            Population  (avoided cases per year)	61
Table 5-4    Mortality Distribution by Age in Primary Analysis  (2010  only),
            Based on Pope et al. (1995)	62
Table 5-5    Major Health Benefits of provisions to Protect Stratospheric Ozone	64
Table 5-6    Key  Uncertainties  Associated with Human Health Effects Modeling	65

Table 6-1    Health Effects Unit Valuation (1990 Dollars)	70
Table 6-2    Summary of Mortality Valuation Estimates  (millions of $1990) 	72
Table 6-3    Results of Human  Health Benefits  Valuation, Post-CAAA 2010	75
Table 6-4    Valuation of CAAA Benefits: Potential Sources  and Likely Direction  of Bias	76
Table 6-5    Key  Uncertainties  Associated with Valuation of Health Benefits	79

Table 7-1    Classes of Pollutants and Ecological Effects	83
Table 7-2    Interactions of Mercury and. Ozone with Natural Systems at Various  Levels of
            Organization	84

                                             xv

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table 7-3    Interactions Between Nitrogen Deposition and Natural Systems
             at Various Levels of Organization	85
Table 7-4    Interactions Between Acid Deposition  -and Natural Systems
             at Various Levels of Organization	86
Table 7-5    Ecological Effects of Air Pollutant[[[ 88
Table 7-6    Summary of Endpomts  Selected  For Quantitative  Analysis	89
Table 7-7    Estimated Displaced Costs For Three Estuaries[[[ 91
Table 7-8    Annual Economic Impact of Acidification in 2010	92
Table 7-9    Quantified and  Unquantified Ecological and  Welfare Effects
             of Title  VI Provisions	96
Table 7-10  Summary of Evaluated Ecological Benefits [[[ 97
Table 7-11  Summary of Other  Welfare  Benefits	97
Table 7-12  Key Uncertainties Associated with Ecological Effects  Estimation................................. 98

Table 8-1    Criteria Pollutant Health and Welfare Benefits  in 2010.................................................. 102
Table 8-2    Present Value of Monetized  Benefits for 48  State Population	103
Table 8-3    Summary of Quantified  primary  Central Estimate  Benefits and Costs ...................... 104
Table 8-4    Summary comparison of Benefits and Costs	105
Table 8-5    Summary of Impact of Alternative  Methods  for Calculating Costs and Benefits..... 108
Table 8-6    Effect of Alternative  Discount Rates  on Primary Central Estimates 	114

Table A-l   Base Year Inventory - Summary of Approach	A-3
Table A-2  Analysis  Approach  By Major  Sector[[[ A-4
Table A-3  Projection Scenario Summary  By Major Sector	A-5
Table A-4  Comparison  of Emissions:   Prospective Analysis and GCVTC Study ..................... A-l 3
Table A-5  Industrial Point Source  Control Assumptions For  The  Post-CAAA Scenario	A-l 7
Table A-6  Industrial Point Source Emission Summaries By Pollutant
             For 1990, 2000, and 2010	A-19
Table A-7  Utility Emission Summary[[[ A-23
Table A-8  BEA Growth Forecasts  by Major Source  Category: Nonroad Engines/Vehicles ..A-26
Table A-9  Nonroad National Emission Projections  By  Source Category ...................................A-28
Table A-10  Applicability of Mobile  Source Control Programs	A-32
Table A-ll  National Highway Vehicle Emissions  By Vehicle Type...............................................A-33
Table A-12  Area Source  Emission Summary By Pollutant For 1990, 2000, and 2010	A-39
Table A-l3  2000 Rate of Progress Analysis [[[ A-43
Table A-14  2010 Rate of Progress Analysis	A-45
Table A-15  Discretionary Control Measures  Modeled For ROP/RFP  ..........................................A-47
Table A-16  Airborne Mercury Emission Estimates	A-51

Table B-l    Summary of Cost Estimates  By Emissions Source	B-3

-------
                                                                                       List of Tables and Figures
Table 13-8    Cost Estimates of Motor Vehicle Program[[[ B-17
Table B-9    Cost Summary of Area Source NOx and PM Controls 	B-19
Table B-10   2000 Rate  of Progress  Analysis [[[ B-21
Table B-ll   2010 Rate  of Progress  Analysis	B-22
Table B-12   Summary of Cost Estimates By CAAA  Title[[[ B-24
Table B-13   Title I  National Rules, Point,  and Area Source VOC Control Costs	B-26
Table B-14   Summary of Costs  For Title I[[[ B-26
Table B-15   Summary of Title II Motor Vehicle and Non-road
              Engine/Vehicle Program Costs [[[ B-27
Table B-16   Title III, MACT Standards, Point and Area Source VOC Control Costs	B-28
Table B-17   Annual Cost of Title IV [[[ B-29
Table B-18   Potential Effects of Uncertainty' on  Cost Estimates	B-33
Table B-19   Factors Affecting Cost of Major CAAA  Provisions [[[ B-37
Table B-20   Rate-of-Progress Cost Sensitivity  Summary	B-42
Table B-21   Area Source PM Control Cost Sensitivity Analysis, Year 2000 ................................. B-43
Table B-22   Results of Sensitivity' Analysis  of LEV Cost	E-45
Table B-23   Discount Rate Sensitivity Analysis For 2010 Cost Estimates...................................... B-46

Table C-'l    Emission Totals by Component for each Scenario
              for the OTAG Domain  (tpd)	C-10
Table C-2    Emissions  Totals by Component for each Scenario
              for the Entire  U.S. (tpd)	C-13
Table C-3    Emissions  Totals by Component for each Scenario
              for the San Francisco Bay Area Entire U.S. (tpd)	C-'l7
Table C-4    Emission Totals by  Component for each Scenario for Los Angeles  (tpd)................ C-l9
Table C-5    Emissions  Totals by Component for each Scenario  for Pheomx  (tpd)	C-22
Table C-6    Comparison of  CASTNet -and RPM Average  Concentration of SO4 ......................C-40
Table C-7    Comparison of CASTNet and RPM Average Concentrations
              and Fractions  of NO3 [[[ C-41
Table C-8    REMSAD  Output  File Species	C-43
Table C-9    Chemical Speciation Schemes  Applied for REMSAD [[[ C-45
Table C-10   Emission Totals by  Component for Each Scenario for the Entire U.S.  (tpd)	C-46
Table C-ll   Background Species  Concentration used  for REMSAD Initial
              and Boundary  Conditions	C-47
Table C-12   Geographical Regions of the  U.S. [[[C-50
Table C-13   Comparison of  Visibility in Selected Eastern  Cities, Metropolitan Areas,

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table D-3   Studies  and Results Selected for Adverse Effects  in Fetuses, Infants,
             and Young Children	D-25
Table D-4   Summary of Selected Studies  for Chronic Illness [[[ D-28
Table D-5   Studies  Used to Develop Respiratory Admissions Estimates 	D-32
Table D-6   Summary of Hospital Admissions Studies - Respiratory Illnesses ............................. D-33
Table D-7   Studies  Used to Develop Cardiovascular Admissions Estimates	D-39
Table D-8   Summary of Hospital Admissions Studies - Cardiovascular Illness .......................... D-40
Table D-9   Studies  Used to Develop Asthma Emergency Room Visits	D-42
Table D-10  Summary of Selected Studies  for Emergency Room Visits
             - Asthma and Acute Wheezing	D-43
Table D-ll  Summary of Selected Studies  for Emergency Room Visits
             - All-Cause, All-Respiratory,  COPD, and Bronchitis	D-46
Table D-12  Studies  Used to Develop Minor Illness Estimates[[[ D-51
Table D-13  Summary of Selected Studies  for Minor Illness	D-52
Table D-14  Summary of Selected Studies  for Asthmatics [[[ D-55
Table D-15  Summary of C-R Functions  for Carbon Monoxide	D-59
Table D-16  Summary of C-R Functions  for Nitrogen Dioxide [[[ D-62
Table D-17  Summary of C-R Functions for Ozone	D-65
Table D-18  Summary of C-R Functions  for Particulate Matter[[[ D-71
Table D-19  Summary of C-R Functions for Sulfur Dioxide	D-81
Table D-20  Change in Incidence of Adverse Health Effects  Associated with Criteria Pollutants
             (Pre-CAAA minus Post- CAAA) - 48 State U.S. Population within 50 km of a
             Monitor (avoided cases  per year)[[[ D-85
Table D-21  Change in Incidence of Adverse Health Effects  Associated with Criteria Pollutants
             (Pre-CAAA minus Post-  CAAA) -  48 State U.S. Population
             (avoided cases per year)	D-87
Table D-22  Mortality Distribution by Age in Primary Analysis,  Based
             on Pope et al.  (1995)	D-89
Table D-23  Illustrative Estimates of the  Impact  of Criteria Pollutants on Mortality
             — 48 State U.S. Population within 50 km of a Monitor (cases per year	D-90
Table D-24  Illustrative Estimates of the  Impact  of Criteria Pollutants on Mortality
             — 48 State U.S. Population (cases per year)	D-90
Table D-25  Comparison of Alternative Lag Assumptions for Premature Mortality
             Associated with PM Exposure	D-91

Table E-l    Classes  of Pollutants and Ecological  Effects	E-3
Table E-2    Interactions Between Acid Deposition and Natural Systems
             at Various Levels of Organization	E-10
Table E-3    Interactions Between Nitrogen Deposition  and Natural  Systems
             at Various Levels of Organization	E-ll
Table E-4    Interactions  of Mercury and  Ozone With  Natural Systems
             at Various Levels of Organization	E-12
Table E-5    Ecological Impacts with Identifiable Human Service  Flows........................................ E-16

-------
                                                                                     List of Tables and Figures
Table  E-10   Land Use  Prevalence and Pass-Through Figures[[[ E-23
Table  E-ll   Nitrogen Loading  From Atmospheric  Deposition	E-23
Table  E-12   Estimated Avoided Costs for three Estuaries[[[ E-27
Table  E-13   Avoided Cost for Atlantic Coast	E-29
Table  E-14   Summary of pH-Based Effects Threshold[[[ E-38
Table  E-15   Acidification Results  - 2010	E-40
Table  E-16   Annual Economic Impact of Acidification in 2010 [[[ E-41
Table  E~17   Cumulative Economic Benefits  of Acidification from 1990 to 2010	E-42
Table  E-18   Cumulative Cost of pH Stabilization  from  1990  to 2010 ............................................. E-43
Table  E-19   Difference in  Commercial Timber Growth Rates  With
              and Without the CAAA[[[ E-48
Table  E-20   Carbon Flux B  CAAA  versus No-CAAA Air Quality Scenarios	E-52
Table  E-21   Typical Impacts of Specific Pollutants on the Visual Quality  of Forests.................. E-54
Table  E-22   Forests Affected by  Regional Pollution	E-55
Table  E-23   Summary of Monetized Estimates of the Annual Value of Forest
              Quality Changes	E-60
Table  E-24   Illustrative Value of Avoiding Forest Darn-age  in the United  States .......................... E-60
Table  E-25   Summary of National Data on  Toxicity  Sampling for Fishing Advisories	E-63
Table  E-26   Estimates  of the Welfare Cost of Toxification  in New York  State ............................ E-63
Table  E-27   Summary of Evaluated Ecological Benefits	E-67

Table  F-l    Ozone Exposure-Response  Functions for Selected Corps  (SUM06)	F-4
Table  F-2    Relative  Percent Yield Course [[[F-7
Table  F-3    Ozone Exposure-Response  Functions for Selected Corps  (SUM06)	F-8

Table  G-l    Six Major  Sections  of Title VI	G-3
Table  G-2    Phaseout Scenario in Clean Air Act Section 604 and Phaseout Scenario
              in Amendments Added  Under Clean Air Act Section 606	G-5
Table  G-3    Scope of Title VI Cost Estimates[[[G-9
Table  G-4    Benefits of Section 604, 606, and  609 	G-16
Table  G-5    Benefits  of Section 608 [[[ G-20
Table  G-6    Benefits  of Section 611	G-21
Table  G-7    Sections  604 and 606: Valuation of Total Benefits from 1990  to 2165,
              With a Two Percent Discount Rate	G-23
Table  G-8    Adjustment Strategy for Key Parameters[[[ G-25
Table  G-9    Costs and Benefits  of Title VI	G-27

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table H-3   Unit Values Used for Economical Valuation of Health
            and Welfare Endpoints	H-21
Table H-4   Primary Estimates of Health and Welfare Benefits Due
            to Criteria Pollutants - Post-CAAA  2000	H-29
Table H-5   Primary Estimates of Health and Welfare Benefits Due
            to Criteria Pollutants -  Post-CAAA 2010	H-30
Table H-6   Sensitivity Analysis  of Alternative Discount Rates
            on the Valuation of Reduced Premature  Mortality	H-37
Table H-7   Elasticity  Values  for Conducting Sensitivity Analysis of Income Effect................. H-39
Table H-8   Illustrative Adjustment to Estimates of WTT to Avoid Morbidity	H-40
Table H-9   Illustrative Adjustment to Estimates  of the Value of Statistical Life......................... H-41
Figures
Figure 1-1   Analytic Sequence For First Section 812 Prospective Analysis	4

Figure 2-1   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario VOC Emissions Estimates	16
Figure 2-2   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario NOx Emissions Estimates............................................... 16
Figure 2-3   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario SO2 Emissions Estimates	16
Figure 2-4   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario CO Emissions Estimates. ................................................ 17
Figure 2-5   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario PM10 Emissions Estimates	17
Figure 2-6   Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario PM2.5 Emissions  Estimates. ........................................... 17
Figure 2-7   1990 Primary PM2.5 Emissions  by EPA Region	19

Figure 4-1   Schematic Diagram of the Future-Year Concentration Estimation  Methodology. ... 39
Figure 4-2   Distribution  of Monitor-Level Ratios for 95th Percentile
            Ozone  Concentration: 2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA	40
Figure 4-3   Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-Denved
            Monitor Level  Ratios for Annual Average PM10 Concentrations:
            2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA[[[ 42
Figure 4-4   Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-Denved
            Monitor-Level  Ratios for Annual Average PM2.5 Concentrations:
            2000 Post-CAAA / 2000Pre-CAAA 	42
Figure 4-5   Distribution  of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer SO2 Emissions:
            2010 Post-CAAA/ 2010 Pre-CAAA	45
Figure 4-6   Distribution  of Monitor-Level Ratios of NO  Summer Emissions:
            2010 Post-CAAA/ 2010 Pre-CAAA	45
Figure 4-7   Distribution  of Monitor-Level Ratios of NO2 Summer Emissions:
            2010 Post-CAAA/ 2010 Pre-CAAA	46

-------
                                                                                     List of Tables and Figures
Figure 7-1   Annual Economic Welfare Benefit of Mitigating Ozone Impacts
             on Commercial Timber:  Difference Between Pre-  and Post-CAAA 	93

Figure 8-1   Monte Carlo Simulation Model Primary Benefits  Results
             for Target Years - Titles  I Through V . [[[ 101
Figure 8-2   Analysis of Contribution of Key Parameters  to Quantified Uncertainty	107

Figure A-l  Comparison of Pre-CAAA,  Post-CAAA, and Trends
             VOC Emissions Estimates [[[ A-8
Figure A-2  Comparison of Pre-CAAA,  Post-CAAA, and Trends
             NOx Emissions Estimates [[[A-l0
Figure A-3  Comparison of Pre-CAAA,  Post-CAAA, and Trends
             SO  Emissions Estimates  [[[ A-l 0
Figure A-4  Comparison of Pre-CAAA,  Post-CAAA, and Trends
             CO Emissions Estimates [[[ A-l 1
Figure A-5  Comparison of Pre-CAAA,  Post-CAAA, and Trends
             PM10  Emissions  Estimates [[[ A-l 1
Figure A-6  1990 Primary PM2.5 Emissions by EPA Region	A-13

Figure C-'l  Schematic Diagram of the Future-year Concentration
             Estimation Methodology [[[ C-4
Figure C-2  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)
             for  the 15 July  1995 OTAG  Episode Day:  2010  pre-CAAA90
             minus  base 1990	C-26
Figure C-3  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)
             for the 15 July  1995 OTAG  Episode Day:  2010  post-CAAA90
             minus  base 1990 [[[C-27
Figure C-4  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)
             for  the 15 July  1995 OTAG  Episode Day:  2010  post-CAAA90
             minus pre-CAAA90 	C-28
Figure C-5  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)
             for the 8 July 1995  Western U.S. Simulation Day:  2010 pre-CAAA90
             minus  base 1990 [[[C-29
Figure C-6  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)
             for  the 8 July 1995  Western U.S. Simulation Day:  2010 post-CAAA90
             minus  base 1990	C-30
Figure C-7  Difference in Daily Maximum  Simulated Ozone  Concentration (ppb)

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-lla Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             Ozone Concentration 2000 Pre-CAAA90/1990 Base-Year	C-35
Figure C-lib Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             Ozone Concentration 2000 Post-CAAA90/1990 Base-Year	C-35
Figure C-12a Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             Ozone Concentration 2010 Pre-CAAA/1990 Base-Year	C-36
Figure C-12b Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             Ozone Concentration 2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year	C-36
Figure C-13a Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             C)2one Concentration 2000 Post-CAAA/2000 Pre-CAAA	C-37
Figure C-13b Distribution of Monitor - Level  Ratios for 95th Percentile
             C)2one Concentration 2010 Post-CAAA/2010 Pre-CAAA	C-37
Figure C-14 80-km RADM Domain[[[C-54
Figure C-15 Comparison of Simulated and Observed Seasonal PM10 Concentration
            (ug/m3) for REMSAD for the Western U.S.:  Spring 1990...........................................C-55
Figure C-16 Comparison of Simulated and Observed Seasonal PM10 Concentration
            (ug/m3) for REMSAD for the Western U.S.:  Summer  1990 .......................................C-55
Figure C-17 Comparison of Simulated and Observed Seasonal PM10 Concentration
            (ug/m3) for REMSAD for the Western U.S.:  Fall 1990................................................C-55
Figure C-18 Comparison of Simulated and Observed Seasonal PM10 Concentration
            (ug/m3) for REMSAD for the Western U.S.:  Winter 1990 .........................................C-55
Figure C-19 Difference  in Seasonal Average PM10 Concentration (ug/m3) for the Summer
            REMSAD  Simulation  Period (1-10 July 1990)  for 2010: post-CAAA90
            minus  pre-CAAA90 	C-56
Figure C-20 Difference  in Seasonal Average PM25 Concentration (ug/m3) for the Summer
            REMSAD  Simulation  Period (1-10 July 1990)  for 2010: post-CAAA90
            minus  pre-CAAA90 [[[C-57
Figure C-21a Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
             Monitor-level Ratios  for Annual Average PM-10  Concentration:
             2000 Pre-CAAA90 /  1990Base-Year	C-58
Figure C-21b Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
             Monitor-level Ratios  for Annual Average PM-10  Concentration:
             2000 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year[[[ C-58
Figure C-22a Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
             Monitor-level Ratios  for Annual Average PM-10  Concentration:
             2010 Pre-CAAA/1990 Base-Year	C-59
Figure C-22b Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
             Monitor-level Ratios  for Annual Average PM-10  Concentration:
             2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year[[[ C-59
Figure C-23a Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived

-------
                                                                                   List of Tables and Figures
Figure C-24a Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-2.5 Concentration:
              2010 Pre-CAAA/1990  Base-Year  [[[ C-61
Figure C-24b Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-2.5 Concentration
              2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year	C-61
Figure C-25a Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-10  Concentration:
              2000 Post-CAAA/2000 Pre-CAAA[[[C-62
Figure C-25b Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-10  Concentration:
              2010 Post-CAAA/2010 Pre-CAAA	C-62
Figure C-26a Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-2.5 Concentration:
              2000 Post-CAAA/ 2000 pre-CAAA[[[C-63
Figure C-26b Distribution  of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-derived
              Monitor-level Ratios for Annual  Average PM-2.5 Concentration
              2010 Post-CAAA/2010 Pre-CAAA	C-63
Figure C-27 Seasonal  Average Deciview for the Summer  REMSAD Simulation
             Period (1-10 July 1990): Base 1990 (Western  U.S. Only) 	C-67
Figure C-28 Difference  in  Seasonal Average Deciview  for the Summer REMSAD
             Simulation  Period (1-10 July 1990): 2010 Pre-CAAA90 Minus Base  1990
             (Western United States Only)[[[C-68
Figure C-29 Annual Sulfur Deposition 1990 Base  Case Scenario	C-71
Figure C-30 Annual Nitrogen Deposition  1990 Base Case Scenario ................................................. C-72
Figure C-31 Annual Sulfur Deposition  2010 Pre CAAA Scenario	C-73
Figure C-32 Annual Sulfur deposition 2010 Post CAAA Scenario [[[C-74
Figure C-33 Annual Nitrogen Deposition 2010 Pre CAAA Scenario	C-75
Figure C-34 Annual Nitrogen deposition in 2010 Post CAAA Scenario ........................................ C-76
Figure C-35 Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer SO2 Emissions:
             2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA [[[C-78
Figure C-36 distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios  of Summer NO Emissions:
             2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA [[[C-78
Figure C-37 Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer NO2 Emissions:
             2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA [[[C-79
Figure C-38 Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer CO  Emissions:
             2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA [[[C-79


-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure E-5   Chesapeak Bay SAV 1978-1996 [[[ E-32
Figure E-6   Percentage  of Acidic Surface Waters in the National Surface
              Water Survey Regions[[[ E-36
Figure E-7   Acidification of Freshwater Ecosystems	E-37
Figure E-8   Annual Economic Welfare Benefit of Mitigation Ozone Impacts
              on Commercial Timber	E-49
Figure E-9   U.S. Major Forest Types  Affected By Air Pollution-Induced Visual Injuries ......... E-57

Figure G-'l   Schematic of Cost and Benefit Analysis of Title  VI[[[ G-12
Figure G-2   Annual Human Health Benefits from Sections 604 and 606 (Discounted at 5%).. G-29
Figure G-3   Annual Undiscounted Human Health Benefits of Sections  604 -and 606................. G-33

Figure H-'l   Hypothetical Survival  Curve Shift[[[ H-4

-------
Acronyms  and Abbreviations
uEq          microequivalents
(ig           microgram
ACT         average cost per ton
AGSIM       AGricultural Simulation .Model
AIC          Akaike information criterion
AIRS         Aerometric  Information Retrieval
             System
ANC         acid neutralizing capacity
AN OVA     analysis of variance
AOD         airway obstructive disease
AP-42        EPA's Compilation of Air Pollu-
             tion Emission Factors
ATDM       aerosol and  toxics deposition
             module
AQM        air quality modeling
A QMS       Air Quality Modeling Subcommit-
             tee
ATLAS       Aggregate Timber Land Assessment
             System
b            light extinction coefficient
 ext            o
BAAQM.D    Bay Area Air Quality Management
             District
BACT        best available control technology
BAF         bioaccumulation  factor
BARCT      best available retrofit control
             technology
BCF         bioconcentration factor
BEA         Bureau of Economic Analysis
BID          background information document
BIES         Biogenic Emissions Inventory
             System
BLS          Bureau of Labor  Statistics
BMP         best management practice
BNR         biological nutrient removal
BS           black smoke
C-R          concentration-response
CAA         Clean Air Act
CAAA       Clean Air Act Amendments
CAP I         Clean Air Power Initiative
CAPMS      Criteria Air Pollutant Modeling
             System
GARB        California Air Resources Board
CAS AC
CASTNet

CB
GEM
CES
CFG
CFFP
CGE
CI
CO
GOH
CO I
COPD

CRC
CRF
CTG
CV
dbh
DDT
DOE
dV
E-GAS
EC
EGU
EMFAC
ER
EPA
EPS
ERCAM

ERL

FACA
FAPRI

FGM
FDA
Clean Air Science Advisory Board
Clean Air Act Status and Trends
Network
chronic bronchitis
continuous  emissions monitoring
constant elasticity of substitution
chlorofluorocarbon
Clean Fuel  Fleet Program
computable general equilibrium
compression ignition
carbon  monoxide
coefficient of haze
cost of  illness
chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease
capital recovery cost
capital recovery factor
control  technique guideline
contingent  valuation
diameter at breast height
dichlorodiphenyl-trichloroethane
Department of Energy
deciview
Economic Growth Analysis System
elemental carbon
electrical generating unit
emission factors model
emergency  room
Environmental Protection Agency
Emissions Processing System
Emission Reduction and Cost
Analysis Model
Environmental Research Labora-
tory
Federal Advisory  Committee Act
Food and Agricultural Policy
Research Institute
Fuel Consumption Model
Food and Drug Administration
forced expiratory volume in one
second
                                         xxv

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
FGD          flue gas desulfurization
FHWA        Federal Highway Administration
FMVCP       Federal .Motor Vehicle Control
               Program
FORCARB    forest carbon model
FORTRAN    formula translation
FR            Federal Register
GCVTC       Grand  Canyon  Visibility Transport
               Commission
GDP          gross domestic product
GIRAS        Geographic Information  Retrieval
               Analysis System
GIS           geographic information system
GNP          gross national product
GSP           gross state product
H +           hydrogen ions
ha             hectare
HAP          hazardous air pollutant
HARVCARB  harvested carbon model
HB FC         hydrobromofluorocarbons
IIC           hydrocarbon
H C F C        hydrochlorofluorocarboii
HDDV        heavy-duty diesel vehicle
HDGV        heavy-duty gasoline vehicle
HDV          heavy-duty vehicle
HEES         Health  and Ecological Effects
               Subcommittee
Hg            mercury
IIIV-1         human immunodeficiency virus
               type one
HNO3         nitric acid
HPMS         Highway Performance Monitoring
               System
HS_O4         sulfunc acid
I/M           inspection and maintenance
ICI            iiidustrial/commercial/iiistitutioiial
ICD           International Classification of
               Disease
ID             identification code
IMPROVE    Iiiterageiicy Monitoring of
               PROtected Environments
IP.M           Integrated Planning Model
kg             kilogram
km            kilometer
kWh          kilowatt hour
LAER         lowest  achievable emission rate
Ib             pound
LDAR         leak detection and repair
LDDT         light-duty diesel  truck
LDDV         light-duty diesel  vehicle
LDGT         light-duty gasoline truck
LDGV         light-duty gasoline vehicle
LEV           low emission vehicle
LRS           lower respiratory symptom
LTO          landing and takeoff  operations
m             meter
m3             cubic meter
MACT        maximum  achievable control
               technology
MAG          Mancopa Association of Govern-
               ments
MAGIC       Model of Acidification of Ground-
               water 111 Catchments
.M C           motorcycle
MCF          methyl chloroform
MDL          method  detection limit
MM4          mesoscale model four
MMBtu        million British thermal units
MRAD        minor restricted  activity day
Models-3       Third Generation Air Pollution
               Modeling System
MOD          memorandum of understanding
.MOBILE      mobile  source emission  factor
               model
MPO          metropolitan planning organization
MWC         municipal waste  combustor
MWI          medical  waste incinerator
N             nitrogen
NAA          nonattainment area
NAAQS       National Ambient Air  Quality-
               Standards
NAPAP       National Acid Precipitation Assess-
               ment Program
NASA         National Aeronautics and Space
               Adminis tration
NCAR        National ("enter  for Atmospheric
               Research
NCLAN       National Crop  Loss  Assessment
               Network
NE            northeast
NEMS         National Energy Modeling System
NERC         North American Electric Reliabil-
               ity Council
NESHAP      National Emission Standards for
               Hazardous Air Pollutants
                                                XXVI

-------
                                                                               Acronyms and Abbreviations
NET          National Emission Trend
NH            ammonia
NIIANES     National Health  and Nutrition
               Examination
NIH          National Institutes of Health
NMOC        non-methane organic compound
N (3            nitrogen oxide
NO2          nitrogen dioxide
NOx          nitrogen oxides
NP            national park
NPI            National Particulates Inventory
NPP          net primary productivity
NPV          net present value
NSPS          new source performance standard
NSR          new source review
NSWS         National Surface Waters Survey
NYSDEC      New York Department of Environ-
               mental Conservation
O3             ozone
O&M         operation and maintenance
OBD          onboard diagnostic
O C            organic carbon
ODS          ozone-depleting substance
OMB          Office of Management and Budget
OMS          Office of Mobile Sources
OPPE         Office of Policy, Planning  and
               Evaluation
ORIS          Office of the Regulatory Informa-
               tion System
OSD          ozone season daily
OTAG        Ozone Transport Assessment
               Group
OTC          Ozone Transport Commission
OTR          Ozone Transport Region
P-i-G          plume-in-grid
PAN          peroxyacetyl nitrate
Pb             lead
PCB          polychlorinated biphenyl
PCDD        polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin
PCDF         polychlorinated dibenzofurans
PCE          perchloroethylene
pH            logarithm of the  reciprocal of
               hydrogen ion concentration, a
               measure of acidity
PM            paniculate matter (both PM10  and
               PM25)
PM.|()          particulate matter less than or equal
               to  10 microns in diameter
PM            particulate matter less than or equal
               to  2.5 microns in diameter
PnET          Net Photosynthesis and Evapo-
               Transpiration model
POC          parameter occurrence code
POTW        publically owned treatment works
ppb            parts per billion
ppm           parts per million
PRYL         percentage relative yield loss
PRZM         Pesticide  Root Zone Model
PSU           Pennsylvania State University
QALY         quality adjusted life years
R&D          research and development
RACT         reasonable available control tech-
               nology
RAD          restricted activity day
RADM        Regional  Acid Deposition Model
RELMAP      Regional  Lagrangian Model  of Air
               Pollution
REMSAD      Regulatory Modeling System for
               Aerosols  and Acid Deposition
RE            rule effectiveness
RFG          reformulated gasoline
RHC          reactive  hydrocarbon
RIA           regulatory impact analysis
RFP           reasonable further progress
RO2           peroxy radical
ROP          rate of progress
RPM          Regional  Particulate Model
RUM          Random  Utility Model
RYP           Reid vapor pressure
S              sulfur
SAB           Science Advisory Board
SAS           Statistical Analysis Software
SAV           submerged aquatic vegetation
SCAQMD     South Coast Air Quality Manage-
               ment District
SCAQS        South Coast Air Quality Study
SCC           Source  Classification Code
SCR           selective  catalytic reduction
SEDS          State Energy Data Systems
SI             spark ignition
SIC            Standard  Industrial Classification
SIP            State Implementation Plan
SO_            sulfur dioxide
                                               xxvn

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
SO A          secondary organic  aerosol
SoCAB        South Coast Air Basin
SOCMI        synthetic organic chemical  manu-
               facturing industry
SUM06        sum of hourly ozone  concentra-
               tions at or above 0.06 ppm
TAG          total annualized  costs
TAP          temporal allocation factors
TAMM        Timber Assessment Market .Model
TBRP         Tampa Bay Estuary Program
TCDD        tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
TEQ          toxic equivalency
TLEV         transitional low  emission vehicle
tpd            tons per day
TREGRO     tree growth model
TSDF         treatment, storage, and disposal
               facility
TSP           total suspended  particulates
[JAM         Urban  Airshed M'odel
URS          upper respiratory symptoms
USD A         United States Department of
               Agriculture
ULEV         ultra-low emission vehicle
USGS         United States  Geological Survey
UV            ultraviolet
VMT          vehicle miles  traveled
VNA          Voronoi neighbor  averaging
VOG          volatile organic  compound
VR            visual range
VSL           value of statistical life
VSLY         value of statistical life year
WE FA        Wharton Economic Forecasting
               Associates
WHO         World  Health Organization
WrLD          work-loss days
WT A          willingness-to-accept
WTP          willingness-to-pay
XO,           halogenated peroxy radical
yr             year
ZEV          zero emission vehicle
                                                XXViil

-------
Acknowledgments
   This project is managed under the direction of
Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator and Rob-
ert D. Brenner, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
the EPA Office of Air and Radiation. The principal
project manager is  Jim DeMocker, Senior Policy
Analyst, EPA Office of Air and Radiation/Office of
Policy Analysis and  Review.  Brian  Heninger, EPA
Office of Policy/Office of Economy and Environ-
ment, directed the ecological assessment; and Sam
Napolitano, EPA Office of Air  and Radiation/Of-
fice of Atmospheric Programs directed the electric
utility emissions and cost analyses.  Robin Dennis,
EPA Office of Research and Development/National
Exposure Research Laboratory directed the RADM-
RPM air quality modeling. Al McGartland, Direc-
tor of the EPA Office of Economy and Environment
in the Office of Policy, and David Gardiner, former
Assistant Administrator for the Office of Policy' pro-
vided guidance and support.

   Many EPA staff contributed or reviewed portions
of this document, including Bryan Hubbcll, John
Bachmann, Ron Evans, Rosalina Rodriguez, Scott
Mathias, Ann Watkins, Rona Bimbaum, Karen Mar-
tin, Dons Price, Drusilla  Hufford, Jeff Cohen, Joe
Somers, Carl Mazza, Brett Snyder, and Tom Gillis.

   A number of contractors developed key elements
of the analysis  and supporting documents.  Jim
Neumann of Industrial Economics, Incorporated
managed the overall integration and  coordination of
the analytical work and documentation and also made
considerable substantive analytical contributions.
Other contractor members of the 812 Project Team
included Bob  Unsworth, Henry  Roman, Jared
Hardner, Naomi Kleckner, Nick Live say, Lauren
Fusfeld, Andre Cap, Stephen Everett, Jon Discher,
and Mike Hester of Industrial Economics, Incorpo-
rated; Lelaiid Deck, Ellen Post,  Lisa Akcson, Ken-
neth Davidson, and  Don McCubbin of Abt Associ-
ates;  Sharon Douglas, John  Langstaff, Robert
Iwamiya, Belle Hudischewsky, and John Calcagm of
ICF Incorporated, and  John Blaney of ICF' Consult-
ing; and Jim Wilson, Erica Laich, and Dianne Crocker
of Pechan-Avanti Associates.

    Science  Advisory Board review of this report is
supervised by Donald G. Barnes, Director of the SAB
Staff.  The Designated Federal Official for the SAB
reviews is Angela Nugent.   Other SAB staff who as-
sisted 111 the coordination of SAB reviews include jack
Fowie, Robert Flaak,  and Jack Kooyoomjian.  Diana
Pozuii provided  administrative support to the SAB.

    The SAB Council is chaired by Maureen Crop-
per of the World Bank.  SAB Council  members serv-
ing during the final review  of this report include A.
Myrick Freeman  of Bowdoin College,  Gardner
Brown, Jr. of the  University of Washington, Paul
Lioy of the  Robert Wood Johnson School of Medi-
cine, Paulette Middleton of the RAND Center for
Environmental Sciences and Policy, Donald Fuller-
ton of the University of Texas —  Austin, Lawrence
Goulder of Stanford University, Jane Hall of Cali-
fornia State University — Fullerton, Charles Kolstad
of the University of California at Santa Barbara, and
Lester Lave of Carnegie-Mellon  University. Alan
Krupnick of Resources for the Future  served as a
Consultant to the Council.   In addition, several mem-
bers of the SAB  Council whose terms  expired during
the development of the study provided  valuable ad-
vice and ideas in  the early stages of project design and
implementation. These former members include
Richard Schmalensee of MIT, William Nordhaus of
Yale University,  Paul Portncy of Resources  for the
Future, Kip Viscusi of Harvard University,  Ronald
Cummings  of Georgia State University, Thomas
Tietenberg of Colby College, Wallace Gates  of the
University of Maryland, Wayne Kachel  of MELE As-
sociates, Robert .Mendelsohn of Yale University,  and
Daniel Dudek of the Environmental Defense Fund.
William Smith, a  liaison to the Council  from the SAB
Environmental Processes and Effects Committee also
provided valuable advice regarding the ecological as-
sessment.
                                            XXIX

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The SAB Council is supported by two  technical
subcommittees.  The first of  these subcommittees,
the Health and Ecological Effects Subcommittee is
chaired by Paul Lioy. Members who participated in
the final  review of this  report included Morton
Lippmann of New York University Medical Center,
George T. Wolff of General .Motors, A. Myrick Free-
man, Timothy Larson of the University of Washing-
ton, Joseph Meyer of the University of Wyoming,
Robert Rowe of Stratus Consulting, George  Taylor
of George "Mason  University, jane Hall, "Michael
Kleinman of the  University of California at  Irvine,
and Carl Shy of die  University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill.  Several former members who  provided
valuable advice in the early stages of the  study in-
clude  Bernard Weiss of the University of Rochester
.Medical Center, David V.  Bates of the University of
British Columbia, Gardner Brown, and Lester Lave.

    The second technical subcommittee, the  Air
Quality Modeling  Subcommittee  is chaired by
Paulette Middleton.  Members serving during the fi-
nal review of this report include Philip Hopke of
Clarkson University, James IT.  Price, Jr. of the Texas
Natural Resource  Conservation Commission, Harvey
Jeffries of the University of North Carolina  —  Chapel
Hill, Timothy Larson, and Peter Mueller of  the Elec-
tric Power Research Institute.  A former member who
helped guide the analysis in its early stages was George
T. Wolff.

    The project managers  wish to convey special ac-
knowledgment and appreciation for the valuable con-
tributions  of A. Myrick Freeman.  As a charter mem-
ber of the Council and  as Vice Chair of the  "Health
and Ecological  Effects Subcommittee, Dr.  Freeman
provided wise and excellent counsel throughout the
entire  course of SAB review of both this study  and
the preceding retrospective  study.

    This report could not have been produced with-
out the support of key administrative support staff.
The project managers are  grateful to Barbara Morris,
Nona  Smoke,  Eunice  javis, Gloria Booker, and
Wanda Farrar for their timely and tireless support
011 this project.
                                                XXX

-------

                                                                              CD
    Section 812 of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amend-
ments requires the EPA to develop periodic Reports
to Congress that  estimate the  benefits and costs of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).  The first report EPA
created  under this authority,  The Benefits and Costs
of the Clean Air Act: 1970 to 1990, was published and
conveyed to Congress in October 1997. This retro-
spective analysis  comprehensively assessed benefits
and costs of requirements of die 1970 Clean Air Act
and the  1977 Amendments, up to the passage of the
Clean Air  Act Amendments of 1990.  The results of
the retrospective  analysis showed that the nation's
investment in clean air was more than justified by
the substantial benefits that were gamed in the form
of increased health, environmental quality, and pro-
ductivity.  The aggregate benefits of the CAA dur-
ing the 1970 to 1990 period exceeded costs by a fac-
tor of 10 to  100 times.

    Before the retrospective analysis was complete,
we began  the process of assessing the prospective
benefits and costs of the Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA), covering the period 1990  to 2010.  This
report, the first of a series that we plan to produce
every two years, is the result of our prospective analy-
sis of the  1990 Amendments.

    Similar to the retrospective  analysis, this docu-
ment has one primary and several secondary objec-
tives.  The mam goal is to provide Congress and the
public with comprehensive, up-to-date information
on  the CAAA's social costs and  benefits, including
health, welfare, and ecological benefits. Data and
methods derived from the retrospective analysis have
already been used to assist policy-makers in refining
clean air regulations over the last two years, and we
hope the information continues to  prove useful to
Congress during future Clean  Air Act  reauthoriza-
tions.  Beyond the statutory  goals of section 812,
EPA also intends to use the results of this study to
help support decisions on future investments in air
pollution research.   In  addition, lessons learned in
conducting this first prospective  will  help better  tar-
get efforts to improve the accuracy  and usefulness
of future prospective analyses.
                      of This
to

    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 aug-
ment the significant progress made in improving the
nation's air quality through the original Clean  Air
Act of 1970 and its 1977 amendments. The amend-
ments built off the existing structure of the original
Clean Air Act, but went beyond those requirements
to tighten and clarify implementation goals  and  tim-
ing, increase the stringency of some  federal require-
ments, revamp  the hazardous air pollutant regula-
tory program, refine and streamline permitting re-
quirements, and introduce  new programs for  the
control of acid ram and stratospheric ozone depleters.
Because the 1990 Amendments represent  an addi-
tional improvement to the nation's  existing clean
air program, the analysis summarized in  this report
was designed  to estimate the  costs and benefits of
the 1990 CAAA incremental to those costs  and ben-
efits assessed  in the retrospective analysis.   In eco-
nomic terminology, this report addresses  the mar-
ginal  costs and benefits of the 1990 CAAA.  Our
intent is that this report and its predecessor, the  ret-
rospective  analysis, together provide  a comprehen-
sive assessment of current and expected future clean
air regulatory programs and their costs and benefits.

    Because of the time  and resources necessary to
conduct this type of comprehensive  prospective as-
sessment, however, and the ongoing refinements in
Clean Air  Act regulatory programs, the estimates
presented in this report do not reflect some recent

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
major developments in EPA's clean air program.
The prospective analysis, for example, does not cap-
ture the benefits and costs of EPA's recent revision
of the participate matter and ozone National Ambi-
ent Air Quality Standards  (NAAQS),  the recently
proposed  Tier  II tailpipe standards, or the recently
finalized regional haze standards.  Neither costs nor
benefits of those actions are reflected in  the estimates
presented here.  In most cases, Regulatory  Impact
Analyses  (RIAs)  for those  actions  did incorporate
the section 812 prospective Post-CAAA scenario  as
their starting point, or baseline, from which  the ac-
tions  were assessed, and in most respects the  RIAs
used a methodology consistent with that used here.1
As a result, cost and benefit estimates  presented  in
those RIAs can be considered incremental to the
primary estimates  presented in this document.

    In addition to  omitting these actions from the
assessment, this first prospective analysis required
locking in a set of emissions reductions to be  used  in
subsequent analyses  at a relatively early date (late
1996), and as a result we were  compelled to forecast
the implementation outcome of several pending pro-
grams.  The most important of these was the  then-
ongoing  Ozone  Transport  Assessment  Group
(OTAG)  recommendations for achieving regional-
scale reductions of emissions of ground-level ozone
precursors.  The NOx control program  incorporated
in the Post-CAAA scenario may not reflect the NOx
controls that are  actually implemented  in a regional
ozone transport rule.  We  acknowledge and  discuss
these  types of discrepancies and their impact on die
outcome of our analysis in  the document.

    Finally, despite our  efforts to  comprehensively
evaluate the costs and benefits of all provisions  of
the Clean Air  Act and its  Amendments, there re-
main a few7 categories of effects  that are not addressed
by either  the retrospective  or  prospective analyses.
For example, this first prospective analysis does not
assess the effect of CAAA provisions on lead expo-
sures, primarily because the 1990 Amendments do
    ' There arc minor differences in the assumptions used to
construct the Post- CAAA scenario for this analysis  and the
baseline used in the PM and ozone NAAQS RTA. For example,
the RIA baseline incorporates the effects of 7- and 10-year MACT
rules that are not reflected here,  because of the timing of the
two analyses, and the  RIA used a 95 percent rule-eiiecliveness
assumption.  In most  respects, however, the analyses are com-
patible.
not include major new provisions  for the control of
lead emissions.  The vast majority of lead emissions
sources present in 1970 were addressed by programs
initiated under the original Clean Air Act and the
1977 Amendments; evaluation of the costs and health
benefits of these programs were important elements
of the retrospective analysis.   In  the  retrospective,
however, wre  wrere unable to quantify the potentially
substantial ecological  benefits of controls on lead
emissions.  While this first prospective analysis  re-
flects a significantly greater investment in quantify-
ing ecological effects, for the reason stated above we
did not assess the ecological effects of lead in this
analysis either.  As a result, the ecological effects of
this persistent pollutant, past emissions of which may
continue to be released from soils  for many years,
are not captured by  either the  retrospective or pro-
spective analyses. In  addition, lead previously de-
posited to soils may be re-entrained in the air as road
dust, dust plumes from construction excavations, and
other particulate matter emission processes  subject
to 1990 CAAA  controls.   Reductions in this  re-en-
trainmen t of, and potential exposure to, pre-1990
emitted lead due to post-1990 control programs,
however, are not reflected in either the section 812
retrospective  (1970 to 1990) or prospective (1990 to
2010) benefit analyses.


          Air

    The first prospective analysis, despite the limi-
tations  discussed above, presents a comprehensive
estimate of costs and benefits of all titles of the 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments. The 1990 Amendments
consist  of the following eleven  titles:

    *   Title I.  Establishes a detailed and graduated
        program for the attainment and maintenance
        of the National Ambient Air Quality Stan-
        dards.

    *   Title II. Regulates mobile  sources and  es-
        tablishes requirements for reformulated gaso-
        line and clean  fuel vehicles.

    *   Title III. Expands  and modifies regulations
        of hazardous air pollutant emissions; and
        establishes a list of 189 hazardous air pollut-
        ants to be regulated.

-------
                                                                                     Chapter 1: Introduction
    *   Title IV. Establishes control programs for
       reducing acid rain precursors.

    •   Title V. Requires a new permitting system
       for primary sources of air pollution.

    •   Title VI. Limits emissions of chemicals that
       deplete stratospheric ozone.

    •   Title VII. Presents new  provisions for en-
       forcement.

       Titles VIII through XI.  Establishes miscel-
       laneous provisions  for issues such as disad-
       vantaged business concerns, research,  train-
       ing, new regulation of outer continental  shelf
       sources, and assistance  for people who lose
       their jobs  as a result of the Clean Air Act
       Amendments.

    As part of the requirements under Title  VIII,
section 812 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990 requires the EPA to analyze  the costs and ben-
efits to human health and the environment that are
attributable to the  Clean Air Act.  In addition, sec-
tion 812  directs EPA to measure the effects of this
statute on economic growth, employment, produc-
tivity, cost of living, and the overall economy of the
United States.



Target

    The  prospective analysis compares the overall
health, welfare, ecological and  economic benefits of
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment  programs to
the costs  of these programs.  By examining the over-
all effects of the Clean Air Act, this analysis comple-
ments  the  Regulatory  Impact Analyses (RIAs) de-
veloped by EPA over the years to evaluate individual
regulations. Resources were used more  efficiently by
recognizing that these  RIAs, and other EPA analy-
ses, provide complete information about the  costs
and benefits  of specific rules. Within  this analysis,
costs  can be reliably attributed to individual  pro-
grams, but the  broad-scale approach adopted in the
prospective study precludes  reliable re-estimation of
the benefits  of individual  standards or programs.
Similar to  the  retrospective benefits analysis, this
study calculates the change in incidences of adverse
effects implied by changes in  ambient concentrations
of air pollutants. However, pollutant emissions re-
ductions achieved contribute  to  changes in ambient
concentrations of those, or secondarily formed, pol-
lutants in ways that are highly complex, interactive,
and often nonlinear. Therefore, benefits cannot be
reliably matched to provision-specific changes  in
emissions or costs.

    Focusing 011 the broader target variables of over-
all costs and overall benefits of the Clean Air Act,
the EPA Project Team adopted an approach based
on construction and comparison of two distinct sce-
narios: a "Pre-CAAA" and a "Post-CAAA"  scenario.
The  Pre-CAAA scenario essentially freezes federal,
state, and local air pollution controls at the levels  of
stringency and effectiveness which  prevailed in 1990.
The  Post-CAAA scenario  assumes that all federal,
state, and local rules promulgated pursuant to, or in
support of, the 1990 CAAA were implemented.  This
analysis then estimates the differences between the
economic and  environmental outcomes associated
with these two scenarios.  For more information on
the scenarios and their relationship  to historical
trends, see Chapter 2 and  Appendix A  of this docu-
ment.



    Similar  to the retrospective analysis, we made
two key assumptions during the scenario design pro-
cess  to avoid miring the analytical process in endless
speculation.   First, as stated above, we  froze air pol-
lution controls at 1990 levels throughout  the  Pre-
CAAA scenario.  Second,  we assumed  that the  geo-
graphic distributions of population and economic
activity remain the same between the two scenarios,
although these distributions do change over  time
under both  scenarios to reflect expected patterns  of
high  and low population and economic  growth
across the country.

    The  first assumption is an  obvious simplifica-
tion.  In the absence of the 1990 CAAA, one would
expect to see some air pollution abatement activity,
either voluntary or due to state or local regulation.
It is conceivable that state  and local regulation would
have required air pollution abatement  equal to -or
even greater than- that required by the  1990 CAAA;

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
particularly since some states, most notably Califor-
nia, have in the past done so.  If one were to assume
that state and local regulations would have been
equivalent to  1990 CAAA standards, then a cost-
benefit analysis of the 1990 CAAA would be a mean-
ingless exercise since both costs and benefits would
equal zero.  Any attempt to predict how states' and
localities' regulations would have  differed  from the
1990 CAAA would  be too speculative to support
the credibility of the ensuing analysis.  Instead, the
Pre-CAAA scenario has been structured to reflect
the assumption that states and localities would not
have  invested further  in  air pollution control pro-
grams after 1990 in the absence of the federal CAAA.
Thus, this analysis  accounts for all  costs  and ben-
efits of air pollution control  from 1990 to
2010  and does not speculate about the frac-
tion of costs and benefits attributable exclu-
sively to the federal CAAA.  Nevertheless,
it is important to note that state  and local
governments and private initiatives  are re-
sponsible for  a significant portion of these
total  costs and total benefits. In the end,
the benefits of air pollution  controls result
from partnerships among all levels of gov-
ernment and  with the active participation
and cooperation of private entities and indi-
viduals.
    The second assumption concerns chang-
ing demographic patterns in response to air
pollution.  In the hypothetical Pre-CAAA
scenario, air quality is worse than the actual
1990 conditions and the projected air qual-
ity in the Post-CAAA scenario.  It  is pos-
sible that  under the Pre-CAAA scenario
more people, relative to the  Post-CAAA
case, would move away from the most
heavily polluted areas.  Rather than specu-
late on  the scale  of population movement,
the analysis assumes no differences in demo-
graphic patterns between the two scenarios.
Similarly, the  analysis assumes no differences
between the  two scenarios with respect to
the spatial pattern of economic activity.

Analytic

    The analysis comprises a sequence of six
basic steps, summarized below and described
                                                      in detail later in this report.  These six steps, listed in
                                                      order of completion, are:
                                                          (1)  emissions modeling
                                                          (2)  direct cost estimation
                                                             air quality modeling
                                                             health  and environmental effects estimation
                                                             economic valuation
                                                          (6)  results aggregation and uncertainty  charac-
                                                             terization

                                                          Figure 1-1 summarizes the analytical sequence
                                                      used to develop the prospective results; we describe
                                                      the  analytic process in greater detail below.
                                            Figure 1-1
                                            Analytic Sequence for
                                            First Section 812 Prospective Analysis
                                                                Comparison of Benefits
                                                                     and Costs

-------
                                                                                        Chapter 1: Introduction
    The  first step of the analysis is die estimation of
the effect of the 1990 CAAA on emissions sources.
We generated emissions estimates through a three
step process: (1) construction of an emissions inven-
tory for the base year (1990); (2)  projection of emis-
sions for the  Pre-CAAA case  for two target years,
2000 and 2010, assuming a  freeze on emissions  con-
trol regulation at 1990 levels and continued economic
progress, consistent with sector-specific Bureau of
Economic Analysis economic activity projections;
and (3) construction of Post-CAAA estimates for the
same two target years, using the same set of economic
activity projections used in the Pre-CAAA case but
with regulatory  stringency, scope, and timing  con-
sistent with EPA's  CAAA  implementation plan (as
of late 1996).  The analysis reflects application of
utility and other sector-specific  emissions models
developed and used in various  offices of EPA's Of-
fice of Air and Radiation.  These emissions models
provide estimates of emissions  of six criteria air pol-
lutants2  from each of several  key emitting sectors.
We provide more details in Chapter 2 and Appen-
dix A.

    The  emissions modeling step is a critical compo-
nent of die analysis, because it establishes  consistency
between the subsequent cost and benefit estimates
that we develop. Estimates of direct compliance costs
to achieve the emissions reductions  estimated in the
first step are generated as either an integral or subse-
quent output from the  emissions estimation mod-
els, depending on the model used.  For example, the
Integrated Planning Model used to estimate emissions
and compliance  costs for the utility sector  develops
an optimal allocation of reductions of sulfur and ni-
trogen oxides taking into account the regulatory flex-
ibility inherent in the Title IV trading schemes for
emissions allocations.   In a few cases, for example
the Title V permitting requirements, we  estimate
public and private  costs incurred to implement the
    2  The six pollutants are participate matter (separate esti-
mates for each of PM|f and PM25), sulfur dioxide (SO,), nitro-
gen oxides (NOJ, carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic com-
pounds (VOCs), and ammonia (NH,).  One of the CAA criteria
pollutants, ozone (O^), is formed in the atmosphere through the
interaction of sunlight and ozone  precursor pollutants such as
NOv and VOCs.  Ammonia is not a criteria pollutant, but is an
important input to the air quality  modeling  step because it af-
fects secondary particulate formation.  The sixth criteria pollut-
ant, lead (Pb), is  not included in this analysis since airborne
emissions  oi lead were virtually eliminated by pre-1990 Clean
Air Act programs.
regulatory requirements  through analysis of the rel-
evant RIAs conducted to support promulgation of
the rules.

    Emissions  estimates also form the  first step in
estimating benefits.  After the emissions inventories
are developed, they are  translated  into  estimates of
air quality  conditions  under each  scenario.  Given
the complexity,  data  requirements, and operating-
costs of state-of-the-art air quality models, and the
project's resource constraints, the EPA Project Team
adopts simplified, linear scaling approaches  for some
gaseous  pollutants.  However, for particulate  mat-
ter, ozone, and other  air quality conditions that in-
volve substantial non-linear formation processes  and/
or long-range  atmospheric transport and  transfor-
mation, the EPA Project Team invests  die time and
resources needed to use more sophisticated model-
ing systems.  For example,  we exercise EPA's Re-
gional Acid Deposition  Model/Regional Particulate
Model  (RADM/RPM)  to  estimate   secondarily
formed particulate  matter in the eastern U.S.

    Up to this  point of the analysis, modeled condi-
tions and outcomes establish  the Pre-CAAA and
Post-CAAA scenarios.  However,  at the air quality
modeling step, the analysis returns to a foundation
based 011 actual historical conditions and data.  Spe-
cifically, actual 1990 historical air quality  monitor-
ing data are used to define  the baseline conditions
from which the  Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA sce-
nario air quality projections  are  constructed. We
derive air quality conditions under the Pre-CAAA
scenario by scaling the  historical  data  adopted for
the base-year (1990) by the ratio of the modeled Pre-
CAAA and base-year  air quality.  Wre use  the  same
approach to estimate  future-year air quality for the
Post-CAAA scenario.  This method takes advantage
of the richness of  the monitoring  data  on air  qual-
ity, provides a realistic grounding for the benefit
measures, and  yet  retains analytical consistency by
using the same modeling process for both scenarios.
The outputs of this step of  the analysis are profiles
for each pollutant characterising air quality  condi-
tions at each monitoring site in the lower 48 states.

    The Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA  scenario air
quality profiles  serve as inputs  to a modeling system
that translates air quality to physical outcomes  (e.g.,
mortality,  emergency room visits, or crop yield

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
losses) through the  use  of concentration-response
functions.   Scientific literature on the health and
ecological effects of air pollutants provides the source
of these  concentration-response functions.  At this
point, we derive estimates of the differences between
the two  scenarios  in terms  of incidence rates for a
broad range of human health and other effects of air
pollution by year, by pollutant, and by geographic
area.

    In the next step, we use economic  valuation
models or coefficients to estimate the economic value
of the reduction in incidence of those adverse effects
amenable to monetization.   For example, a distribu-
tion of unit values derived from the economic litera-
ture provides estimates of the value of reductions in
mortality risk.  In  addition,  we  compile and present
benefits that cannot be expressed in economic terms.
In some  cases, we calculate  quantitative estimates of
scenario  differences   in  the  incidence  of  a
nonmonctizcd effect. In many cases, available data
and techniques are insufficient to support anything
more than a qualitative characterization of the change
in effects.

    Next, we compare costs and monetized  benefits
to provide  our primary estimate of the net economic
benefits of the 1990 CAAA and associated programs,
and a range of estimates around that  primary esti-
mate reflecting quantified uncertainties associated
with the physical effects and economic  valuation
steps.  The monetized benefits used in die net ben-
efit calculations reflect only a  portion of the total
benefits  due to limitations in analytical resources,
available data and models,  and the state of the  sci-
ence.  For  example,  in many cases wfe are unable to
quantify  or monetize the potentially large benefits
of air pollution controls  that result from protection
of the health, structure, and function of ecosystems.
In addition, although available scientific studies dem-
onstrate  clear links between air quality changes and
changes  in many human  health effects, the available
studies do not always provide the data needed to
quantify  and/or monetize some of these effects.

    Finally, we present a limited set of alternative
benefit estimates which reflect methods, models, or
assumptions  that differ from those we used to  de-
rive the primary net benefit estimate. We also quan-
tify some of the uncertainties  surrounding these  al-
ternative estimates.  In addition, beyond those vari-
ables for which alternative results  are estimated, we
conduct sensitivity analyses for a number of vari-
ables that may influence the primary net benefit es-
timate.  The primary estimate and the range around
this  estimate, however, reflect our current interpre-
tation of the  available literature; our judgments re-
garding the best available data, models, and  model-
ing methodologies; and the assumptions we consider
most appropriate to adopt in the  face of important
uncertainties.

    In addition, throughout the report at the end of
the chapter we summarize the major sources of un-
certainty for each analytic step.  Although the im-
pact of many of these uncertainties cannot be quan-
tified, we  qualitatively characterize the magnitude
of effect on our net benefit results by assigning one
of two  classifications to each source of uncertainty:
potentially major factors could, in our estimation,
have  effects of greater than five percent of the total
net benefits;  and  probably minor factors likely have
effects less  than five percent of total net benefits.



    The CAA requires RPA  to consult with an out-
side panel  of experts during the  development and
interpretation of the 812  studies.  This panel  of ex-
perts was organized in 1991  under  the auspices of
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) as the Advi-
sory Council  011 Clean Air Act Compliance Analy-
sis (hereafter, the  Council).   Organizing the review
committee  under the SAB ensured that highly quali-
fied  experts would review the section 812 studies in
an objective, rigorous, and publicly open manner
consistent with  the requirements and procedures of
the  Federal  Advisory  Committee Act  (FACA).
Council review  of the present study began in 1993
with  a review of the analytical design plan.  Since
the initial June  1993 meeting, the Council has met
many times to review proposed data,  proposed meth-
odologies, and interim results.  While the full  Coun-
cil retains  overall  review responsibility for the sec-
tion 812 studies,  some specific issues concerning
physical effects and air quality modeling were re-
ferred to subcommittees comprised of both Council
members and members of other  SAB committees.
The Council's Health and Ecological Effects Sub-
committee (ITEES) met several times and  provided

-------
                                                                                     Chapter 1: Introduction
its own review findings to the full Council.  Simi-
larly, the Council's Air Quality Modeling Subcom-
mittee  (AQMS) held in-person and teleconference
meetings to review  methodology proposals and
modeling results and conveyed its  review recommen-
dations to the parent committee.

    An interagency review was conducted, during
which  a number of analytical issues were discussed.
Conducting a benefit/cost analysis of a major stat-
ute such as the Clean Air Act requires scores of meth-
odological decisions.  Many of these  issues are the
subject of continuing discussion within the economic
and policy  analysis communities and within the
Administration.  Key issues include  the treatment
of uncertainty in the relationship between  particu-
late matter exposure and mortality; the valuation of
premature mortality; the  treatment of tax  interac-
tion effects; the assessment of stratospheric ozone
recovery; and the  treatment of ecological and wel-
fare effects.  These issues could not be resolved within
the constraints  of  this review.  Thus,  this  report re-
flects  the findings of the EPA and not necessarily-
other  agencies of  the Administration.



   The remainder of the main text  of this report
summarizes  the key methodologies and findings our
prospective  study.

   •    Chapter 2 summarizes emissions  modeling
        and  key elements of the regulatory scenarios.

   •    Chapter 3 discusses the direct cost estima-
        tion.

   •    Chapter 4 presents the air quality modeling
        methodology and sample results.

   •    Chapter 5  describes the approaches used and
        principal results obtained through  the hu-
        man health effects estimation process.

   *    Chapter 6  describes the human health effects
        economic valuation methodology  and re-
        sults.
    •   Chapter 7 summarizes  the ecological and
       other welfare effects analyses,  including as-
       sessments of commercial timber, agriculture,
       visibility, and other  categories  of effects.

    *   Chapter 8 presents the aggregated results of
       the cost and benefit estimates and describes
       and  evaluates important  uncertainties in the
       results.

    Additional  details regarding the methodologies
and results are presented in the appendices and in
the referenced  supporting documents.

    *   Appendix A provides additional detail on the
       sector-specific emissions modeling effort.

    •   Appendix B covers the direct costs.

    •   Appendix C provides details of the air qual-
       ity models used and results obtained.

    *   Appendix D presents the human health ef-
       fects estimation methodology and results.

    *   Appendix E describes the ecological  benefits
       estimation methods  and results.

    •   Appendix F presents the agricultural benefits
       estimation methodology and results.

    •   Appendix G provides details of the strato-
       spheric ozone analysis.

    •   Appendix H describes the methods  and as-
       sumptions used to value quantified effects
       of the CAA in economic terms.

    *   Appendix 1 describes areas of research which
       may increase comprehensiveness and/or re-
       duce uncertainties in effect estimates for fu-
       ture assessments.

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                     [Thispage left blank intentionally.]

-------
Emissions
    Estimation of pollutant emissions, a key com-
ponent of this prospective analysis, serves as the start-
ing point for subsequent benefit and cost estimates.
We focused the emissions analysis on  six major pol-
lutants:  volatile organic compounds (YOCs), nitro-
gen oxides  (NOJ, sulfur dioxide (SO,), carbon mon-
oxide (CO), particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of 10 microns or less  (PM]0), and fine par-
ticulate matter (PM25).1   For each of these pollut-
ants we projected 1990 emissions to the years 2000
and 2010 under two different scenarios:  a) the Pre-
CAAA  scenario which assumes no additional con-
trol  requirements would be implemented beyond
those m place  when the 1990 Amendments were
passed; and b) the Post-(]AAA. scenario which incor-
porates the effects of controls authorized by the 1990
Amendments.  We compare the emissions estimates
under each of these  scenarios to forecast the effect
of the  CAAA requirements on future emissions.

    This chapter consists of four sections. The first
section  provides  an  overview7 of our approach for
developing the Pre- and Post-CAAA control sce-
narios and  projecting emissions from  1990 levels to
2000 and 2010.  The second section summarizes our
emissions projections for the years 2000 and 2010
and presents our estimates of changes in future emis-
sions resulting from the implementation of the 1990
Amendments.  The  third section compares these re-
sults writh other estimates that are based upon more
    1 We also estimated ammonia (NH,) emissions.  NH, in-
fluences the formation of secondary PM (PM formed as a result
of atmospheric chemical processes). We used NH, emissions
estimates as an input during the air quality modeling phase of
the prospective analysis when estimating future-year ambient
PM concentrations. However, we did not examine the human
health and environmental effects of exposure to NH  In addi-
tion to NH,, we also  estimated mercury  (Hg) emissions.  We
qualitatively evaluated  the effects of Hg  emissions on ecologi-
cal systems, but we did not examine the impact of Hg on hu-
man health.  We did not estimate the effect of the CAAA on
lead (Pb) emissions. By 1990 most major airborne Pb emission
sources were already  controlled and the CAAA has minimal
additional impact on Pb emissions.
recent emissions data.  Finally, we conclude this chap-
ter writh a summary of the key uncertainties associ-
ated writh estimating emissions.
Overview Of

    We projected  emissions  for  five major source
categories:  industrial point sources, utilities, nonroad
engines/vehicles, motor vehicles, and area sources
(see Table 2-1).2  The basic method involves esti-
mating emissions in the 1990 base-year,  adjusting
the base-year emissions to  reflect projected growth
in the  level of pollution-generating  activity by 2000
and 2010 in the absence of additional CAAA require-
ments, and modifying these projections  to reflect
future-year control assumptions.  The resulting esti-
mates depend largely upon three factors:  the method
for selecting the base-year inventory, the  indicators
used to forecast growth and the effectiveness of fu-
ture controls, and the specific  regulatory  programs
incorporated in the Pre- and Post-CAAA  scenarios.

    We constructed  the  base-year  inventory using
1990 emissions levels.  For all  of the air  pollutants
examined in this analysis except  particulate matter,
we selected emissions levels from Version 3 of  the
National Particulates  Inventory (NPI) to serve as  the
baseline.  This  inventory consists of emissions data
compiled primarily by the National Acid  Precipita-
tion Assessment Program (NAPAP), EPA's Office
of Mobile Sources  (OMS), and  the Federal Highway
Administration  (FHWA). For both  PM,5  and PMin,
however, wre updated NPI  estimates to incorporate
changes in the  methodology  used to  calculate fugi-
tive dust emissions. Adoption of this new  technique,
also used to develop EPA's National Emission Trend
    1 We estimated utility and industrial point source emis-
sions at die plant/facility level.  We estimated nonroad engine/
vehicle,  motor vehicle, and area source emissions at the county
level.

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
     Table 2-1
     Major Emissions Source Categories
    Source Category
Examples
     Industrial Point Sources
boilers, cement kilns, process heaters, turbines
     Utilities
electricity producing utilities
     Nonroad Engines/Vehicles
aircraft, construction equipment, lawn and garden equipment,
locomotives, marine engines
     Motor Vehicles
buses, cars, trucks (sources that usually operate on roads and
highways)
    Area Sources
agricultural tilling, dry cleaners, open burning, wildfires
(NET)   PM,5 and PM.|() inventory, leads  to  lower
estimates of fugitive dust emissions  and therefore of
overall  primary PM.J

    Once we established the base-year  inventory, we
projected emissions to the years 2000 and  2010, ac-
counting for the influences expected to cause  future
emissions to differ from  1990 levels.  For all but util-
ity sources, we rely on an emissions analysis using
the Emissions Reduction  and Cost Analysis Model
(ERCAM) which incorporates the effects of the level
of pollution-generating  activity and the stringency
and  success  of regulations designed to protect air
quality.  In this analysis,  we view  changes in eco-
nomic growth as  an important indicator of future
activity levels and thus,  future emissions.  We used
1995 Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) Gross
State Product (GSP) projections  to  forecast the
growth  of emissions from industrial point sources.
We relied on BEA GSP projections as well as data
on BEA predicted changes in population to estimate
future emissions from nonroad and area  sources.4
We used BEA population growth as an indicator of
the increase in nonroad  emissions from  recreational
marine  vessels, recreational vehicles, and lawn/gar-
den equipment as well as an indicator of the increase
in area  source solvent emissions (e.g., VOC emis-
sions from dry cleaners).  For motor vehicle sources,
we estimated  the growth in activity based  primarily
on the  projected increase in vehicle miles traveled
(VMT).  Wre  develop future VMT estimates using
the EPA MOBILE fuel  consumption model.

    3  Primary PM consists of directly emitted  particles  such  as
wood smoke and road dust.  Secondary PM forms in the atmo-
sphere as  a result of atmospheric chemical  reactions.
    4  The growth forecast for  area source agricultural tilling is
based oil projections oi acres planted, not BEA GSP and popu-
lation projections.
                  We estimated the impact of CAAA regulations
              on industrial point source, nonroad, motor vehicle,
              and area source emissions based on expected control
              efficiency and  rule effectiveness.  Control efficiency
              represents  the percentage reduction  in emissions
              anticipated  as a result of the implementation of the
              CAAA, assuming full compliance and successful
              operation of all control mechanisms.  The rule ef-
              fectiveness  factor accounts for equipment malfunc-
              tion,  non-compliance, and  other circumstances that
              influence the overall  effectiveness of air pollution
              regulations.  We selected a rule effectiveness of 80
              percent as  the standard  for  this analysis which we
              applied to  stationary source NOx and  VOC  con-
              trols.5 Rule effectiveness was not calculated for mo-
              bile source  controls as an adjustment factor separate
              from the emissions rates estimated for  the various
              vehicle classes.

                  To estimate future utility source  emissions, we
              relied on the Integrated Planning Model (IPM).   This
              optimization model forecasts, for the  48 contiguous
              states and the  District of Columbia, emissions  from
              all  existing  utility power generation units, as well as
              from independent power producers and other co-
              generation  facilities that sell wholesale  power and
              are included in the North American Electric  Reli-
              ability Council  (NERC) data base for reliability  plan-
              ning.   The model  considers future capacity7 additions
              by both utilities and independent power producers
              which might cause an increase in emissions.  In  addi-
              tion,  the model is capable  of producing baseline air
                  3  At the  time we selected the general  rule effectiveness for
              use in  this analysis, 80 percent was the standard factor applied in
              air pollution modeling.  More recent analyses have used  higher
              rule effectiveness values. If a higher rule effectiveness value had
              been used in this  analysis, emissions reduction estimates  would
              be larger and  the estimated benefits associated with  air quality
              improvements would be greater.
                                                   10

-------
                                                                                         Chapter 2: Emissions
emissions forecasts and estimates of air emissions
levels under various control options at the national
and NERC regional and subregioiial level.  We used
IPM to estimate base-year  (1990) utility source emis-
sions and to  project  future-year  (2000  and  2010)
emissions under both  the Pre- and Post-CAAA sce-
narios.

    Using emissions analysis or IPM, we  estimated
future emissions for each of the five major  source
categories under both  the Pre- and Post-CAAA sce-
narios.  While the  selection of the base-year inven-
tory,  emission growth factors, and  rate of regula-
tory effectiveness all influence the  emissions projec-
tions, the difference between Pre- and Post-CAAA
estimates is primarily  determined by the difference
in control assumptions incorporated in the two pro-
jection  scenarios.



    We developed two contrasting emissions con-
trol scenarios, the  Pre-CAAA scenario and the Post-
CAAA  scenario. The Pre-CAAA scenario  maintains
the air  pollution regulatory requirements which ex-
isted  in 1990  through the 2000 and  2010 analytical
period  and  serves as  a baseline  against which we
measure the  changes  in emissions projected  under
the Post-CAAA scenario.6  This latter scenario as-
sumes the implementation of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments  and  incorporates the influences of the
following provisions:

    •   Title I VOC and NOx reasonably available
        control technology (RACT)  and reasonable
        further progress  (RFP)  requirements for
        ozone nonattamment areas;
    •   Title II motor vehicle and nonroad engine/
        vehicle provisions;
    •   Title III 2- and 4-ycar maximum achievable
        control technology  (MACT) standards;
    *   Title IV SO, and  NO  emissions  programs
        for utilities;
    6  We also  attempted to incorporate in the Pre-CAAA
(baseline) scenario the non-CAAA regulations and policies we
expect will have  a significant effect on emissions between 1990
and 2010. For example, the TPM, which we used to estimate
utility emissions, incorporates the effect of the deregulation of
railroad rates on SO, emissions.  IPM accounts for the influence
of the future cost of low-sulfur coal prices expected to occur as
a result oi lower railroad rales. The impact oi prescribed burn-
ing policies ior private and federally owned lands on PM emis-
sions is also incorporated in the Pre-CAAA  scenario.
    •   Title  V  permitting system  for  primary
        sources of air pollution; and
    •   Title VI emissions limits for chemicals that
        deplete stratospheric ozone.'

    The Post-CAAA scenario also assumes the imple-
mentation of region-wide NOx controls  and a cap-
and-trade system designed to reduce emissions dur-
ing the summer  months from  large utility and in-
dustrial sources in the 37 easternmost states that com-
prise the  Ozone  Transport Assessment Group
(OTAG) domain.8  In addition, the  Post-CAAA sce-
nario incorporates the effects of a similarly  designed
trading program for the 11 northeast states that com-
prise the Ozone Transport Region (OTR). This trad-
ing program is consistent with Phase II  of the Ozone
Transport Commission (OTC)  Memorandum  of
Understanding (MOU).9  \Vc provide more detailed
discussion of both Pre- and Post-CAAA  scenario
development  in Appendix A.


Results

    The results of  the Pre- and Post-CAAA projec-
tions indicate that  the  1990 Clean Air Act Amend-
ments will likely  have a significant  effect on future
emissions of air pollutants. Table 2-2  displays both
base-year (1990) and future-year (2000 and 2010)
emissions estimates for the  modeled scenarios along
with the percent change from  Pre- to Post-CAAA
VOC, NOx, SO2, CO,  PM1(), and PM2, projections.
A more detailed breakout  of 2010 Pre- and Post-
CAAA emissions estimates, displaying  emissions for
each major source  category,  is contained in Table 2-
3.  Figures 2-1 through 2-6 show the emissions pro-
jections for each  of the pollutants examined in this
analysis.

    Emissions projections for VOC, NOx, SO,, and
CO, displayed in Figures 2-1 through 2-4, follow
    '  For a more detailed discussion of the CAAA provisions
incorporated in the Post-CAAA scenario, see Appendix A.
    8  The NO control program incorporated in the Post-
CAAA scenario may not reflect the NO., controls that are actu-
ally implemented in  a regional ozone transport rule.
    '  The Posl-CAAA scenario does not incorporate any  in-
fluences oi file recently revised PM and o^one NAAQS regula-
tions or any impact of the recently proposed Tier II tailpipe
standards.
                                                   11

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Table 2-2
   Summary of National Annual Emissions Projections
   (thousand tons)
Pollutant
VOC
NOX
SO2
CO
Primary
PM10
Primary
PM2.5
1990
Base-
Year
22,715
22,747
22,361
94,385
28,289
7,091
2000
Pre-
CAAA
24,410
25,021
24,008
95,572
28,768
7,353
2000
Post-
CAAA
17,874
18,414
18,013
80,919
28,082
7,216
2000
%
Change
-27%
-26%
-25%
-15%
-2%
-2%
2010
Pre-
CAAA
27,559
28,172
26,216
107,034
28,993
7,742
2010
Post-
CAAA
17,877
17,290
18,020
81,943
28,035
7,447
2010
%
Change
-35%
-39%
-31%
-23%
-3%
-4%
   Notes: Totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii.
         Percent change between Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA scenarios.
similar patterns.  Pre-CAAA estimates indicate emis-
sions  of these pollutants would increase, on average,
by almost 20 percent from 1990 to 2010.  These in-
creases reflect the expectation that anticipated growth
in activity levels  in the relevant emitting sectors will
more  than offset reductions achieved by pre-1990
control programs. While we predict relatively steady
growth in emissions in the absence of the 1990
Amendments, projections show emissions of these
four pollutants would increase at a slightly  faster rate
over the  last ten years of  the 20 year projection pe-
riod.

    Post-CAAA estimates of VOC,  NOx, SO,, and
CO emissions for the modeled regulatory scenarios
decrease  significantly  from  1990 to  2000 and then
plateau, remaining relatively constant from 2000  to
2010.   The initial decrease is  triggered by the imple-
mentation of die CAAA and  the associated controls.
After  cleaner means of production are adopted, bet-
ter emissions control technologies are implemented,
and other required changes and  improvements are
made, emissions reduction slows and in some  in-
stances stops all together;  emissions may even begin
to increase.  Although the Post-CAAA estimates  for
each of the above mentioned pollutants  show little
or no change in  the level of emissions from 2000  to
2010, an overall comparison of our  Pre-  and Post-
CAAA projections indicates that during this time
period the 1990 Amendments continue to have an
increasingly beneficial effect on  emission  levels.

    Comparison of Pre- and Post- CAAA emissions
estimates reveals that by 2010, estimated VOC emis-
sions will be 35 percent lower as a result of the imple-
mentation of the CAAA than they would have been
if no  new control requirements,  beyond those  in
place  in 1990, were mandated. This  sizeable change
in emissions attributable to the Amendments is due
largely to estimated VOC reductions from motor
vehicle and area sources.   The 2010 Post-CAAA es-
timate for these two source categories combined is
8.2  million tons lower than the Pre-CAAA projec-
tion, a total which accounts for 84  percent of the
predicted difference in VOC emissions  estimated
under the two  scenarios.

    Based on the  regulatory programs incorporated
in the Post-CAAA scenario, we project  that NOx
emissions will be  reduced by the  greatest percent-
age.  Comparison  of projections for the  year 2010
indicates the Post-CAAA NOx  estimate is 39 per-
cent lower than the Pre-CAAA  estimate,  represent-
ing  a decrease in emissions of 10.8 million tons. We
project nearly half of this  reduction will come from
utilities, while the remaining portions  will come from
cuts in motor vehicle  and non-utility point source
emissions.
                                                  12

-------
                                                                                         Chapter 2: Emissions
    Figure 2-3 shows that by 2010 we anticipate SO,
levels will be 31 percent lower than  they would have
been under the Pre-CAAA  scenario. We project 96
percent of the 8.2 million ton difference between
Pre- and Post-CAAA estimates will result from regu-
lation  of utilities, while the  remaining  reduction
comes from motor vehicles.

    We estimate 2010 Post-CAAA CO emissions
will be 81.9 million tons, 23 percent lower than the
Pre-CAAA projection.   Much of this reduction we
project will be achieved  as a result of nonattainment
(Title I)  and motor vehicle provisions (Title II) of
the 1990  Amendments.  The  more influential pro-
grams  (m order of importance)  are expected  to be
enhanced vehicle emission inspections, wintertime
oxygenated fuel use,  and LEV program adoption.

    Figures 2-5 and 2-6  indicate that the 1990  Clean
Air Act Amendments have more modest effects on
primary  PM10 and PM25 emissions.10  For both of
these pollutants, Pre-CAAA projections  increase at
a slow  rate  from 1990  to 2010.  Post-CAAA emis-
sions estimates  for primary PM10 and PM2_, how-
ever, follow different  paths.  While we  estimate
implementation  of the CAAA will cause primary
PM10 levels to  slowly decrease from 1990 to  2010,
Post-CAAA projections  indicate primary PM23 emis-
sions will actually rise  despite the influence of the
CAAA.  Overall, however, emissions of primary
PM10 and PM,5 both  will be approximately four per-
cent lower in 2010 than they would  have been with-
out the CAAA.11

    The significant influence of area  source emissions
on primary PM  emissions levels, combined with the
limited regulation of this  major source category,
explains the limited effect of the CAAA on primary
particulate matter emissions. According to data used
in this  analysis, area sources account for over 90 per-
cent of primary  PMin emissions and  over 80 percent
    *c EPA projected PM1(, and PM,/5 levels  holding natural
source emissions of particulate matter constant at 1990 levels.
The estimates presented in Figures 2-5 and 2-6 have been ad-
justed; these estimates represent total PM emissions minus natu-
ral source emissions (wind erosion).

    :" Directly emitted PM, such as fugitive dust, is referred to
as primary PM. Secondary PM is not directly emitted, but rather
iorms in the atmosphere.  NO^ and SO0 are two examples oi
secondary PM precursors.
of primary PM,_ emissions.12  As a result, even the
successful reduction of motor vehicle and nonroad
emissions have only a  slight impact on overall pri-
mary PM]0 and PM25 estimates  developed for this
study.13  Furthermore,  the CAAA's most significant
primary PM area source controls  target emissions in
counties not in compliance with  the  National  Am-
bient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).14   Currently,
however, there are fewer than  85 counties in the
country that are not in attainment with the national
standards.  Emissions changes  in  these areas are ca-
pable of having only a  minor influence on  the over-
all primary PM level  in the United  States.  Even
minor changes in primary PM emissions leading to
minor changes in the concentrations  of this pollut-
ant,  however,  are significant.  In the subsequent
portions of this analysis, sizable benefits are  estimated
to result from small reductions  in PM concentra-
tions in  the atmosphere.

    The  seemingly  small impact on direct  PM emis-
sions resulting from implementation  of the CAAA
depicted in  Figures 2-5 and 2-6 can be misleading.
While  these figures illustrate the  impact of the  1990
CAAA on primary PM emissions, it is important to
remember  that ambient PiVt concentrations are in-
fluenced by the presence of both primary and sec-
ondary PM.  VOCs, NOx, and  SO,, all pollutants
regulated by the CAA, are  secondary PM precur-
sors.  The reduction in the emissions  of these three
pollutants also leads to  lower overall PM concentra-
tions in  the atmosphere.  The complete  impact of
the CAAA on PM  thus is not  fully captured by Fig-
ures  2-5 and 2-6.  Additional discussion of the influ-
ence of the CAAA on PM and ambient air quality is
provided in Chapter 4  and Appendix C.
    As part of this prospective analysis we  also esti-
mated future-year NH emissions  The 1990 Amend-
ments, however, do not include provisions  designed
    ;2 A.s discussed on pages 18 and 20 and in Table 2-5, how-
ever, some recent data indicate that the composition data used
in this analysis may underestimate the contribution from mo-
tor vehicle carbonaceous emissions.

    13 The difference between 2010 Pre- and Post-CAAA esti-
mates for PM  and PM  motor vehicle emissions is 31 percent
and 39 percent respectively. Hie difference between 2010 Pre-
and Post CAAA estimates for PM]0 and PM2R nonroad emis-
sions is 19 percent and 20  percent respectively.

    !" The PA1 NAAQS referred to here is the 50  ug/m' (an-
nual mean) 150 ug/m3 (daily mean) standard.
                                                   13

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table 2-3
Summary by Source Category of National Annual Emission Projections to 2010
(thousand tons)
Source
Pollutant Category
VOC Utility
Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL
NOX Utility
Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL
CO Utility
Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL
SO2 Utility
Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL
Primary Utility
PM10 Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL
Primary Utility
PM25 Point
Area
Nonroad
Motor Vehicle
TOTAL


1990
37
3,500
10,000
2,100
6,800
23,000
7,400
2,900
2,200
2,800
7,400
23,000
330
6,000
12,000
14,000
62,000
94,000
16,000
4,600
1,000
240
570
22,000
280
930
26,000
340
360
28,000
110
590
5,800
290
290
7,100

2010
Pre-CAAA
49
4,200
13,000
2,600
7,300
28,000
9,100
3,600
3,000
3,400
9,100
28,000
450
7,400
14,000
19,000
66,000
107,000
18,000
6,000
1,500
240
770
26,000
310
1,200
27,000
410
300
29,000
120
750
6,300
360
230
7,700

2010
Post-CAAA
50
3,500
8,500
1,900
3,900
18,000
3,800
2,200
3,000
2,700
5,600
17,000
460
7,400
14,000
18,000
42,000
82,000
9,900
6,000
1,500
240
410
18,000
280
1,200
26,000
340
210
28,000
110
750
6,100
290
140
7,400


% Change
2%
-1 9%
-36%
-28%
-46%
-35%
-58%
-39%
-1%
-20%
-39%
-39%
2%
0%
0%
-4%
-37%
-23%
-44%
0%
0%
0%
-47%
-31%
-9%
0%
-3%
-1 9%
-31%
-3%
-8%
0%
-2%
-20%
-39%
-4%
         NOTES:  Table may not sum due to rounding. Percentage change was calculated prior to rounding.
                                                         14

-------
                                                                                        Chapter 2: Emissions
to regulate  Nil,  As a result, the Pre- and Post-
CAAA estimates follow a similar upward trend.  We
estimate  NH3 emissions will increase roughly 55
percent from 1990 to 2010.  Although we do not
estimate the costs  and benefits associated with NH3
controls and changes  in NH  ambient concentrations
as part of this analysis, estimation of NTT. emissions
is an important part of the prospective study.  NH3
is a secondary PM precursor, and we relied on  fu-
ture-year NH3 emissions estimates as  model input
to help us estimate PM concentrations.

    We also estimated the effect of CAAA provi-
sions  on mercury (Hg) emissions  for five  separate
Hg emissions sources:  medical waste incinerators
(MWI), municipal  waste combustors (MWCs), elec-
tric utility plants, hazardous waste combustors, and
chlor-alkali plants.13  Together, these sources account
for 75 to  80 percent of national anthropogenic air-
borne Hg emissions.  In this analysis we qualitatively
examine the effects of mercury emissions reductions
on ecological systems  (see Chapter 7 and Appendix
E).  We do not, however, evaluate the impact of Hg
on human health.

    Table 2-4 displays, for each  emission category,
base-year (1990) and future-year (2000 and 2010) Pre-
and Post-CAAA emissions estimates.  The table also
shows the difference between Pre- and Post-CAAA
estimates for each projection year.  Overall, the re-
sults of this analysis indicate that the  1990 Amend-
ments will provide a reduction in Hg emissions of
44.2 tons per year (tpy) in the year 2000 and a reduc-
tion of 56.2 tpy in 2010.  These changes represent a
35 percent reduction in airborne  mercury emissions
for the year 2000 and a 42 percent reduction for 2010.
We estimate  that most of  the reduction will  be the
result  of New Source Performance Standards for
MWI and MWCs.
    Table 2-4
    Airborne Mercury Emission Estimates
2000 Emissions (tons)
Source Category
Medical Waste Incin.
Municipal Waste Comb.
Electric Utility Generation
Hazardous Waste Comb.
Chlor-Alkali Plants
1990
Emissions
(tons)
50
54
51.3
6.6
9.8
Pre-
CAAA
17.9
31.2
63.0
6.6
6.0
Post-
CAAA
1.3
5.5
61.1
6.6
6.0
Total CAAA Benefits (Reductions)
Diff.
16.6
25.7
1.9
0
0
44.2
2010 Emissions
Pre-
CAAA
22.6
33.8
68.5
6.6
2.0

Post-
CAAA
1.6
6.0
65.4
3.0
1.3

(tons)
Diff.
21.0
27.8
3.1
3.6
0.7
56.2
    ^ With the exception of electric utility plant Hg emissions
that were estimated using 1PM., we relied on previously gener-
ated estimates (typically from recently conducted RTAs) to evalu-
ate the impact oi the CAAA on Hg emissions. For a more com-
plete discussion of the methodology,  see Appendix A.
                                                   15

-------
 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure 2-1
Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario VOC Emissions
Estimates
K  20 -

I V
W c
E 1 15-

§!
£  10
                                                    Figure 2-2
                                                    Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario NOX Emissions
                                                    Estimates
                                                         30
                                                     £    25-
                                                     o

                                                     i_20-
                                                     .c  tn
                                                     
-------
                                                                                      Chapter 2: Emissions
Figure 2-4
Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario CO Emissions
Estimates
     120
o
i-
    100 -
     80
5?
in =
c °  60
     40

     20
      1980
                     1990
                                   2000
                            Year
                      Re-CAAA
                                 Fbst-CAAA
   30
   25
   20 +
o —
= I 15 ••
| t
w  10 |
    5 --
    1980
                     1990
                                       2000
                           Year
                     - Pre-CAAA •
                               - Fbst-CAAA
                                                 2010
Figure 2-6
Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario Primary PM25
Emissions  Estimates
                                                    Figure 2-5
                                                    Pre- and Post-CAAA Scenario Primary PM10
                                                    Emissions Estimates
                                                         30
                                                         25 -
                                                         20-
                                                     (/> c
                                                     c | 15 +
                                                     c i
                                                     o — 10-
                                                          1980
                                                                         1990           2000
                                                                                Year
                                                                                                     2010
                                                                         - Re-CAAA —•— Rost-CAAA
                                                  17

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                     of




    Comparison of the emissions  projections gener-
ated by the prospective analysis to historical  emis-
sions estimates drawn  from the National  Air Pollut-
ant and Emissions Trends reports (Trends)  provides
a check on the reasonableness of our emissions in-
ventories.  In addition, comparison of emissions pro-
jections from  the  prospective analysis  with those of
the Grand  Canyon Visibility Transport Commis-
sion (GCVTC) study of western regional haze pro-
vides an initial test of the sensitivity of emissions
projections  to base-year inventories and  growth as-
sumptions.  Analysis of PM emissions and  compari-
son of estimated and observed PM data also help us
evaluate the prospective study's emissions estimation
methods.

    'Trends reports contain historical estimates  of
annual VOC,  NOx,  SO,, CO, and PM10, emissions.
While the  most recent report only provides  emis-
sions data  through the  first half of the 1990s, com-
parison of these estimates from 1990 to 1996 with
emissions  trends  projected under the Post-CAAA
scenarios reveals  that emissions figures  from both
are similar. The  disparity that does exist between
die two sets of estimates largely stems from the fact
that the Post-CAAA  scenario trend  lines running
from 1990 to  2000 consist of only two data points.
As  a result, Post-CAAA trend lines cannot capture
yearly fluctuations in emissions and the exact tim-
ing of emissions cuts.   Only for NOx  are the  Trends
and Post-CAAA estimates significantly different; this
is because the Trends report is still in the process of
incorporating the State's periodic emission inventory
into the NET database.  As  a result, Trends values
do not capture all  the  NOx emission reductions that
have  occurred since 1990.   For example, significant
reductions attributable  to reasonable available con-
trol technology- (RACT) requirements for major sta-
tionary source NO  emitters areas are not reflected
                  X
in the Trends figures.

    The Grand  Canyon Visibility Transport Com-
mission conducted an air pollution analysis for West-
ern States that projected emissions for selected pol-
lutants, including  NOx, SO_,  and PM25,  from 1990
base-year levels for the year 2000 and every tenth
subsequent year up  to 2040.  GCVTC estimates  of
future-year emissions levels differ from Post-CAAA
projections.  This disparity results from the  use  of
different base-year inventories in the two studies and
from specific regional reductions not  incorporated
in the prospective analysis scenarios.  Despite the
difference in GCVTC and Post-CAAA estimates,
the change in the level  of emissions from 1990  to
2010 predicted by the two studies is similar.   Com-
parison of both sets  of projections illustrates the sen-
sitivity of future-year emissions estimates to the base-
year inventory.

    The 1997 National  Air Quality and Emissions
Trends Report provides a summary of PM,5 con-
centration speciation data.  This report shows the
relative contribution of the major PM emissions
source components (crustal  material, carbonaceous
particles, nitrate,  and sulfatc)  to ambient PM,5 con-
centrations in urban and nonurban areas through-
out  the U.S.16  Comparison  of primary PM,5 emis-
sions estimates generated  for this analysis with the
observed  concentration  data presented in the 1997
report indicates that  die ratio  in die prospective study
of crustal material to primary carbonaceous particles
is high.  At least part of this apparent overestima-
tioii of crustal material and underestimation of car-
bonaceous participates, however,  is due to the fact
that much of the emitted crustal material  quickly
settles and does not have a  quantifiable impact on
ambient air quality.  In this analysis, we apply a fac-
tor of 0.2 to crustal emissions to estimate the frac-
tion of crustal PM25 that makes its way into the
"mixed layer" of the atmosphere  and influences pol-
lutant concentrations.  Figure  2-7  displays the
breakout  of primary PM_5 into its adjusted  crustal
and carbonaceous (elemental carbon  and organic
carbon) components.   The figure divides crustal
material into two subcategories, fugitive dust or in-
dustrial sources, based on the source of the material
and  also shows the  fraction of primary PM,,,. that is
    16  Crustal material is directly emitted from fugitive dust
sources  such as agricultural operations, construction, paved and
iinpaved roads, and wind erosion as well as from some indus-
trial sources such as metals processing.  Carbonaceous particles,
as  defined in the 1997 National Air Quality and Emissions
Trends  Report," are emitted directly and as condensed liquid
droplets irorn iuel combustion, burning oi forests, rangelands,
and fields; oil highway and highway mobile sources (gas and
diesel); and certain industrial processes".
                                                   18

-------
                                                                                      Chapter 2: Emissions
Figure 2-7
1990 Primary PM25 Emissions by EPA Region (tons/year)
                                                                          Region 1
                                                                          i
                                                                          i

                                                                       Region 2  ^^ Crustal- Fugitive Dust Sources
                                                                                     Crustal - Industrial Sources

                                                                    fcjion 3      £3 otherprimary
                                                                                     Elemental Carbon
                                                                                     Organic Carbon
                                                                                  o
                                                                                  100,000   450,000    850,000
neither crustal nor carbonaceous. The ratios of ad-
justed crustal material to primary carbonaceous par-
ticles presented in Figure  2-7  are in line with the
observed PM25 concentration data presented in the
1997 report.
Uncertainty In  Emission
Estimates

    Table 2-5 provides a list of sources of uncertainty
associated with estimating base-year emissions, the
expected direction of  bias introduced by each un-
certainty (if known), and the  relative significance of
each uncertainty in  the overall 812 benefits analysis.
The emissions estimates presented in the prospec-
tive analysis are characterized  by three major sources
of uncertainty:   estimation of the base-year inven-
tory, prediction of the growth in pollution-generat-
ing activity, and  assumptions  about future-year  con-
trols.

    Base-year emissions were estimated using emis-
sions factors that express the  relationship between a
particular human/industrial activity and the  level of
emissions.  The accuracy of base-year emissions esti-
mates varies from pollutant to pollutant, depending
largely on how directly the selected activity and
emissions correlate.  We likely estimated 1990 SO2
emissions with the greatest precision.  Sulfur diox-
ide emissions  are generated during combustion  of
sulfur-containing  fuel and are directly related to fuel
sulfur content.  In addition, we were able to   verify
these estimates through comparison with Continu-
ous Emission Monitoring (GEM) data.  As a result,
we were able to  accurately estimate SO2 emissions
using emissions factors based on data on  fuel usage
and fuel  sulfur content.  Nitrogen oxides are also a
product of fuel combustion, allowing us  to estimate
emissions of this pollutant using the same general
technique used  to estimate  SO2 emissions. However,
the processes involved in the formation of  NOx
during combustion are  more complicated than those
involved in the formation of SO2; thus, our NOx
emissions estimates are more variable and less cer-
tain than SO2  estimates.

    Volatile organic compounds, like SO2 and NOx,
are  products of fuel  combustion; however, these
compounds are also  a  product of evaporation.  To
estimate  evaporative emissions of this pollutant we
                                                  19

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
used emissions factors that relate changes in emis-
sions to changes in temperature.  Because future
meteorological  conditions are  difficult to predict,
the uncertainty associated with forecasting tempera-
ture influences the uncertainty in  our VOC emis-
sions estimates.  The likely significance of this un-
certainty, in terms of its impact on  the overall mon-
etary benefit  present  in  this analysis, is  probably
minor.

    In this analysis we estimated primary PM,5 emis-
sions based on unit emissions  that may not accu-
rately reflect the composition and  mobility of par-
ticles.  The ratio of crustal to carbonaceous particu-
late material, for example, likely is high as a result of
overestimation of the fraction  of  crustal material,
primarily composed  of fugitive dust,  and underesti-
mation  of the fraction of carbonaceous  material.
Because the CAAA has  a greater impact  on emis-
sions sources  that generate carbonaceous particles
(mobile sources) than  on sources that mainly emit
crustal material (area sources), we  likely underesti-
mate  the  impact of the  CAAA on reducing  PM2_,
thereby reducing monetary benefits estimates.  The
uncertainty associated with estimating the partition
of PiVl,. emissions components could conceivably
have a major  impact  011 the net benefit estimate;
compared to secondary PM2_ precursor emissions,
however, changes in primary PM25 emissions have a
relatively small impact on PM  related benefits.

    We  estimated future-year emissions levels based
on  expected growth in pollution-generating activi-
ties.  Inherent uncertainties and data inadequacies/
limitations exist in forecasting  growth for any fu-
ture period.  Also, the growth indicators we used in
this analysis may not directly correlate with changes
in the factors that influence emissions.  Both of these
factors contribute to the uncertainty associated wfith
this study's emissions results.  For example, the best
indicator of pollution-generating activity is fuel use
or some other measure  of input/output that most
directly relates to emissions.  The key BRA indica-
tor used in this analysis, GSP, is closely correlated
with the pollution-generating activity associated with
many manufacturing industry processes (iron and
steel, petroleum refining,  etc.).  However, a good
portion of industrial sector emissions are from boil-
ers and furnaces, whose activity is related to produc-
tion, but not as closely as to product output.  Activi-
ties such as  fuel switching may produce  different
emission patterns than those reflected in the results
of this study.

    Our future-year control assumptions are also a
source of uncertainty.  Despite our efforts to mini-
mize  this uncertainty, whether  each of the Post-
CAAA controls will  be adopted, whether  Post-
CAAA control programs will be  more or less effec-
tive than estimated, and whether  unanticipated tech-
nological shifts will reduce future-year emissions are
all unknown.  For example, the Post-CAAA scenario
includes implementation  of a region-wide NOx con-
trol strategy designed to  regulate the  regional trans-
port of ozone.  However, the control program as-
sumed under the Post-CAAA scenario may not re-
flect die NOx controls that are actually implemented
in a regional ozone  transport rule.
                                                  20

-------
                                                                                      Chapter 2: Emissions
Table 2-5
Key Uncertainties Associated with Emissions Estimation
  Potential Source of Error
 Direction of Potential Bias for
     Net Benefits Estimate
 Likely Significance Relative to Key
    Uncertainties in Net Benefit
             Estimate*
PM2 5 emissions are largely
based on scaling of PM-io
emissions.
Overall, unable to determine
based on current information,
but current emission factors are
likely to underestimate PlVh.s
emissions from combustion
sources, implying  a potential
underestimation of benefits.
Potentially major.  Source-specific
scaling factors reflect the most careful
estimation currently possible, using
current emissions monitoring data.
However, health benefit estimates
related to changes in  PlVh.5 constitute
a large portion of overall CAAA-related
benefits.
Primary PlVb.s emissions
estimates are based on unit
emissions that may not
accurately reflect composition
and mobility of the particles.
For example, the ratio of
crustal to primary
carbonaceous  particulate
material likely is high.
Underestimate. The effect of
overestimating crustal emissions
and underestimating
carbonaceous when applied in
later stages of the analysis, is to
reduce the net impact of the
CAAA on primary PlVb.5
emissions by underestimating
PlVhs emissions reductions
associated with mobile source
tailpipe controls.
Potentially major. Mobile source
primary carbonaceous particles are a
significant contributor to public
exposure to PIvb.s. Overall, however,
compared to secondary PlVb.5
precursor emissions, changes in
primary PIvh.s emissions have only a
small impact on PlVb.s related benefits.
The Post-CAAA scenario
includes implementation of a
region-wide NOX emissions
reduction strategy to control
regional transport of ozone
that may not reflect the NOX
controls that are actually
implemented in a regional
ozone transport rule.
Unable to determine based on
current information.
Probably minor. Overall, magnitude of
estimated emissions reductions is
comparable to that in expected future
regional transport rule.  In some areas
of the 37 state region, emissions
reductions are expected to be
overestimated, bur in other areas, NOX
inhibition of ozone leads to
underestimates of ozone benefits
(e.g., some eastern urban centers).
VOC emissions are dependent
on evaporation, and future
patterns of temperature are
difficult to predict.
Unable to determine based on
current information.
Probably minor. We assume future
temperature patterns are well
characterized by historic patterns, but
an acceleration of climate change
(warming) could increase emissions.
Use of average temperatures
(i.e., daily minimum and
maximum) in estimating
motor-vehicle emissions
artificially reduces variability in
VOC emissions.
Unable to determine based on
current information.
Probably minor. Use of averages will
overestimate emissions on some days
and underestimate on other days.
Effect is mitigated in Post-CAAA
scenarios because of more stringent
evaporative controls that are in place
by 2000 and 2010.
                                              21

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Table 2-5 (continued)
       Key Uncertainties Associated with Emissions Estimation
         Potential Source of Error
 Direction of Potential Bias for
     Net Benefits Estimate
 Likely Significance Relative to Key
    Uncertainties in Net Benefit
             Estimate*
       Economic growth factors used
       to project emissions are an
       indicator of future economic
       activity. They reflect
       uncertainty in economic
       forecasting as well as
       uncertainty in the link to
       emissions.
Unable to determine based on
current information.
Probably minor.  The same set of
growth factors are used to project
emissions under both the Pre-CAAA
and Post-CAAA scenarios,  mitigating
to some extent the potential for
significant errors in estimating
differences in emissions.
       Uncertainties in the
       stringency, scope, timing, and
       effectiveness of Post-CAAA
       controls included  in projection
       scenarios.
Unable to determine based on
current information.
Probably minor.  Future controls could
be more or less stringent, wide-
reaching (e.g., NOX reductions in
OTAG region - see above), or
effective (e.g., uncertainty in realizing
all Reasonable Further Progress
requirements) than projected.  Timing
of emissions reductions may also  be
affected (e.g.,  sulfur emissions
reductions from utility sources have
occurred more rapidly than projected
for this analysis).
       * The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team.  The
       Project Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could
       influence the overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more; if an alternative assumption or
       approach is likely to change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification
       of "probably minor."
                                                       22

-------
                      Costs
    The costs of complying with the requirements
of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA.) of 1990
will affect all levels of the U.S. economy.  The im-
pact, initially experienced through the direct costs
imposed by  regulations promulgated under the
amendments, will also be seen in patterns  of indus-
trial production, research and development, capital
investment, productivity, employment, and  con-
sumption.  The purpose of the analysis summarized
in this chapter is to estimate die incremental change
in annual compliance  costs from  1990 to 2010 that
are directly attributable to the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments.

    This chapter consists of four sections.  The  first
section summarizes our approach to estimating di-
rect compliance costs.  In the second  section we
present the results of the cost analysis.  We first re-
port the total costs of Titles  I through V  and then
present estimates  for major  individual  provisions.
We also briefly discuss our derivation of Title VI
costs.  In the third section, we provide a qualitative
discussion of the potential magnitude of social  costs
and other impacts associated  with the Amendments
to characterize the potential welfare  loss  not cap-
tured in the direct cost approach. We conclude the
chapter with a discussion of  the major analytic un-
certainties and include the results of quantitative  sen-
sitivity tests of key data and assumptions.

                 to
Direct

    As discussed  in the previous chapter, the  first
step of the prospective analysis required the devel-
opment of emission estimates for the base-year, 1990,
and for the two  target years in  our  analytic time
period, 2000 to 2010.  We developed two scenarios,
Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA, that reflect three key
parameters:  (i) base-year inventory selection, (li) in-
dicators of forecasted economic growth, and (iii) ef-
fects of future year controls and selected CAAA pro-
visions.  The Pre-CAAA scenario applies the strin-
gency and scope of air pollution regulations as they
existed 111 1990 and projects emissions  and  costs to
2000 and 2010.  This scenario establishes a baseline
that represents projected  emission levels and con-
trol costs 111 the absence of the 1990 Amendments.
Under the Post-CAAA scenario, costs are based on
compliance  with selected CAAA provisions.  To-
gether these two scenarios  form the foundation upon
which the incremental costs and benefits of comply-
ing with the 1990 Amendments are estimated. For
more  information on the development of these sce-
narios, see  Chapter 2.

    We closely integrate the modeling of direct com-
pliance  costs with emissions projections by main-
taining consistency among control assumptions (i.e.
emissions scenarios) used  as inputs in the cost esti-
mation  modeling and  in  the analysis of emissions
projections  and benefits. Wre use  two models to es-
timate costs, Emission Reduction  and Cost  Analysis
Model (ERCAM)  and Integrated Planning Model
(IPM). These models generate cost estimates for the
Post-CAAA scenarios in two projection years,  2000
and 2010.  The estimates  are calculated relative to
costs  under the same year Pre-CAAA scenario, so
estimates represent incremental costs of compliance
wfith the 1990 Amendments.

    We use ERCAM to estimate costs associated with
regulating particulate matter  (PM), volatile organic
compounds (VOCs),  and  non-utility source oxides
of nitrogen (NOJ.1 The model is essentially a cost-
accounting tool that provides a structure for modi-
fying  and updating changes  in inputs  while main-
                                                        1  This model was developed by E. H. Pechan & Associ-
                                                    ates, Inc. io iacililale EPA's analysis oi  emissions control.
                                                 23

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
taming consistency with the emission and cost analy-
ses.  Cost scenarios and assumptions are developed
for each non-utility source category (e.g., point, area,
nonroad, and motor vehicle sources) and in response
to specific provisions  and emission targets.   The
model estimates costs based on inputs such as  cost
per ton, source-specific cost equations, incremental
production, and operating cost estimates.  For this
analysis, we collected data and  inputs from informa-
tion presented in  regulatory  impact  assessments
(RIAs), background information documents  (BIDs),
regulatory  support documents, and Federal Regis-
ter notices.

    To  estimate the costs of  reducing utility NOx
and sulfur dioxide (SO,,) emissions, we  use the Inte-
grated Planning Model  (IPM).  IPM allows us to es-
timate the  control  costs of several pollutants while
maintaining consistent control scenarios and eco-
nomic forecasts of the electric power industry.  It
assesses the optimal mix of pollution control strate-
gies subject to  a series of specified constraints.  Key
inputs and  constraints in  the model include targeted
emissions reductions (on a seasonal or annual basis),
costs  and constraints of control technology, and  eco-
nomic parameters  (e.g., forecasted demand for elec-
tricity,  power  plant availability/capacity, costs  of
fuel, etc.)

    To  assess the costs  of reducing emission of pol-
lutants  or sectors  not covered by our two models,
we estimate costs using the best available cost equa-
tions  or other  types of analyses.  For example, we
estimate non-utility SO emission control costs  for
point sources by applying source-specific cost equa-
tions  for flue gas desulfurization (FGD)/scrubber
technology  to  affected sources in 2000 and 2010.
While we do not explicitly model  CO attainment
costs, we include  in the  analysis  the costs  of pro-
grams designed  to reduce CO emissions, such as oxy-
genated fuels and a cold temperature CO motor ve-
hicle  emission  standard.  Finally, to estimate costs
of the rate of progress/reasonable further progress
(ROP/RFP) provisions, requirements under Title I
that require ozone nonattainment  areas to make
steady progress toward  attainment, we  first estimate
the emissions reduction shortfall that must be
achieved in each target year in each nonattainment
area, and then  apply a cost per ton  estimate from a
schedule of measures that could  be applied locally
to meet the necessary ROP/RFP  requirement.  For
more detail on the specific methods  used to estimate
compliance costs for each pollutant and source cat-
egory, see Appendix B.

    The cost estimates in this chapter are  the incre-
mental costs  of the  1990 Amendments (i.e. the dif-
ference between pre- and Post-CAAA cost estimates).
We present die results as  total annualized costs (TAC)
in 2000 and  2010.  Annualized costs include both
capital costs,  such as costs of control equipment, and
operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.2   They
do  not represent actual cash flow  in a given year,
but are rather an estimate of average annual burden
over the  period during which  firms  will incur costs.
In annualizing costs, we  convert total capital invest-
ment to a uniform scries  of total per-year equivalent
payments over a given time period using an assumed
real cost-of-capital  at five percent.  Wrc  then add
O&M and other reoccurring costs to the annualized
capital cost to arrive at TAC.  The  discounted sum
of these annual expenditures is  equal to the net
present value of total costs incurred over the time
period of this analysis.3


Results

    Total annual compliance costs  for  Titles  I
through V of the 1990 Amendments in the  year 2000
will be approximately  $19.4 billion;  the estimate in-
creases to $26.8 billion in the year  2010. These costs
reflect "annualized"  operation  and maintenance
(O&M) expenditures (which includes research and
development (R&D) and other similarly  recurring-
expenditures) plus amortized  capital costs  (i.e., de-
preciation plus interest costs associated with the ex-
    2  For a few VOC source categories, we estimate that capi-
tal investment will not be necessary; for these sources, compli-
ance costs reflect O&M costs only.

    J  We recalculate the control cost estimates from regulatory
documents that use a seven or ten percent discount rate so that
the costs will be consistent with the five percent discount rate
assumption used in this analysis. We  also calculate cost using
three percent and seven percent discount rales, as sensitivity tests;
ior detail see the discussion oi uncertainty later in this  chapter,
in Chapter 8, and in Appendix B.
                                                   24

-------
                                                                                       Chapter 3: Direct Costs
isting capital stock) for the particular  year.4  We
present cost estimates by title and emissions source
category (point sources,  area sources,  utilities,
nonroad engines and vehicles, and motor vehicles)
111 Table 3-1.

    In some cases,  assigning costs to a single CAAA
title is complicated by the  fact that there  are  rules
issued pursuant  to more than one  title.5   In addi-
tion, with the passage of the 1990 Amendments, the
States  were given  greater discretion in  developing
CAAA compliance strategies.  For example, the
States can determine how best to meet progress re-
quirements  and are responsible for  creating permit
programs (under Title V).  As a result, a significant
portion of the costs also represent State-level strate-
gies and decisions  for reducing emissions.

    Title I,  Provisions  for  Attainment and Mainte-
nance  of National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), represents pollution controls (of VOC,
NO , and PM emissions) implemented primarily by
point and area sources.  Title I provisions also ac-
count for State programs designed to meet progress
requirements.  By 2010, we  project the costs of Title
1 provisions will account for over half of total CAAA
direct compliance costs  ($14.5 billion). An additional
34 percent of estimated total  costs ($9 billion) is  at-
tributed to  regulating mobile  source emissions un-
der Title II.  Collectively, the combined direct com-
pliance costs of these two titles is $16 billion in 2000
and $23 billion by  2010.

    The remaining three titles account for  less than
20 percent of total  CAAA direct costs. We estimate
that Title III provisions, which target hazardous  air
pollutant (HAP) emissions, will cost $840 million
by the year  2010.   This estimate represents total an-
nualized capital costs (TACs) for individual  two- and
four-year MACT standards.  While  the majority of
this estimated cost  reflects  reducing VOC emissions
    4  Capita] expenditures are investments, generating a stream
of benefits and opportunity costs over an investment's lifetime.
In a cost-benefit analysis, the appropriate accounting technique
is to annualize capital expenditures.  This technique involves
spreading the costs of capital equipment uniformly over the use-
ful life of lie equipment, by using a discount rate to account, for
the time value of money.  In this analysis, all capital expendi-
tures were annualized using a real five percent interest rate.

    5  In those cases, we generally assigned costs to a single title
based upon implementation dates  and the year by which emis-
sion reductions are expected.
(since I LAP emissions were  not included as part of
the Section 812 base- year inventory), Title III costs
do include some costs of final MACT rules that regu-
late non-VOC HAP emissions.

    In order to estimate the costs associated  with
Title IV, we considered the implications of pollu-
tion abatement controls (for SO2 and  NOJ on the
electric power industry's operation of generation
units and how, over time, this  would affect the de-
mand for  electricity.  The  annual compliance esti-
mate for Title  IV costs is $2.3 billion in  2000.  This
estimate  decreases to $2.0 billion by 2010.  This de-
crease  reflects, in part,  the  future compliance cost
savings resulting from  the  SO, allowance trading
program.

    Title V costs  arc associated with new operating
permit programs.  The estimate accounts for approxi-
mately one percent of total costs projected under
the Post-CAAA 2010  scenario.  States are expected
to implement Title V permit programs by 2005.  The
estimate reflects the costs  of State-developed pro-
grams during die  first five-year implementation pe-
riod.  These costs include  incremental administra-
tive costs incurred by the permitted sources,  State
and local permitting agencies, and EPA.  The esti-
mate excludes  federally-implemented State programs
and state programs  which were already  established
in the baseline.

    Our presentation of  cost estimates for the strato-
spheric  ozone  protection provisions of Title VI is,
by necessity, different from other tides.  Ideally, one
should compare the  costs of actions taken in a given
year to the benefits attributable to these actions.  For
Title VI, a cost-benefit comparison of any given year
requires  assumptions that result in potentially mis-
leading figures.  The difficulty is due to the differing
time horizons  and the complexity of the process by
which ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) cause ad-
verse effects on human health and the  environment.
Title VI provisions incur  costs over significantly
varying time horizons; for example, the  cost analy-
sis of Sections  604 and 606 provisions spans 85 years
(from 1990 to  2075). At the same time,  the analysis
of Section 611 extends  from 1994  to 2015.  In re-
sponse to  this  analytic difficulty, we base our com-
parison  of Title VI costs to Title VI benefits on net
present values.
                                                   25

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
      Table 3-1
      Summary of Direct Costs for Titles I to V of CAAA, By Title and Selected Provisions
      (Annual Costs in million 1990$)
Title/Provision
Primary Cost
Estimate Percentage of
2000 Total Costs
Primary Cost
Estimate Percentage of
2010 Total Costs
Title 1- Provisions for Attainment and Maintenance ofNAAQS
Stationary NOX Controls, Utility Industry
Progress Requirements
PM NAAQS Controls
California LEV
National LEV
High Enhanced I/M
Other Title 1 Programs
Title 1: Total Costs
$ 790
1,200
1,900
320
180
1,100
3,100
$ 8,600
4%
6%
10%
2%
1%
6%
16%
44%
$ 2,500
2,500
2,200
1,100
1,100
1,400
3,700
$14,500
9%
9%
8%
4%
4%
5%
14%
54%
Title II- Provisions Relating to Mobile Sources
California Reformulated Gasoline
NOX Tailpipe/Extended Useful
Life Standard
Other Title II Programs
Title II: Total Costs
Title III- Hazardous Air Pollutants
Title III: Total Costs
Title IV- Acid Deposition Control
Title IV: Total Costs
Title V- Permits
Title V: Total Costs
Total Annual Cost
$2,000
1,500
3,900
$ 7,400

$780

$2,300

$300
$19,400
10%
8%
20%
38%

4%

12%

2%
100%
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding. Only major provisions are listed under each
listed here are nonetheless included in the totals by title and the overall total.
$2,400
1,700
4,900
$ 9,050

$840

$2,040

$300
$26,800
title - other, less costly
9%
6%
18%
34%

3%

8%

1%
100%
provisions not
    The net present value of Title  VI program costs
reflect selected actions and their associated costs from
Sections 604, 606, 608, 609, and 611.  Examples of
these actions include: replacement of ozone-deplet-
ing chemicals with alternative technologies and ma-
terials; recycling and storage of unused chlorofluo-
rocarbons; labeling; training; and administration.
Using a discount rate of five percent and a 85-year
time horizon (from 1990  to 2075), we estimate the
net present value of Title VI costs is $27 billion.  For
illustrative purposes, we  calculated an annualized
estimate of Title VI costs.  It is, however, important
to recognize that these estimates may overestimate
actual compliance costs in those years, especially in
the year 2000, because of the phased nature of imple-
mentation—  see Appendix G for more details.  Our
annualized estimate of total Title VI costs is Si.4
billion.  This value  reflects an annualized  equivalent
value of costs incurred over 85 years  (from  1990 to
2075) using a five percent discount rate.

           Provisions

    Our analysis indicates eight provisions  will ac-
count for approximately 54 percent of the total di-
rect compliance costs estimate for 2010.  Six are Title
I provisions that affect stationary sources and vehicle
                                                  26

-------
                                                                                     Chapter 3: Direct Costs
emissions.  The remaining two provisions target
mobile sources under Title II. These provisions are:

    •   PM NAAQS controls6,
    •   Electric power industry compliance  (station-
       ary NOx control),
    •   Progress Requirements,
    •   California   Low   Emission    Vehicle
       (LEV)program,
    •   National Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) pro-
       gram,
    •   High Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance
       (I/A/1) program,
    •   California Reformulated  Gasoline,  and
       NOx Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life Stan-
       dard".

    The  1990  CAAA regulates  stationary source
emissions primarily under Title  I.  Among the rel-
evant provisions, PM NAAQS, utility industry com-
pliance with  NOx standards, and progress  require-
ments are the main sources of Title 1  costs.  From
2000  to 2010,  we estimate the control costs of all
three  provisions will increase by  at least a factor of
two.  Under the Post-CAAA scenario developed for
the emissions analysis, the utility industry's  compli-
ance with NO  emission  standards affects all electric
             X
generation units using fossil fuels.  Existing oil and
gas units  face Reasonable Available Control Tech-
nology (RACT) requirements and all new units  must
comply with more stringent New  Source  Perfor-
mance Standards (NSPS) and New Source Review
(NSR) requirements.  By 2010, estimated costs for
stationary NOx controls more than  triple ($790 mil-
lion to f2,500 million).   The cost estimate indicates
that the provision will be the single  largest source of
CAAA direct costs.  The second  largest component
of total costs in 2010 is  attributed  to progress re-
quirements.  Annual compliance costs with  progress
requirements double from 2000  to  2010 ($1.2 bil-
lion and $2.5 billion, respectively). Among the  three
provisions, the annual  costs associated with  PM
NAAQS compliance exhibits the least  amount of
growth.  We  estimate annual costs for PM NAAQS
compliance will grow from SI.9  billion in  2000 to
S2.2 billion in 2010.
    5 We estimate the PM NAAQS provision costs based on
compliance with standards that were ill effect prior to 1997 revi-
sions (62 Fed. Reg. 38,652, 1997).
    Among the  provisions regulating vehicle emis-
sions,  only the  national and California LEV pro-
grams  exhibit a trend of increasing direct costs of
the same magnitude as seen with the costs of regu-
lating stationary sources under Title I.  The com-
bined cost  of national and California LEV programs
is $2.2 billion in 2010. For the California LEV pro-
gram,  the  increase in cost is largely a function of
higher per  vehicle  cost estimates (e.g., zero emission
vehicles (ZEV) are mandated in the year 2003). Our
cost analysis of the national LEV program assumes
that only the Northeast Ozone Transport Region
(OTR) states will  incur costs  in the year 2000.  By
2010, however, we expect that the program will  af-
fect areas  outside of the OTR.  As a result, 2010
national  LEV costs increase with the expected ex-
pansion and increased volume of vehicle  sales. Un-
like many of the other provisions, high enhanced I/
M costs do not exhibit significant growth from 2000
to 2010.  We estimate this provision accounts for
approximately six percent of total costs in 2000 and
five percent in 2010.  These costs, however, are un-
certain pending State decisions regarding the design
of their programs.

    Among the analyzed Title II provisions, we  at-
tribute nearly 15 percent of total annual direct costs
to the California reformulated gasoline (REG) pro-
gram and NOx Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life Stan-
dard.  Although the reformulated gasoline program
affects only California, the  state accounts for  nearly
ten percent of annual gasoline  sales in  the  United
States. We estimate compliance  costs of SI.9  billion
in the  year 2000.  As the program enters Phase 2,
estimated costs grow to  $2.4  billion. The trend in
cost associated with NOx Tailpipe/Extended Useful
Life Standard is  very different. While costs increase
slightly  between the years  2000  and  2010, the
provision's share of total cost slightly decreases.

                             of Other


    In an ideal setting, a cost-benefit analysis would
not only identify, but also  quantify and monetize,
an exhaustive list of social  costs associated with a
regulatory action.  This would include assessing how
regulatory actions targeting a specific industry or  set
of facilities can alter the level of production and con-
sumption in die directly affected market  and related
                                                  27

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
markets.  For example, regulation of emissions from
the electric utility industry that results in higher elec-
tricity  rates would have both supply-side and de-
mand-side responses. In secondary markets, the in-
creased electricity rates affect production costs  for
various industries and  initiate  behavioral changes
(e.g., using alternative fuels as a substitute for elec-
tric power).  With each affected market, there  are
also associated externalities that should  be included
in estimating social costs.  Returning to the utilities
example,  the externalities associated with electric
power generation versus nuclear power generation
can be very different. The mix of externalities could
change as consumers substitute nuclear power  for
electric power.  It is frequently difficult to accurately
characterize one or all of these  dimensions of mar-
ket responses and estimate the resulting  social costs.

    There are three generally practiced  approaches
to calculating costs associated with  regulation: (i) di-
rect compliance cost, (ii) partial equilibrium model-
ing, and  (ni)  general equilibrium modeling. Direct
compliance cost estimates  are calculated differently
than the  economic welfare impact estimates that re-
sult from partial or  general equilibrium  modeling; a
direct cost estimate is often the most straightforward
of the three approaches. This method estimates com-
pliance expenditures or, in economic terms, how an
industry's or firm's marginal cost curve shifts due to
increased production costs associated with regula-
tory compliance.  As a result, this method does not
account for firm responses and market responses,
such as adjustment of production levels and product
prices. The other two methods measure changes in
producer and consumer welfare,  and incorporate
these  types of adjustments.

    The direct cost approach  likely overstates actual
compliance expenditures, but may  have  an ambigu-
ous relationship  to total social costs.  There are two
primary reasons  for the overstatement of compli-
ance expenditures.  First,  the direct cost approach
does not account for market responses.  As a result,
total direct  cost estimates reflect  the incremental cost
per unit of output multiplied by  the generally higher,
prc-regulation quantity produced.  Second, a direct
cost approach tends  to make the simplifying assump-
tion that firms  rely 011 static pollution abatement
technology, when in fact  the presence of compli-
ance costs  provides  an  incentive to innovate.  Sev-
eral ex post cost analyses  suggest that the marginal
cost curve may not necessarily shift  by the full
amount of the pollution  abatement.  For example,
firms may respond by altering production processes
to more efficiently reduce emissions.'  Social cost
estimates, however, may include other costs not re-
flected  in direct cost estimates (discussed below),
thereby offsetting the tendency for direct cost esti-
mates to overstate expenditures.

    Measuring net welfare  changes  due to regulatory-
action requires either partial or general  equilibrium
modeling.  These more complicated approaches es-
timate social costs by accounting for a wider range
of market consequences associated with compliance
with pollution abatement requirements. The par-
tial equilibrium approach is  particularly appropri-
ate when social  costs are predominantly incurred in
directly affected  markets.   It requires modeling both
supply and  demand functions in  the  affected eco-
nomic sector.  Therefore, measures of social cost
reflect behavioral responses by both producers and
consumers in a specific market and do not necessar-
ily reflect how those  changes  affect related  markets.

    In cases where the regulatory action is known
to have an impact  on many  sectors  of the  US
economy, the general equilibrium  model is  a more
appropriate approach  to estimating social costs.  Like
the partial equilibrium model, the general equilib-
rium model  estimates social costs by accounting for
direct compliance costs and producer and consumer
market behavior.  The general equilibrium model
can capture  first-order effects that  occur in  multiple
sectors  of the economy, and may also  provide in-
sight into unanticipated indirect effects in sectors that
might not have been  included in the scope of a par-
tial equilibrium analysis.

    The relationship of general equilibrium estimates
to estimates from the other two cost approaches is
not always clear.  General equilibrium estimates have
a broader basis  from which to estimate  social  costs
and can reflect  the net welfare changes across  the
full range of economic sectors in  the U.S.  Partial
equilibrium  modeling tends to understate full social
costs because of its restricted scope (i.e., generally
limited to one industry).  Total direct cost estimates
are likely to overstate costs in  the primary market
because they do  not reflect consumer  and producer
responses.   This  is demonstrated in comparisons of
    'Morgcnstcm et a!. (1998) estimate the ratio of incurred
abatement expenditures to estimated direct costs can be as low
as 0.8.
                                                   28

-------
                                                                                          Chapter 3: Direct Costs
estimates generated using a direct cost approach and
a partial equilibrium approach.  The extent to which
a direct cost estimate will overstate or understate a
social cost estimate from a general equilibrium model
depends on the magnitude of the "ripple  effects" in
economic sectors  not targeted by a regulation.8

    In  the 812 retrospective analysis  (RPA, 1997),
we recognized that the Clean Air Act has a perva-
sive impact on the US  economy and  opted  for the
general equilibrium approach.  The  retrospective
nature  of the analysis, however, provided  us with
fairly well-developed historical data sets of goods and
service  flows  throughout the economy.  These data
sets facilitated the development of detailed, year-by-
year expenditures  m all sectors of the economy, from
which we modeled producer and consumer behav-
ior and estimated net social costs.  In  the retrospec-
tive, our central estimate of total  annualized direct
costs, from 1970 to 1990, was $523 billion.  In com-
parison, we estimated the aggregate welfare effects
to be between $493 and $621 billion.9

    For the prospective analysis, however, we adopt
a direct compliance cost approach.  Although  the
general equilibrium approach may represent  a more
theoretically preferable  method for measuring so-
cial costs, we use the  simpler direct  cost modeling
method for three  reasons:

    •   First, we believe that the direct cost approach
        provides  a good  first approximation of the
        CAAA's economic impacts on various sec-
      Current regulatory analyses that apply partial equilib-
rium modeling or general equilibrium modeling tend to mea-
sure costs with the assumption that markets are currently oper-
ating under optimally efficient conditions.  Emerging literature
suggests that a full accounting of the social costs and efficiency
impacts of environmental regulations  could also include an as-
sessment of the incremental  costs that reflect existing market
distortions, such as those imposed by the current tax code.  The
distortions introduced  by existing taxes, in combination with
new regulatory requirements,  are collectively referred to as  the
tax-interaction eiiect.  One oi the major conclusions oi this
emerging literature is  that the social cost oi environmental policy
changes can be substantially higher when pre-existing tax distor-
tions are taken into account.  Our direct cost  estimates do not
reflect quantification of this effect, in part: because of the emerg-
ing nature of this literature and in part because existing esti-
mates of the magnitude of the tax-interaction effect are calcu-
lated as increments to social costs and are not  necessarily appli-
cable adjustments to  direct cost estimates.

    9 Estimates are  in 1990  dollars.  The retrospective states,
"Tn general the estimated second order macroeconomic effects
were small relative to the  size of the U.S. economy."  The rate
of long term GNP growth between the control and no-control
scenarios  amounted  to roughly one-twentieth of one percent
less growth.
        tors the U.S.  economy.  Comparison of the
        direct cost approach to the partial equilib-
        rium modeling suggests  that the direct cost
        approach likely overstates costs to  the  en-
        tity that incurs the pollution control cost ex-
        penditure.  As discussed earlier, the direct
        cost approach does  not reflect adjustments
        to prices and quantities  that might mitigate
        the effects of regulation.  Recent research
        analysing ex ante  and ex post cost estimates
        of regulations suggests that ex ante analyses
        are far more  likely to  overstate than under-
        state  costs.10  However, direct cost estimates
        may also understate  the effects of long-term
        changes in productivity and the ripple effects
        of regulation  on other economic  sectors that
        are captured by  a general  equilibrium  ap-
        proach.   The magnitude of those  other ef-
        fects, including potential magnification of
        social costs by existing tax  distortions, may
        be  substantial.

        Second, we believe that the  closer approxi-
        mation of social costs that might be gained
        through a general  equilibrium approach
        could  be compromised by the difficulty and
        uncertainty associated with projecting future
        economic and  technological changes.  The
        general equilibrium approach could provide
        many  insights that the direct cost  approach
        cannot, but also introduces a significant level
        of additional uncertainty.

        Third, the focus of the present analysis  is  a
        comparison of direct costs and  direct ben-
        efits.  To provide a balanced  treatment of
        costs and benefits in  a general  equilibrium
        framework, the social cost model must be
        designed and configured to reflect the indi-
        rect economic consequences of  both costly
        and beneficial economic effects.  None of
        the general equilibrium models  available in
        the time frame of  this study could be config-
        ured  to support effective analysis of the  full
        range of specific direct costs and, especially,
        direct benefits of the 1990 Clean Air Act
        Amendments.
    "°  See, for example, Harrington et al (1999), referenced in
Appendix B, for a comparative analysis of ex ante and ex post
regulatory cost estimates.
                                                     29

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    *    Fourth, undertaking a general equilibrium
        modeling exercise remains a very resource-
        intensive task.  For the purposes of compar-
        ing costs to benefits we concluded that more
        detailed modeling would not be the most
        cost-effective use of the project resources.

Uncertainty in
Estimates

Overview

    As we note  at the  beginning of this chapter, ex-
plicit and implicit assumptions regarding changes in
consumption patterns, input costs, and technologi-
cal innovation are crucial to framing the question of
the CAAA's cost impact.  Given  the nature  of this
prospective study, there  is  no way to verify  the ac-
curacy of the assumptions applied to future scenarios.
We can envision other plausible  analyses with esti-
mates that differ from  results in this chapter.   More-
over, for many of the  factors  contributing to uncer-
tainty, the  degree or even  direction of the  bias is
unknown or  cannot be determined.  Nevertheless,
uncertainties and/or sensitivities can be identified
and in many cases the potential measurement errors
can be quantitatively characterised.  In this  section
of the chapter, w7e  first discuss several quantitative
sensitivity analyses undertaken to characterize the
impact of key assumptions on the  ultimate cost analy-
sis. We conclude the chapter with a qualitative dis-
cussion of the impact of both quantified and
unquantified  sources of uncertainty.



    In order to characterize the  uncertainty  in the
cost estimates, we conducted  sensitivity analyses on
the key parameters and analytic assumptions of six
major provisions.  The provisions are the following:

    *    Progress Requirements,
    *    California Reformulated Gasoline,
    •    PM NAAQS Controls,
    *    LEV program (the  National and California
        programs combined),
    *    Non-utility Stationary Source NOx Con-
        trols, and
    *    ^TOX Tailpipe/Extended  Useful Life Stan-
        dard.
    We selected these provisions because they are
among the most significant sources of CAAA costs,
yet cost estimates  for each of the provisions incor-
porate significant  uncertainties.  Collectively, these
provisions account for nearly 50 percent of total di-
rect compliance cost estimates for 2010.  Table 3-2
summarizes the methods we used to conduct the cost
sensitivity analyses and the  results.

    For each test,  we developed three estimates for
one or more  components  of costs affecting the total
cost estimate  for a given provision:  (1) a central esti-
mate, equal to the 2010  primary cost estimate re-
ported in  this chapter11, (2) a low estimate; and (3) a
high estimate.  The low7  and  high estimates assess
the potential magnitude  of the effect  of  the
component(s) on  the provision's costs and conse-
quently, total CAAA costs, using reasonable alter-
native  assumptions for each cost component.  For
progress requirements, PM NAAQS controls, and
stationary source NOx controls, the cost projections
are based on models of  future emissions controls.
Accurately identifying the  set of adopted controls  is
a key source  of uncertainty.   For example, cost-ef-
fective control measures for complying with progress
requirements have not yet been  identified and the
sensitivity test suggests the potential  for substantial
variability in progress requirement compliance costs.
In the case of motor  vehicle provisions,  there are
two significant sources of uncertainty, projecting
future  car sales and forecasting accurate per  vehicle
costs.

    The results  indicate  that  the sensitivity of our
primary cost  estimates  (central estimates) is not uni-
form across provisions.   In addition, low and high
estimates  may vary by as  much as a  factor of two.
These  sensitivity analyses  demonstrate  the potential
effect of altering selected assumptions and data.  We
do  not assign probabilities to the likelihood of the
alternative. In other words, it would  be inappropri-
ate simply to  add up the array of low7 and  high esti-
mates  to  arrive at an  overall range of uncertainty
around the central estimates, because  it is unlikely
that a plausible scenario could be constructed where
all the estimates are concurrently either at the high
    11 The one exception is the central estimate of progress
requirements.  Our sensitivity analysis which is based on more
recent cosl iniormadon indicates thai  our primary estimate is
more reflective oi a high  estimate.  See Appendix B for more
details.
                                                  30

-------
                                                                                      Chapter 3: Direct Costs
or low end of their individual plausible ranges.  A
better interpretation of these results is  that uncer-
tainty in  key input parameters can have a significant
effect on the overall uncertainty of our estimates of
direct compliance costs and  ultimately the net ben-
efits calculation.

    In addition to examining specific provisions, we
conducted  a sensitivity analysis of the cost of capital
used throughout the analysis. Cost estimates  pre-
sented earlier in this chapter reflect  application  of a
cost of capital (for the purposes of aimualizmg total
capital costs) of five percent.  We also examined the
effect on cost estimates for those provisions which
involve significant capital expenditures and where
we  could recalculate  annualized costs from the avail-
able information.  These provisions include non-util-
ity  and area source  estimates for VOC, NOx,  and
PM control.  The alternative  estimates use  three and
seven percent for the cost of capital. Results indi-
cate that cost estimates are  only moderately sensi-
tive to the discount rate. The provisions  evaluated
have a total annualized  capital cost of approximately
S3 billion in 2010. Varying the cost  of capital gener-
ated alternative estimates of S2.8 billion (three  per-
cent)  and $3.1 billion (seven percent).12

                         Of
                to Uncertainty

    There  are a wide range  of other factors which
contribute to uncertainty in the overall cost esti-
mates. In  most cases, the effect of these other fac-
tors cannot be quantified, though  some may have
significant  influences on our overall  net  benefits es-
timate.   We present a summary  of  these factors  in
Table 3-3 below, and provide a  characterization of
the potential effect of each uncertainty  on the pri-
mary estimate of the net benefits (i.e.,  if costs are
overestimated, net benefits are underestimated).  The
two most important factors are the potential impact
of innovation on the ultimate control costs incurred
and the  conservative assumptions we made  to  esti-
mate  RFP  costs.
    •2 Note that these calculations reflect the use of alternative
discount rates to estimate annual costs.  The use of alternative
rates  to calculate the total net present value of costs incurred
through the full 1990 lo 2010 study period is examined sepa-
rately in Chapter 8, where we compare total costs lo tola! ben-
efits.
    The  regulatory documents which provide cost
inputs to ERCAM and the IPM contain  the most
recent data available, given existing technological
development.  Between 2000 and 2010,  however,
advancements in control technologies will allow
sources  to  comply with  CAAA requirements at
lower costs.  For example, we anticipate technologi-
cal  improvements for complying with  the multiple
tiers of  proposed  emission standards during the
phase-in  of nonroad engine controls will likely lead
to reduced costs.  In addition, the costs for certain
control equipment may decrease over time as demand
increases and technology innovation and  competi-
tion exert downward  pressure on equipment prices.
For instance, selective catalytic  reduction (SCR  )
costs have decreased over the past three years as more
facilities  begin to apply the technology.  We also
believe that even in the absence of new emission stan-
dards, manufacturers will eventually upgrade engines
to improve performance  or  to  control emissions
more cost-effectively; firms will  institute  technolo-
gies such as turbocharging, aftercooling,  and vari-
able-valve timing, all  of which improve engine per-
formance.

    There is considerable uncertainty  surrounding
the development of States' control plans  for meet-
ing ozone NAAQS attainment requirements.  We
base the  RFP cost  estimate on the assumption that
ozone nonattaiiimeiit areas (NAAs) will take credit
for NO  reductions for meeting progress require-
ments.   Additional area-specific analysis would be
necessary to determine the extent to which  areas find
NOx reductions beneficial in meeting attainment and
progress  requirement targets.  Trading of NOx for
VOC'- to  meet RFP requirements  may result in  dis-
tributions of VOC'- and NO  emission reductions
                            X
which differ from  those  used in this  analysis.  In
response to these uncertainties, we adopted a con-
servative strategy for estimating  the costs of RFP
reductions in  the primary analysis.  Wre use a rela-
tively high cost per ton reduced estimate of $10,000
for all required reductions.  Since the time we con-
ducted our  primary cost analysis  more information
has emerged suggesting controls could cost much less,
perhaps as little as $3,500  (see Table 3-2 and Appen-
dix B for more details). In our sensitivity analysis of
this variable, we incorporate  the more recent cost
per ton  estimates.  The analysis  suggests that the
$10,000 per ton reduced may in fact be more repre-
                                                   31

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Table 3-2
       Results of Quantitative Sensitivity Tests
            Provision
  Primary Cost
Estimate in 20101
 (billions 1990 $)
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
 Range of Estimates
from Sensitivity Test
  (billions 1990 $)
Progress
Requirements
California
Reformulated
Gasoline
PM NAAQS Controls
LEV costs (California
and National
Combined)
Non-Utility Stationary
Source NOX Costs
$2.46
$2.45
$2.22
$2.16
$2.15
Vary unit costs for unidentified
measures
Vary incremental fuel costs and
gasoline sales estimates
Vary model attainment plan
assumptions and cost per ton
estimates
Vary per vehicle costs and
projections of vehicle sales
Vary unit-level cost per ton
$1.07-
( centra I,
$1.4-
$0.09 to
$1.08-
$1.1 -
$2.46
$1.15)
$3.5
$3.35
$2.48
$3.2
       NOX Tailpipe/Useful
       Life Standards
     $1.65
Vary per vehicle costs and vehicle
sales data
    $0.83-$2.48
       Note:
       1 In all cases, except progress requirements, the Post-CAAA 2010 primary cost estimates is equal to the central
       estimate in the sensitivity analysis. For more details on the sensitivity analysis of progress requirements and other
       provisions, see Appendix B.
scntativc of an upper bound cost estimate, rather than
a central estimate  as  our primary cost analysis  re-
flects.  The result of our conservative approach indi-
cates that we may overstate RFP costs by a factor of
two in 2010.

    One other factor  is also worth noting, although
its impact is likely to be less important than the pre-
vious two factors.  Under  the 1990 CAAA, EPA
created economic incentive provisions in several rules
to provide flexibility for affected  facilities that com-
ply with the  rules.  These provisions include bank-
ing, trading,  and emissions-averaging provisions.
Flexible compliance provisions tend to lower the cost
of compliance.  For example, the emissions-averag-
ing program grants flexibility  to facilities affected
by the marine vessels rule, the petroleum refinery
National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pol-
lutants  (NESHAP), and the  gasoline  distribution
NRSHAP. These facilities can choose which  sources
to control, as  long  as they achieve the required over-
all emissions reduction. In many of the cost analy-
ses, EPA does not  attempt to quantify the effect that
economic incentive provisions  will have  on the over-
all costs  of a  particular rule.   In  these cases, to  the
                           extent that affected sources use economic incentive
                           provisions to minimize compliance costs, costs may
                           be overstated.  The major trading programs  autho-
                           rized under  the Amendments, however, governing
                           sulfur and nitrogen oxide emissions reductions from
                           utilities and  major non-utility point sources, are re-
                           flected 111 the cost estimates presented here.
                                                    32

-------
                                                                                       Chapter 3: Direct Costs
Table 3-3
Key Uncertainties Associated with Cost Estimation
Potential Source of Error
  Direction of
 Potential Bias
for Net Benefits
                                                  Likely Significance Relative to Key Uncertainties
               on Net Benefits Estimate
Costs are based on today's
technologies. Innovations
in future emission control
technology and
competition among
equipment suppliers tend
to reduce costs overtime.
Underestimate     Probably minor.  Available evidence suggests that estimates
                  of pollution control costs based on current engineering can
                  substantially overestimate the ultimate cost incurred,
                  resulting in understating net benefits.2
Uncertainty of final State
strategies for meeting
Reasonable Further
Progress (RFP)
requirements.
Underestimate     Probably minor.  We apply a conservative estimate for costs
                  of RFP measures.  Available evidence for identified RFP
                  measures suggests costs could be as much as 70 percent
                  lower than this value.  The bias most likely results in
                  significantly understating net benefits.
Errors in emission
projections that form the
basis of selecting control
strategies and costs in
both the IPM and ERCAM
models.
Unable to
determine based
on current
information
Probably minor.  In many cases, emissions reductions are
specified in the regulations, suggesting that errors in the
estimation of absolute levels of emissions under Pre- and
Post-CAAA scenarios may have only a small impact on cost
estimates. The effect on net benefits is unknown.
Exclusion of the impact of
economic incentive
provisions, including
banking, trading, and
emissions averaging
provisions.
Underestimate     Probably minor.  Economic incentive provisions can
                  substantially reduce costs, but the major economic programs
                  for trading of sulfur and nitrogen dioxide emissions are
                  reflected in the analysis.
Incomplete
characterization of certain
indirect costs, including
vehicle owner opportunity
costs associated with
Inspection and
Maintenance Programs
and performance
degradation issues
associated with the
incorporation of emission
control technology.
Overestimate      Probably minor.  Preliminary evidence suggests that the
                  opportunity costs of vehicle owners is most likely small
                  relative to other cost inputs.3 In addition, it is will vary from
                  State to State and is  subject to a variety of influencing
                  factors. The  potential magnitude of indirect costs associated
                  with performance degradation is more uncertain, because
                  few data currently exist to quantify this effect.
                                                 33

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
     Table 3-3 (continued)
     Key Uncertainties Associated with Cost Estimation
Potential Source of Error
Choice to model direct
costs rather than social
costs
Use of costs for rules that
are currently in draft form
(i.e., not yet finalized).
Exclusion of costs of 7-
year and 10-year MACT
standards and the
residential risk standards
for the 2- and 4-year
MACT standards.
Direction of
Potential Bias
for Net Benefits
Unable to
determine based
on current
information
Unable to
determine based
on current
information
Unable to
determine based
on current
information
Likely Significance Relative to Key Uncertainties
on Net Benefits Estimate1
Probably minor. The relationship of social cost to direct cost
estimates is influenced by multiple factors that operate in
opposite directions, suggesting the magnitude of the net
effect is reduced. Social cost estimates can reflect the net
welfare changes across the full range of economic sectors in
the U.S, and so may yield higher estimates of costs than a
direct cost approach. In addition, social cost estimates can
be constructed to reflect the potentially substantial cost-
magnifying effect of existing tax distortions. Direct cost
estimates, however, are likely to overstate costs in the
primary market because they do not reflect consumer and
producer responses. The extent to which a direct cost
estimate will overstate or understate a social cost estimate
depends on the magnitude of the "ripple effects" in economic
sectors not targeted by a regulation. In addition, assessment
of the effect on net benefit estimates must also account for
any economy-wide effects of direct benefits (e.g., the broader
implications of improving health status, and improving
environmental quality).
Probably minor. Rules that are most important to the overall
cost estimate are largely finalized. For example, there is
some uncertainty as to how the cap-and-trade program
through the SIP process will lower NOx emissions in an
efficient manner. The expected effect on net benefits is
minimal.
Probably minor. Costs for the 7- and 1 0-year MACT
standards are likely to be less than for the 2- and 4-year
standards included in the analysis and the need for, and
potential scope and stringency of, future Title III residual risk
standards remain highly uncertain. For consistency, benefits
of the 7- and 10-year standards and the residual risk
standards are also excluded.
      Note:
       1 The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team. The
       Project Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could influence
       the overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more; if an alternative assumption or approach is
       likely to change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification of "probably
       minor."
       2 For more detail, see Harrington et al (1999), referenced in Appendix B.
       3 Preliminary evidence based on Arizona's Enhanced I/M program indicates that major components of the programs costs
       are associated with test and repair costs rather than the costs of waiting and travel for vehicle owners. (Harrington and
       McDonnell, 1999.) To date, Enhanced I/M programs have been implemented in only four States.
                                                          34

-------
Air  Quality
Modeling
    Air quality modeling links changes in emissions
to changes in the atmospheric concentrations of pol-
lutants that may affect human health and the envi-
ronment.  A crucial analytical step, air quality mod-
eling is one of the more complex and resource-in-
tensive components of the prospective analysis. This
chapter outlines how we estimated future-year pol-
lutant concentrations under both the Pre- and Post-
CAAA scenarios using air  quality modeling results
and ambient monitor data.  The first section  of the
chapter begins with a discussion  of some of the chal-
lenges faced by air quality modelers  and  a brief de-
scription of the models we used  in this analysis.  The
following section provides  an overview of the gen-
eral methodology we used to estimate future-year
ambient concentrations.  This methodology section
includes a description of how we used modeling re-
sults to adjust monitor concentration data and esti-
mate ambient concentrations for the years 2000 and
2010.  The third section of this chapter summarizes
the results of the  air  quality modeling and presents
the expected  effects  of the CAAA on future-year
pollutant concentrations.   A discussion  of the key
uncertainties associated  with air quality modeling
concludes the chapter.

Overview of Air
Models

    Air quality modelers  face two key challenges in
attempting to translate emission  inventories into pol-
lutant concentrations. First, they must model the
dispersion and transport of pollutants through the
atmosphere.  Second, they must model pertinent at-
mospheric chemistry and other pollutant transfor-
mation processes.  These challenges are particularly
acute  for those pollutants  that are not emitted di-
rectly, but instead form through  secondary processes.
Ozone is the best example; it  forms in the  atmo-
sphere through a series of complex, non-linear chemi-
cal interactions of precursor pollutants, particularly
certain classes of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
and nitrogen oxides (NOJ.  We faced similar chal-
lenges when estimating P.M concentrations. Atmo-
spheric transformation of gaseous sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxides to  participate  sulfates and nitrates,
respectively, contributes significantly to ambient
concentrations of fine particulate matter.  In  addi-
tion to recognizing the complex atmospheric chem-
istry relevant for some  pollutants, air quality mod-
elers also must deal  with uncertainties associated with
variable meteorology and the  spatial and temporal
distribution of emissions.

    Air quality modelers and  researchers have re-
sponded to the need for scientifically valid and reli-
able estimates of air quality changes by developing a
number of sophisticated atmospheric dispersion and
transformation models.  Some  of these models have
been employed in  support of the development of
federal clean air programs, national assessment stud-
ies, State Implementation Plans (SIPs), and individual
air toxic source risk assessments.  In this analysis,
we used several of  these well-established models to
develop a picture of future changes in air  quality re-
sulting from the implementation of the 1990 CAAA.

    We focused our air quality" modeling efforts on
estimating  the impact of Pre- and Post-CAAA  emis-
sions  on  future-year  ambient concentrations of
ozone, PM10, PM2S, SO,, NOx, and CO and on fu-
ture-year acid  deposition and visibility.   The ideal
model for  this analysis would be a single  integrated
air quality  model capable of estimating ambient con-
centrations for all criteria pollutants throughout the
U.S.  Although EPA is working to develop such a
model, at die time of this analysis the model was not
sufficiently developed and tested.  In the absence of
a single integrated  model, we  employed the Urban
Airshed Model (UAM)  in our analysis of ozone and
used both  the Regional Acid Deposition Model/Re-
gional Particulate  Model (RADM/RPM) and the
Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and Acid
                                               35

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Deposition (REMSAD) model to assess PM10, PM25,
acid deposition and visibility-  All three of these mod-
els  are three-dimensional grid models which require
emissions and meteorological data as input.  Each of
these models calculate pollutant concentrations by
simulating the physical and chemical  pollution for-
mation processes that occur in  the atmosphere.

    We conducted separate  HAM, RADM/RPM,
and REMSAD model runs for the 1990  base-year
and each future-year projection scenario.  The pri-
mary model  input used for each run consisted of
emissions estimates corresponding  to the year and
scenario  being modeled (as described in Chapter 2
and Appendix A) and historical meteorological data
corresponding to a past time period, referred to as a
simulation period.  We selected  previous ozone epi-
sodes, i.e., multi-day events characterized by weather
conditions conducive to ozone formation and trans-
port (and as a result, characterized by multi-day spans
with higher than average ozone concentrations), to
serve as the simulation periods for (JAM  model runs.
Although ozone  concentrations during these simu-
lation periods exceed  the seasonal  average, because
die simulation periods  for both the eastern  and west-
ern U.S.  cover roughly a two week span, ozone con-
centration peaks  are largely offset by the surround-
ing lows.  Overall, the selected simulation periods
reasonably represent  summertime  ozone forming
meteorological conditions and ozone concentrations.
RADM/RPM simulation periods used to model PM,
acid deposition, and visibility were chosen using a
random selection process, while separate simulation
periods at the beginning of each of die four seasons
were  chosen  for  REMSAD.

    Table 4-1 provides an  overview of the air qual-
ity  models used in this analysis.  We  modeled con-
centrations of all pollutants across  the 48 contigu-
ous states; however due to the lack  of an integrated
model, separate air quality models were used  to esti-
mate ozone and PM for the eastern and western U.S.
Table 4-1 shows the domain for each model and  the
simulation periods selected for use  with  each  model
and provides an  overview of the spatial resolution
of the models used as part of this analysis.  The finer
the resolution (i.e., the smaller the grid  cells)  the
better the model  can capture the effects  of localized
changes  in emissions and  weather conditions  011
ambient  air  quality.   Recognizing the relationship
between  grid  cell resolution and the certainty of re-
sults, we endeavored to estimate pollutant concen-
trations in more populated areas using higher reso-
lution models. For this reason, we used the fine grid
UAM-IV, an  urban-scale  model, to  estimate ambi-
ent ozone levels in  selected western cities.  Similarly,
w7e used an intermediate  resolution grid (12 km x 12
km) to model ozone in "inner OTAG" states where
population density  is high  and ozone transport is a
major problem.1

    Using  the three-dimensional grid cell models,
CAM, RADM/RPM, and  REMSAD, we  estimated
grid-cell specific, hourly ozone and  daily PM1(), and
PM25 concentrations for  each day  of the relevant
simulation periods.  We conducted separate model
runs for the  1990 base-year and  2000 and 2010 fu-
ture-year  Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios.  Using
these results, wfe ultimately projected the impact of
the CAAA on ozone and  PM ambient levels.

    We relied on the same models  used to predict
PM concentrations to estimate changes in future-year
acid deposition and visibility.   For each model grid-
cell we predicted daily acid deposition levels and vis-
ibility.  Estimates  for each day of  the simulation
period were  generated for the base-year  and both
projection years under the  Pre- and Post-CAAA sce-
narios.

    Wre estimated future-year Pre- and Post-CAAA
ambient SO2, NO,  NO,, and  CO concentrations by
adjusting  1990 concentrations using future-year to
base-year emissions ratios.  This  technique assumes
a linear relationship between changes  in emissions
in an area  and changes in that area's ambient con-
centration  of the emitted pollutant.2  Although this
technique  does not  take into account  pollutant trans-
port or atmospheric chemistry, we believe linear scal-
ing generates reasonable approximations of ambient
concentrations of gaseous pollutants such  as SO2,
NO , and  CO.
    1  The Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) con-
sists of the 37 easternmost states and the District of Columbia.
The "inner OTAG" region is comprised of the more eastern
(and more populated) states within the OTAG domain.

    '  It is important to emphasize that the correlation expected
is between changes in emissions and changes in air quality.  Di-
rect correlations between the absolute emissions estimates and
empirical air  quality measurements used in the present analysis
may not be strong due to expected inconsistencies between the
geographically local,  monitor proximate emissions densities ai-
iecting air quality data.
                                                   36

-------
                                                                           Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
Table 4-1
Overview of Air Quality Models
Air Quality
Measure   Region    Model
Spatial Resolution
Simulation Period
Ozone     Eastern   UAM-V
           U.S.
a) 12 km x 12 km grid for "Inner
OTAG Region"
b) 36 km x 36 km grid for remainder
of 37-state OTAG region
July 20-30, 1993 and July 7-
18, 1995
Ozone     Western   UAM-V
           U.S.
56 km x 56 km grid (regional scale)  July 1-10, 1990
covering the 11 westernmost states
(states west of North and South
Dakota, including western Texas)
Ozone     San       UAM-IV
           Francisco
           Bay Area
4 km x 4 km (urban scale) grid
covering the San Francisco Bay
Area, the Monterrey Bay Area,
Sacramento,  and a portion of the
San Joaquin Valley
Aug. 3-6, 1990
Ozone     Los       UAM-IV
           Angeles
           Area
5 km x 5 km grid covering the
South Coast Air Basin from Los
Angeles to beyond Riverside and
including part of the Mojave Desert
June 23-25, 1987 and Aug.
26-28, 1987
Ozone     Maricopa  UAM-IV
           County
           (Phoenix)
           Area
4 km x 4 km grid covering
urbanized portion of Maricopa
County
Aug. 9-10, 1992 and June 13-
14,  1993
Particulate  Eastern   RADM/RPM
Matter      U.S.
80 km x 80 km grid (coarse
resolution) covering eastern North
America from the Rocky Mountains
eastward to Newfoundland,
Canada and the Florida Keys (see
Fig. C-14 in Appendix C)
30 randomly selected 5-day
periods spanning a four-year
period
Particulate  Western   REMSAD
Matter      U.S.
56 km x 56 km grid covering the 11
westernmost states
ten-day period for each of four
seasons:
May 1-10,
July 1-10,
Oct. 1-10, and
Dec. 1-10
Visibility
Visibility
Acid
Deposition
Sulfur
Dioxide
Oxides of
Nitrogen
Carbon
Monoxide
Eastern
U.S.
Western
U.S.
Eastern
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
U.S.
RADM/RPM
REMSAD
RADM
linear scaling
linear scaling
linear scaling
(same as PM)
(same as PM)
(same as RADM/RPM)
56 km x 56 km REMSAD grid
covering 48 contiguous states
56 km x 56 km REMSAD grid
covering 48 contiguous states
56 km x 56 km REMSAD grid
covering 48 contiguous states
(same as PM)
(same as PM)
(same as RADM/RPM)
not applicable
not applicable
not applicable
                                             37

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The air quality modeling component of the 812
prospective analysis involved the application of a
variety of complex, sophisticated air quality model-
ing tools  and techniques.  Overall, however, the
method we used  to estimate the impact of changes
in emissions on  air quality wfas  relatively straight
forward.  We began by gathering 1990 air quality
monitor data for  the six criteria pollutants analyzed
in this study.  These observational data served as the
air quality baseline for both the Pre- and Post-CAAA
scenarios.  We then estimated 2000 and 2010 con-
centrations of each pollutant under each emissions
scenario by applying adjustment factors to the  1990
monitor data.   The adjustment factors for each fu-
ture-year projection scenario were based on the rela-
tive change in pollutant concentration between  1990
and the desired future-year, as predicted by air qual-
ity simulation modeling.  This section presents an
overview  of the  methodology we used to estimate
future-year ambient concentrations.  For a  more
detailed description, please refer to Appendix C.

    The diagram  in Figure 4-1 illustrates  the meth-
odology used to estimate ozone and PM concentra-
tions.  First, we compiled distributions of  observed
pollutant concentrations recorded at each air qual-
ity monitor in 1990.  We obtained these  data from
EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System
(AIRS), a publicly accessible database  of air quality
information.  Separately, we then developed distri-
butions of estimated concentrations for each pollut-
ant in 1990 using  1990  emissions data and the appro-
priate air quality  model.  Unlike the 1990 observed
concentrations that were measured at monitoring
sites,  the 1990 estimated concentrations were calcu-
lated at the center of each cell of a grid covering the
domain of the applicable air quality model.  Using
future-year emission inventory estimates for the Pre-
CAAA and Post-CAAA scenarios (developed as de-
scribed in Chapter 2 and Appendix A) and the ap-
propriate air quality models, we next developed dis-
tributions  of model-estimated concentrations at each
grid cell for each  of four future-year projection sce-
narios: 2000 Pre-CAAA, 2010 Pre-CAAA, 2000 Post-
CAAA, and 2010 Post-CAAA.  These results were
used to derive adjustment factors for each air qual-
ity monitor, based on  the simulation results for the
grid cell in which the  monitor is located.  The fu-
ture-year/scenario adjustment factor for each pol-
lutant represents the ratio of the  simulated future-
year/scenario concentration to the 1990  model-esti-
mated concentration. These factors  wfere calculated
by matching future-year and 1990  concentrations at
regular  intervals in each distribution.  Finally, four
sets of model-derived adjustment factors were applied
to the distribution of observed 1990 concentrations
at each  monitor to forecast distributions  of concen-
trations for each of the four future-year projection
scenarios.  It is these concentrations  that serve as
inputs into  the CAAA benefits modeling.

    An  illustrative example follows.  Assume the
median observed concentration of  Pollutant A at
Monitor X in 1990 w7as 0.24 ppm.  Air quality mod-
eling for the grid cell in which Monitor X is located
predicts a median Pollutant A concentration of 0.30
ppm in  1990 and 0.15 ppm in 2010 under the post-
CAAA  scenario.  The 2010 Post-CAAA  adjustment
factor  for the  median Pollutant  A concentration
would be 0.5, and the predicted 2010 Post-CAAA
median  concentration at  Monitor X would  be 0.5
(=0.15/0.30) times the  1990 monitor value of 0.24
ppm, or 0.12 ppm.

    Our approach for forecasting concentrations of
SO_, NOx, and CO involved the same basic approach
described above.  However, instead of applying
model-derived  adjustment factors to the 1990 ob-
served distribution of concentrations, we adjusted
the 1990  distribution using the ratio of  future-year
emissions to 1990 emissions in the vicinity of the
monitor for each of the four future-year projection
scenarios.  For more information  about this ap-
proach, please refer  to Appendix C.
                                                  38

-------
                                                                                 Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
Figure 4-1
Schematic diagram of the future-year concentration estimation  methodology
                       1990
                     (Base Case)
      AQ Model
     Predictions
                                                Cone
          yx\\\\\	Ipost-CAAAl-K
           \\ \ \ \ \x  ^	'
                                                   x\ x \ \ XX
                                              Ratio to Base Case
Cone	
XX X X X \~\
 XX X X X XX
  X X X X X X X
  XX X X X XX
   XX \\X\\
                                                                         Ratio to Base Case
                                 Adjustments
                                    Factors
                       cityl
          AQ
     Observations
  AQ
Results
                       Concentration
                        distributions
             Concentration
              distributions
      Concentration
      distributions
NOTE: Figure illustrates how model results and observations are used to produce the air quality profiles (concentration distributions) for the
benefits analysis.  The figure shows model runs at the top; four sets of "ratios" of model results in space in the middle; and frequency
distributions of pollutant monitor concentrations and the space-dependent scaling of these by the ratios of the model predictions on the bottom.
Air Quality

    This section presents a summary  representation
of the air quality modeling results.  We discuss the
model-simulated concentration estimates and the
adjusted future-year concentration predictions with
a focus on the change in air quality resulting from
the implementation of the  1990 CAAA.

Ozone

    We modeled ozone concentrations separately for
the eastern U.S., western U.S.,  San Francisco Bay
area, Los Angeles area, and  Mancopa County (Phoe-
nix, AZ) area.  Examination of base-year and future-
year model concentration estimates shows  expected
increases  in  Pre-CAAA ozone concentrations and
expected decreases  in  Post-CAAA ozone concentra-
tions in the eastern U.S. In this part of the country,
UAM-V predicts Prc-CAAA ozone concentration
increases will occur primarily over the states of Vir-
               ginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Geor-
               gia, and  Alabama; while Post-CAAA decreases will
               be more  widespread.  Comparison of Pre- and Post-
               CAAA model estimates shows that, wfith the excep-
               tion of a few isolated areas, ambient ozone levels
               throughout the East will be reduced in the year 2010
               as a result of the CAAA.   These lowrer levels are
               largely due to significant reductions in area source
               and motor vehicle VOC emissions and utility, point
               source, and motor vehicle NO  emissions.

                   Regional-scale model results for the western U.S.
               indicate  that ozone concentrations  in this  portion
               of the country, just as in the eastern U.S., will  gen-
               erally increase from  the  1990 base-year  under the
               Pre-CAAA scenario and decrease  from 1990 levels
               under the Post-CAAA scenario.  In the West, we
               anticipate widespread changes under both scenarios;
               however, wfc project that the increases in Pre-CAAA
               ozone concentrations and decreases in Post-CAAA
               model concentrations will be smaller than the pre-
                                                   39

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
dieted changes in ambient ozone  lev-
els in the eastern U.S   Furthermore,
comparison  of 2010 Pre- and Post-
CAAA model estimates shows that
future-year western ozone concentra-
tions will be lower as a result of the
1990 Amendments, but UAM-V re-
sults indicate that the reductions in the
West will likely be about half the  size
of the reductions in the  eastern por-
tion of the country.  The difference
between the  change in western ozone
concentrations and the change in east-
ern  ozone concentrations is  largely
due  to the more aggressive NO  con-
trols expected in the East.   Specifi-
cally, the Post-CAAA scenario  incorporates the ef-
fects of  a NOx cap-and-trade system for the eastern
U.S. (OTAG region).  Another reason for the dif-
ference between  the modeled change in eastern and
western  ozone concentrations is  that we estimated
ozone levels in the  East and West using different
model grid resolutions.   The coarser the resolution,
the less responsive the model concentration estimates
are to localized  changes in emissions.  Thus,  the
smaller estimated change in western ozone concen-
trations  than in eastern  ozone concentrations may,
in part, be attributable to die fact that UAM-V grid-
cells covering the western U.S. are larger than those
covering the eastern U.S.

    Western  urban-area modeling results differ from
the regional scale results  described above.  Examina-
tion of Pre- and Post-CAAA  modeling estimates
shows that, in some portions of the urban centers of
San  Francisco and Los  Angeles, future-year Post-
CAAA ozone concentrations  are  expected to be
higher than Pre-CAAA estimates.   This  ozone
"disbenefit" is  the result of inhibiting a complex
chemical reaction termed "NOx scavenging,"  during
which a  reduction in NOx, an ozone precursor, leads
to an increase in ozone  production instead  of  the
typical decrease.3  In the area immediately surround-
ing the two cities, however, and in Maricopa County,
    ''  Scavenging occurs in areas, typically cities, with limited
VOC and abundant NO... In VOC-limited areas where there is
a relatively high NO concentration (regions where the concen-
tration of VOC, not NO  dictates the amount of ozone that
can be iorrned), these two ozone precursors  (VOC and  NO)
compete to react with a particular gaseous compound.  To pro-
duce ozone,  this compound must combine with VOC.  As a
result,  if the compound joins with NO.., ozone production is
impeded.; thus, a decrease in NOv  lead.s to an  increase in ozone
concentrations.
Figure 4-2
Distribution of Monitor Level Ratios for 95th Percentile Ozone
Concentrations: 2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA
 _ 60
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                                  Ratio
                model results show that scavenging is not expected
                to be influential, if it occurs at all, and  future-year
                Post-CAAA  ozone concentration  estimates are pre-
                dicted to be lower than Pre-CAAA estimates.

                    As described above, we used the UAM-V model
                results to calculate adjustment factors for each of the
                four future-year projection scenarios.  Wre estimated
                future-year monitor-level ozone  concentrations  by
                applying these factors to 1990 observed  concentra-
                tions.  Examination of the distribution of adjusted
                monitor concentration ratios for  95th  percentile
                ozone concentrations is one means  of analyzing the
                impact of the  CAAA on air pollution.  The distri-
                bution of ratios  of 2010 Pre-CAAA to 1990 base-
                year ozone concentrations  reveals that the majority
                of future year  Pre-CAAA ozone concentration esti-
                mates are between zero and 10 percent greater than
                1990 levels, with most concentrations falling in the
                middle of this  range.   The  distribution of ratios of
                2010 Post-CAAA to 1990  base-year shows that in
                nearly all areas of the U.S. ozone  concentrations will
                be lower in 2010 than in the base-year; in the major-
                ity of the  country, future-year concentrations will
                be five to 20 percent lower than in the base-year.4
                The  histogram in  Figure 4-2 depicts the distribution
                of ratios  of 2010 Post-CAAA ozone estimates to 2010
                Pre-CAAA ozone estimates.  Most of the  ratios in
                the distribution are less than one, with a median of
                0.883. This indicates that  the 95th percentile level
                Post-CAAA concentrations, with  few exceptions, are
                lower than the corresponding Pre-CAAA values.
                The  smaller  the ratio, the greater  the difference be-
                tween future-year scenarios.
                    4 See Appendix C for histograms illustrating the change in
                ozone concentrations iroin the base-year.
                                                   40

-------
                                                                                Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
    To model Pre-  and Post-CAAA participate mat-
ter (PM1() and  PM23) concentrations, we  used
RADM/RPM for the' eastern U.S. and REMSAD
for the western U.S.  Results from both models  show
PM concentrations  are expected to be lower under
the Post-CAAA  scenario than under the Pre-CAAA
scenario. This projected improvement in air quality-
is widespread throughout the eastern U.S., with  2010
Post-CAAA PM estimates in some  parts  of the East
up  to 15 to 30 percent lower than  2010 Pre-CAAA
estimates.  In the West, projected reductions in fu-
ture-year PM concentrations  (Pre-CAAA minus
Post-CAAA) are largely restricted  to urban areas.5
The broad scale improvement in  eastern PM  con-
centrations is driven largely by  reductions in utility
source sulfur dioxide emissions throughout this por-
tion of the  country.6  In the West, however, sulfur
dioxide emissions have a much smaller impact on
overall PM concentrations.  Western PM concen-
trations are more significantly  influenced by  area,
motor vehicle, and  nonroad source emissions of ni-
trogen  oxides and directly emitted  PM.   These
sources  are more concentrated in urban areas.  As a
result, the impact of the CAAA on PM concentra-
tions in  the  West  is primarily  restricted to urban
areas.

    Examination of the distribution of adjusted
monitor-level concentration  ratios  for annual  aver-
age PM concentrations  reveals that 2010 Pre-CAAA
PM10 and PM25  estimates are both higher than  1990
base-year estimates  in almost all areas of the coun-
try.  Pre-CAAA 2010 PM]0 and PA^. estimates are
generally zero to 10 percent greater than 1990  base-
year estimates.  The  average estimated  increase in
PM9g concentrations,  however, is slightly larger than
the average estimated increase in  PM1Q.' The esti-
mated change in PM concentrations from the  base-
year to 2010 under  the Post-CAAA scenarios is less
uniform.  While  the majority of areas experience a
reduction in annual average  PM10 and PM25 concen-
trations, m  a number of areas ambient PM levels,
more frequently PM, _, increase from the base-year
under the Post-CAAA scenario.  On average, how-
ever, 2010 Post-CAAA PM10 and PM25 concentra-
tions are between  zero and  five percent  and zero
and  10  percent, respectively, lower than 1990 base-
year concentrations.8

    As shown in Figures 4-3 and  4-4, the percentage
reduction in PM25 concentrations across  the U.S.
between the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios vary
more widely than the percentage  reduction in PM.|0.
In the emissions analysis we focus on the impact of
the CAAA 011 anthropogenic emissions and, so, hold
natural source PM emissions constant at 1990 levels.
Natural source emissions make  up a much larger
portion of PM]0 concentrations than PM,5 concen-
trations  and dampen the influence of changes in an-
thropogenic emissions on ambient PM10 concentra-
tions.

    Comparison of the two distributions in Figures
4-3 and 4-4 shows that, despite the greater variation
of PM,5 reductions, the percentage reduction in PM25
concentrations are  larger on  average than the per-
centage  reduction in PM,0 concentrations.  The rea-
son for  this  difference is two fold.  First, as  described
above, PM,5 concentrations are more susceptible to
the influence of changes in anthropogenic emissions,
which  are regulated by the  CAAA.  Second, the
CAAA provisions that influence PM emissions (regu-
lations  that  focus on  secondary PM precursors such
as NOx, and SO2, and primary PM sources such as
diesel engine exhaust standards) affect the  fine par-
ticulate  (PM, j)  subset of PM]0 to  a much greater ex-
tent than  the coarser fraction  that makes up the rest
of PM1Q.  As a result of these two factors, the pro-
jected difference in ambient concentrations between
the Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA  scenarios reflect a
larger percentage reduction  in PM25 than PMin.
    5  Outside the larger urban areas in the West, REMSAD
results show little or no change in PM concentrations between
Pre- and Post-CAAA estimates.

    "  Sulfur dioxide is a secondary PM precursor.

      In some of She figures in this chapter the Pre-CAAA and
Post-CAAA scenarios are referred to as Pre-CAAA90 and Post-
CAAA90,  respectfully.
    8  See Appendix C ior histograms illustrating the change in
PM concentrations from the 1990 base-year to each of the Pre-
CAAA and Post-CAAA iuture vear scenarios.
                                                  41

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure 4-3
Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM and  REMSAD Derived
Monitor Level Ratios for Annual Average PM10 Concentrations:
2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA
      60
 ST g
 £ 2  30 -
      20 -

      10 -
       0
                                         median: 0.946
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                                   Ratio
Figure 4-4
Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM and  REMSAD Derived
Monitor Level        for Annual Average PM25 Concentrations:
2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA
60 -

> SO'
c
0)
£ 2 30"
g&
1 20-
* 10"








	 1 	 1 	 a 	 . 	 1 1
o 	

median: 0.919







n









1

        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                                   Ratio
Visibility

    We also relied on RADM/RPM and REMSAD
to estimate the impact of the CAAA on future-year
visibility-  Tables  4-2  and 4-3 compare the mean an-
nual visibility (expressed in deciviews)9 in selected
eastern urban  areas and National Parks, respectively,
as estimated bv RADM/RPM under the 1990 base-
                year and 2010 Pre- and Post-CAAA
                scenarios.  Comparison of these val-
                ues reveals that, in the eastern U.S.,
                we  anticipate that  future-year visibil-
                ity  in both urban  and rural areas is
                projected to improve under the Post-
                CAAA scenario.  RADM/RPM pre-
                dicts that  Post-CAAA visibility in
                2010 will not only be better than Pre-
                CAAA visibility, but also, in many
                areas, it  will  be better than the vis-
                ibility 111 the 1990 base-year.  This
                improvement in visibility is attrib-
                utable to reductions in the concen-
                tration of gaseous and suspended par-
                ticles, such as  PM, that scatter and
                absorb light,  and thus influence vis-
                ibility.

                    Visibility  in the West is also sig-
                nificantly  better  under  the  Post-
                CAAA scenario than under the Pre-
                CAAA scenario  (see Tables 4-4 and
                4-5). Base-year model runs show that
                visibility in the western U.S.  is  the
                poorest in larger metropolitan areas
                such as Los Angeles, CA; San  Fran-
                cisco, CA;  Denver, CO; and  Phoe-
                nix, AZ.  Under the 2010 Pre-CAAA
                scenario, REMSAD estimates that,
                throughout much  of the  West, vis-
                ibility will remain relatively un-
                changed  from the base-year, and in
                some cases  will  even improve.  In the
	  metropolitan areas, however, the
                model predicts  visibility degradation.
 Under   the  Post-CAAA  scenario,  however,
 REMSAD estimates widespread improvement in
 future-year  visibility in  the West.  In  both  metro-
 politan  and non-urban  areas,  deciview levels esti-
 mated for 2010 are  lower under the Post-CAAA sce-
 nario than  under  the Pre-CAAA scenario.   The
 model suggests Los Angeles  and Las Vegas will ex-
 perience the greatest improvement.
    9 The deciview is a measure of visibility which captures (lie
relationship between air pollution and human perception of vis-
ibility.  When air is free of the particles that cause visibility deg-
radation, the DeciView Haze Index is  zero.  The higher the
deciview level, the poorer the visibility; a one io two deciview
change translates lo a just noticeable change in visibility for most
individuals.
                                                   42

-------
                                                                         Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
Table 4-2
Comparison of Visibility in Selected Eastern Urban Areas

                                                     Mean Annual Deciview*
         Area Name
  State
   1990
Base-Year
   2010
Pre-CAAA
   2010
Post-CAAA
Atlanta Metro Area
   GA
   20.9
   22.8
   20.0
Boston Metro Area
   MA
   13.2
   14.0
    11.9
Chicago Metro Area
    IL
   17.5
   19.1
   17.0
Columbus
   OH
   16.5
   17.7
    15.1
Detroit Metro Area
    Ml
   16.0
   18.5
    15.3
Indianapolis
    IN
   20.1
   21.1
    19.0
Little Rock
   AR
   15.0
   17.2
    15.1
Milwaukee Metro Area
    Wl
   15.6
   18.4
    15.3
Minn.-St. Paul Metro Area
   MN
   10.1
   12.4
    10.3
Nashville
    TN
   20.4
   21.5
    19.0
New York City Metro Area
  NY/NJ
   15.2
   18.0
    13.9
Pittsburgh Metro Area
    PA
   15.8
   16.9
    14.2
St. Louis Metro Area
   MO
   16.5
   17.8
    16.0
Syracuse
    NY
   12.4
   13.2
    11.5
Washington, DC Metro Area
DC/VA/MD
   17.5
   19.2
    16.3
*For cities or metropolitan areas not contained by a single RADM/RPM grid cell, the visibility measure
presented in this table is a weighted average of the mean annual deciview level from each of the grid
cells that together completely contain the selected area. Weighting is based upon the spatial
distribution of an area over the various grid cells.
  Table 4-3
  Comparison of Visibility in Selected Eastern National Parks
Mean Annual Deciview*
Area Name
Acadia NP
Everglades NP
Great Smoky Mtns. NP
Shenandoah NP
State
ME
FL
TN
VA
1990
Base-Year
11.1
7.6
20.4
16.5
2010
Pre-CAAA
12.0
9.2
22.3
17.8
2010
Post-CAAA
10.4
6.9
19.6
15.2
  *For national parks not contained by a single RADM/RPM grid cell, the visibility measure presented in
  this table is a weighted average of the mean annual deciview level from each of the grid cells that
  together completely contain the selected area. Weighting is based upon the spatial distribution of an
  area over the various grid cells.
                                         43

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
             Table 4-4
             Comparison of Visibility in Selected Western Urban Areas
Area Name
Denver
Las Vegas
Los Angeles
Phoenix
Salt Lake City
San Francisco
Seattle
State
CO
NV
CA
AZ
UT
CA
WA

1990
Base-Year
19.4
14.6
22.7
15.4
12.5
24.4
20.5
Mean Annual Deciview*
2010
Pre-CAAA
22.6
17.9
24.6
17.1
14.8
26.1
22.2

2010
Post-CAAA
21.0
15.2
22.0
15.3
13.4
24.6
21.0
             *For cities not contained by a single REMSAD grid cell, the visibility measure presented in this table is a
             weighted average of the mean annual deciview level from each of the grid cells that together completely
             contain the selected area. Weighting is based upon the spatial distribution of an area over the various grid
             cells.
             Table 4-5
             Comparison of Visibility in Selected Western National Parks
Area Name
Glacier NP
Grand Canyon NP
Olympic NP
Yellowstone NP
Yosemite NP
Zion NP
State
MT
AZ
WA
WY
CA
UT

1990
Base-Year
11.2
8.3
11.1
9.0
11.5
8.0
Mean Annual Deciview*
2010
Pre-CAAA
11.9
8.8
11.8
9.7
13.2
9.0

2010
Post-CAAA
11.5
8.3
11.7
9.5
12.2
8.4
             *For national parks not contained by a single REMSAD grid cell, the visibility measure presented in this
             table is a weighted average of the mean annual deciview level from each of the grid cells that together
             completely contain the selected area. Weighting is based upon the spatial distribution of an area over the
             various grid cells.
                                                         44

-------
                                                                                 Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
                                      Figure 4-5
                                          60
                                        5 50 H
                                        
-------
 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure 4-7
Distribution of Monitor - Level Ratios of N02 Emissions
   60
I
50 -


30-

20-

10-

 0
                     median: 0.575
      0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20
                                  Ratio
Note: 2.7 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.

Figure 4-8
Distribution of Monitor - Level Ratios of CO Emissions
   60
 8 50 -
   4C
 s-
 | 30 -
 ff
 £ 20 H
 I 10 H
    o
                                median: 0.720
      0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20
                                  Ratio
Note: 15.7 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.
    Comparison of Pre- and Post-CAAA emission-
 based adjustment factors also helps illustrate  the ef-
 fect of the  1990 Amendments 011 ambient pollution
 concentrations.  The ratio of 2010 Post-CAAA ad-
 justment factors to 2010 Pre-CAAA adjustment fac-
 tors shows  the  impact of the 1990  Amendments on
 ambient concentrations relative to the baseline sce-
               nario.  Ratios  less than one  indicate
               that we estimate that future-year con-
               centrations of SCX, NO, NO2, and
               CO are lower  under the Post-CAAA
               scenario than  under the Pre-CAAA
               scenario.

                   Figures 4-5 through 4-8 show the
               distribution of 2010 Post-CAAA to
               2010 Pre-CAAA ratios for summer-
               time SO_, NO, NO,, and CO respec-
               tively.  These figures illustrate the re-
               gional variation in die influence of die
               1990 Amendments  on ambient  con-
               centrations of these pollutants.  Al-
               though we estimate  concentrations in
               some areas will increase under the
               Post-CAAA scenario relative to Pre-
               CAAA estimates, the median sum-
               mertime 2010 Post-  to  Pre-CAAA ra-
               tios for SO,, NO, NO,, and  CO arc
               0.90, 0.67, 0.58, and 0.72 respectively.
               These values, each less  than one, indi-
               cate that the central tendency for sum-
               mertime 2010  Post-CAAA concentra-
               tion estimates of these  four pollutants
               is to be lower than 2010 Pre-CAAA
               estimates.

                   Table 4-6 displays the median val-
               ues of the distribution of Post- to Pre-
	  CAAA ratios for the summer months
 described above and the remaining three seasons. Just
 as  for die summer; spring, autumn, and winter me-
 dian values are less than one.  Averaged over all four
 seasons, we estimate a median reduction in   SO2,
 NO, NO2, and CO concentrations of approximately
 9,  33, 40, and 25  percent respectively.  RACT re-
 quirements, tailpipe emissions standards, and NOx
 emissions  trading account  for the bulk of the reduc-
       Table 4-6
       Median Values of the Distribution of Ratios of 2010 Post-CAAA/
       Pre-CAAA Adjustment Factors

Spring
Summer
Autumn
Winter
SO2
0.904
0.892
0.916
0.924
NO
0.669
0.666
0.677
0.686
NO2
0.598
0.575
0.614
0.626
CO
0.790
0.720
0.756
0.692
                                                   46

-------
                                                                               Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
tion in NO and NO2  concentrations.   Title I
nonattainment area controls and Title II motor ve-
hicle provisions  are responsible for much of the
change  in CO concentrations, while regulation of
utility and motor vehicle emissions account  for ma-
jority of the decrease in  SO0 concentrations.

Uncertainty in        Air Quality
Estimates

    .Many  sources of uncertainty affect the precision
and accuracy of the projected changes in air quality
presented in this study.   These uncertainties arise
largely  from potential inaccuracies in the emissions
inventories used as air quality modeling inputs and
potential errors  in the structure and parameteriza-
tion of the air quality models themselves.   For ex-
ample,   we estimated changes  in PM concentrations
in the eastern U.S.  based exclusively on changes in
the concentrations  of sulfate and nitrate particles.
By not  accounting  for changes in organic  and pri-
mary particulate  fractions, we likely underestimate
the impact of the  CAAA on PM concentrations.
Also, by using separate  air quality models for indi-
vidual pollutants and different geographic regions,
as opposed to a single  integrated model, we were
unable  to fully capture  the interaction   among air
pollutants or reflect transport of pollutants  or pre-
cursors  across the boundaries of the models cover-
ing the  western  and eastern states.  The direction
and magnitude of bias these limitations impose on
net benefits estimate presented in this  analysis  can
not be determined based on current information.
    Some model-related uncertainties, however, may
be mitigated because this analysis uses the air qual-
ity modeling results in a relative, not absolute, sense.
We focus 011 the change in air quality between the
Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios and not on the am-
bient concentrations projected by the individual
models themselves.  Therefore, uncertainties that
affect a model's ability7 to accurately predict the rela-
tive change in concentration of a pollutant from one
scenario  to another are more important in the con-
text of this study than those that affect only the ab-
solute  model results.

    The  relatively coarse grid cells  used to model
ozone  in most areas of the U.S.  represents a poten-
tial source of uncertainty affecting a model's sensi-
tivity to changes in emissions.  Grid size affects chem-
istry, transport, and diffusion processes  that in turn
determine the  response of pollutant concentrations
to changes in emissions. The less accurately a model
can predict the impact of changes in emissions 011
ambient levels, the greater the  uncertainty associ-
ated with predicted differences between Pre- and
Post-CAAA concentration estimates.

    Table 4-7 presents the most important specific
sources of uncertainty and Appendix C further de-
scribes the uncertainties associated with air quality
modeling. While the list of potential errors presented
in Table 4-7 is not exhaustive, it includes discussion
of those factors with die greatest likelihood of con-
tributing to any  potential  bias  in the primary net
benefit estimates.
                                                  47

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Table 4-7
       Key Uncertainties Associated with Air Quality Modeling
           Potential Source of Error
    Direction of
  Potential Bias for
    Net Benefits
      Estimate
     Likely Significance Relative to Key
              Uncertainties in
           Net Benefit Estimate*
       PM-io and PM2.5 concentrations in
       the East (RADM domain) are
       based exclusively on changes in
       the concentrations of sulfate and
       nitrate particles, omitting the
       effect of anticipated  reductions in
       organic or primary particulate
       fractions.
 Underestimate.        Potentially major. Nitrates and sulfates
                      constitute major components of PM, especially
                      PM2.s, in most of the RADM domain and
                      changes in nitrates and sulfates may serve as a
                      reasonable approximation to changes in total
                      PM-io and total PM2.5. Of the other components,
                      primary crustal particulate emissions are not
                      expected to change between scenarios;
                      primary organic carbon particulate emissions
                      are expected to change, but an important
                      unknown fraction of the organic PM is from
                      biogenic emissions, and biogenic emissions are
                      not expected to change between scenarios.  If
                      the underestimation is major, it is likely the
                      result of not capturing reductions in motor
                      vehicle primary elemental carbon and organic
	carbon particulate emissions.	
       The number of PM2.s ambient
       concentration monitors
       throughout the U.S. is limited. As
       a result, cross estimation of PM25
       concentrations from PM-io (or
       TSP) data was necessary in
       order to complete the "monitor-
       level" observational dataset
       used  in the calculation of air
       quality profiles.	
 Unable to
 determine based on
 the current
 information.
Potentially major.  PM2.s exposure is linked to
mortality, and avoided mortality constitutes a
large portion of overall CAAA benefits.  Cross
estimation of PM25, however, is based on
studies that account for seasonal and
geographic variability in size and species
composition  of particulate matter.  Also, results
are aggregated to the annual level, improving
the accuracy of cross estimation.
       Use of separate air quality
       models for individual pollutants
       and for different geographic
       regions does not allow for a fully
       integrated analysis of pollutants
       and their interactions.
 Unable to
 determine based on
 current information.
Potentially major.  There are uncertainties
introduced by different air quality models
operating at different scales for different
pollutants.  Interaction is expected to be most
significant for PM estimates.  However,
important oxidant interactions are represented
in all PM models and the models are being
used as designed.  The greatest likelihood of
error in this case is for the summer period in
areas with NOx inhibition of ambient ozone
(e.g., Los Angeles).	
       Future-year adjustment factors
       for seasonal or annual monitoring
       data are based on model results
       for a limited number of simulation
       days.
 Overall, unable to
 determine based on
 current information.
Probably minor. RADM/RPM and REMSAD
PM modeling simulation periods represent all
four seasons and characterize the full seasonal
distribution.  Potential overestimation of ozone,
due to reliance on summertime episodes
characterized by high ozone levels and applied
to the May-September ozone season, is
mitigated by longer simulation periods, which
contain both high and low ozone days. Also,
underestimation of UAM-V western and UAM-
IV Los Angeles ozone concentrations (see
below) may help offset the potential bias
associated with this uncertainty.	
                                                     48

-------
                                                                      Chapter 4: Air Quality Modeling
Table 4-7
Key Uncertainties Associated with Air Quality Modeling (continued)
                                 Direction of
Potential Source of Error
Comparison of modeled and
observed concentrations
indicates that ozone
concentrations in the western
states were somewhat under-
predicted by the UAM-V model,
and ozone concentrations in
the Los Angeles area were
underestimated by the UAM-IV
model.
Ozone modeling in the eastern
U.S. relies on a relatively
coarse 12 km grid, suggesting
NOX inhibition of ambient ozone
levels may be under
represented in some eastern
urban areas. Coarse grid may
affect both model performance
and response to emissions
changes.
UAM-V modeling of ozone in
the western U.S. uses a
coarser grid than the eastern
UAM-V (OTAG) or UAM-IV
models, limiting the resolution
of ozone predictions in the
West.
Emissions estimated at the
county level (e.g., area source
and motor vehicle NOX and
VOC emissions) are spatially
and temporally allocated based
on land use, population, and
other surrogate indicators of
emissions activity. Uncertainty
and error are introduced to the
extent that area source
emissions are not perfectly
spatially or temporally
correlated with these indicators.
The REMSAD model under-
predicted western PM
concentrations during fall and
winter simulation periods.
Potential Bias for Likely Significance Relative to Key
Net Benefits Uncertainties in
Estimate Net Benefit Estimate*
Unable to
determine based
on current
information.
Unable to
determine based
on current
information.
Unable to
determine based
on current
information.
Unable to
determine based
on current
information.
Unable to
determine based
on current
information.
Probably minor. Because model results are
used in a relative sense (i.e., to develop
adjustment factors for monitor data) the
tendency for UAM-V or UAM to underestimate
absolute ozone concentrations would be unlikely
to affect overall results. To the extent that the
model is not accurately estimating the relative
changes in ozone concentrations across
regulatory scenarios, the effect could be greater.
Probably minor. Though potentially major for
eastern ozone results in those cities with known
NOX inhibition, ozone benefits contribute only
minimally to net benefit projections in this study.
Grid size affects chemistry, transport, and
diffusion processes which in turn determine the
response to changes in emissions, and may also
affect the relative benefits of low-elevation
versus high-stack controls. However, the
approach is consistent with current state-of-the-
art for regional-scale ozone modeling.
Probably minor. Also, probably minor for ozone
results. Grid cell-specific adjustment factors for
monitors are less precise for the west and may
not capture local fluctuations. However,
exposure tends to be lower in the predominantly
non-urban west, and models with finer grids
have been applied to three key population
centers with significant ozone concentrations.
May result in underestimation of benefits in the
large urban areas not specifically modeled (e.g.,
Denver, Seattle) with finer grid.
Probably minor. Potentially major for estimation
of ozone, which depends largely on VOC and
NOX emissions; however, ozone benefits
contribute only minimally to net benefit
projections in this study.
Probably minor. Because model results are
used in a relative sense (i.e., to develop
adjustment factors for monitor data) REMSAD's
underestimation of absolute PM concentrations
would be unlikely to significantly affect overall
results. To the extent that the model is not
accurately estimating the relative changes in PM
concentrations across regulatory scenarios, or
the individual PM components (e.g., sulfates,
primary emissions) do not vary uniformly across
seasons, the effect could be greater.
                                          49

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        Table 4-7
        Key Uncertainties Associated with Air Quality Modeling (continued)
           Potential Source of Error
    Direction of
 Potential Bias for
    Net Benefits
     Estimate
     Likely Significance Relative to Key
              Uncertainties in
           Net Benefit Estimate*
        Lack of model coverage for acid
        deposition in Western states.
Underestimate         Probably minor. Because acid deposition tends
                      to be a more significant problem in the eastern
                      U.S. and acid deposition reduction contributes
                      only minimally to net monetized benefits, the
                      monetized benefits of reduced acid deposition
                      in the western states would be unlikely to
                      significantly alter the total estimate of
                      monetized benefits.
        Uncertainties in biogenic
        emissions inputs increase
        uncertainty in the AQM
        estimates.
Unable to
determine based on
current information.
Probably minor.  Potentially major impacts for
ozone outputs, but ozone benefits contribute
only minimally to net benefit projections in this
study.  Uncertainties in biogenics may be as
large as a factor of 2 to 3.  These biogenic
inputs affect the emissions-based VOC/NOX
ratio and, therefore, potentially affect the
response of the modeling system to emissions
changes.	
        * The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team. The
        Project Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could
        influence the overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more; if an alternative assumption or
        approach is likely to change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification
        of "probably minor."	
                                                       50

-------
Human   Health
Effects   of
Criteria   Pollutants
   Health benefits resulting from improved air qual-
ity constitute a significant portion of die overall ben-
efits of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.  As
part of die prospective analysis of these amendments,
we have identified and, where  possible, estimated
the magnitude of the health benefits that Americans
are likely  to enjoy in future years as a result of the
CAAA.   These health benefits are  expressed as
avoided cases  of air-pollution related  health  effects
such  as premature mortality, heart disease, and res-
piratory illness. This chapter presents an  overview
of our approach to modeling these changes in ad-
verse health effects,  discusses key assumptions asso-
ciated with this approach,  and  summarizes model-
ing results for major health effect categories.  Al-
though this chapter focuses predominantly  011 the
human health effects associated with exposure to
criteria pollutants, the final section of this chapter
presents a discussion of the effects associated with
air toxics and  stratospheric ozone.

   In general, this analysis finds that  the  CAAA
will result 111 significant reductions in  mortality, res-
piratory illness, heart disease,  and other adverse
health effects,  with much of these  reductions result-
ing from decreases in ambient particulate matter con-
centrations.



   We estimate the impact of the CAAA on hu-
man  health by analyzing the difference in the ex-
pected incidence of adverse health effects between
the Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA regulatory sce-
narios. As described in Chapter 2, the  Pre-CAAA
scenario assumes no further controls on criteria pol-
lutant emissions besides those  already in place in
1990, while the Post-CAAA scenario assumes full
implementation of the 1990 CAAA.  For each regu-
latory scenario, we use the Criteria  Air Pollutant
Modeling System (CAPMS) to estimate the incidence
of health effects for 1990 (base-year), 2000, and 2010.
Modeling die incidence  of adverse health effects re-
sulting from exposure to criteria air pollutants re-
quires three types of inputs: (1)  estimates  of the
changes in air quality for the Pre- and Post-CAAA
scenarios in 2000 and 2010; (2) estimates of the num-
ber of people exposed  to air pollutants at a given
location; and (3)  concentration-response  (C-R) func-
tions that link changes  in  air pollutant concentra-
tions widi changes in adverse health effects. We dis-
cuss each of diese inputs in greater detail below.

Air Quality

   The development of criteria pollutant concen-
tration estimates  for use in the CAPMS model con-
sists  of two  steps.  First, air quality modeling and
1990 base-year monitoring data arc used to project
ambient pollution levels at monitors throughout the
48 contiguous states.  Second,  because air quality
momtors are neither uniformly nor pervasively dis-
tributed across the  country, concentration data at
monitors are extrapolated to non-monitored areas
in order to generate  a more comprehensive air qual-
ity data set covering  the  48 contiguous states and the
District of Columbia.

   The projections  of criteria pollutant concentra-
tions at air pollution  monitors are developed as sum-
marized in Chapter 4 and described in detail  in Ap-
pendix C.  Briefly, baseline 1990 concentrations at
each monitor are adjusted using  monitor- and pol-
lutant-specific adjustment factors to produce esti-
mates of concentrations in 2000 and 2010 for each
regulatory scenario.  Each adjustment factor reflects
the relative change in the concentration of a  pollut-
ant in a specific  geographic area between 1990 and
the target year, as predicted by air quality modeling.
                                             51

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    To develop pollutant concentration estimates for
the entire continental  U.S. we extrapolate the 1990
monitor data and the future-year estimates  to  the
eight kilometer by eight kilometer CAPMS grid cells
that cover the 48 contiguous states. Within each of
these  cells, we calculate an estimated pollutant con-
centration using data from nearby  monitors accord-
ing to a distance-weighted  averaging method  de-
scribed in Appendix D.  We  then use  these grid  cell
pollutant concentration estimates to predict changes
in health effects among the population  residing
within each cell.



    Health benefits resulting from the CAAA are
related to the change in air pollutant exposure expe-
rienced by individuals.  Because the expected changes
in pollutant  concentrations  vary from location to
location, individuals in different parts of the coun-
try may not experience the same level of health ben-
efits.  This analysis apportions benefits among indi-
viduals by matching the change in air pollutant con-
centration in  a CAPMS grid cell with the size of the
population that experiences  that change.

    As a result, we require an estimate of the distri-
bution of the U.S. population among CAPMS grid
cells.  The grid-cell-specific population counts for
1990 are derived from U.S. Census Bureau block level
population data.  Grid cell population estimates for
future years are extrapolated from  1990 levels using
the ratio of future-year and 1990 state-level popula-
tion estimates provided by the U.S. Bureau of Eco-
nomic Analysis.1

Concentration-Response Functions

    We calculate the benefits attributable  to  the
CAAA as the avoided incidence  of adverse  health
effects.   Such benefits  can be measured using C-R
functions specific to each health effect.  C-R func-
tions are equations that relate the change in the num-
ber of individuals in a population exhibiting a "re-
sponse" (in this case an adverse health effect such as
respiratory disease)  to a change in pollutant concen-
tration experienced by that population.  The C-R
functions used in CAPMS generate changes in  the
incidence of an adverse health effect using three val-
ues: the grid-cell-specific change in pollutant concen-
tration, the grid-cell-specific population, and  an esti-
mate of the change in the number of individuals that
suffer an adverse health effect per unit change in air
quality.2  As  described in Appendix D, we derive
this last factor, as well  as the specific  form of the C-
R equation, from the  published scientific literature
for each pollutant/health effect relationship of in-
terest.

    Using the appropriate C-R functions, CAPMS
generates estimates for each  grid-cell  of the change
in incidence of a set of adverse health effects result-
ing from the incremental change in exposure between
the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios in 2000 and 2010.
For each health effect, CAPMS then generates na-
tional health benefits estimates by summing  the  an-
nual incidence change  across all grid cells.

    Each criteria pollutant evaluated in the 812 pro-
spective analysis has been associated with multiple
adverse health  effects.  The  published scientific  lit-
erature contains information that supports the esti-
mation of some, but not all,  of these effects.   Thus,
it is not possible currently to estimate all of the hu-
man health benefits attributable to the  CAAA.  In
addition, for some of the health effects we do  quan-
tify,  the current economic literature does not sup-
port the estimation of die economic value of these
effects. For each of the criteria pollutants  we evalu-
ate in  this analysis, Table 5-1 presents the  health ef-
fects that are quantitatively estimated and those that
can not currently be quantified.  The sixth  criteria
pollutant, lead  (Pb), is not included in this analysis
since  airborne emissions of lead were  virtually  elimi-
nated by pre-1990  ('lean Air Act programs.

       Analytical

    The modeling of health  benefits attributable to
the CAAA  involves numerous judgments and  as-
sumptions to address data limitations and other con-
straints.  Each of these analytical assumptions affects
both the accuracy and precision with  which  we can
estimate health benefits of the  CAAA, but some  as-
    1  U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.  1995.  BEA. Regional
Projections to 2045: Volume 1, States. U.S. Department of Com-
merce.  Washington, DC.  July.
    •" An estimate of the baseline incidence of the adverse health
eiiect may also be required ior certain C-R functions.
                                                   52

-------
                                                                Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
Table 5-1
Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
 Pollutant
Quantified Health Effects
Unquantified Health Effects1
Ozone       Respiratory symptoms
             Minor restricted activity days
             Respiratory restricted activity days
             Hospital admissions-
                     All Respiratory and
                     All Cardiovascular
             Emergency room visits for asthma
             Asthma attacks
                                Mortality
                                Increased airway responsiveness to stimuli
                                Inflammation in the lung
                                Chronic respiratory damage / Premature aging of the lungs
                                Acute inflammation and respiratory cell damage
                                Increased susceptibility to respiratory infection
                                Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Particulate   Mortality*
Matter       Bronchitis - Chronic and Acute
(PM-io,       New asthma cases
PM2.s)       Hospital admissions -
                     All Respiratory and
                     All Cardiovascular
             Emergency room visits for asthma
             Lower respiratory illness
             Upper respiratory illness
             Shortness of breath
             Respiratory symptoms
             Minor restricted activity days
             All restricted activity days
             Days of work loss
             Moderate or worse asthma status
               (asthmatics)
                                Neonatal mortality*
                                Changes in pulmonary function
                                Chronic respiratory diseases
                                other than  chronic bronchitis
                                Morphological changes
                                Altered host defense mechanisms
                                Cancer
                                Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Carbon      Hospital Admissions -
Monoxide            All Respiratory and
                     All Cardiovascular
                                Behavioral effects
                                Other hospital admissions
                                Other cardiovascular effects
                                Developmental effects
                                Decreased time to onset of angina
                                Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Nitrogen     Respiratory illness
Oxides       Hospital Admissions -
                     All Respiratory and
                     All Cardiovascular
                                Increased airway responsiveness to stimuli
                                Chronic respiratory damage / Premature aging of the lungs
                                Inflammation of the lung
                                Increased susceptibility to respiratory infection
                                Acute inflammation and respiratory cell damage
                                Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
Sulfur       Hospital Admissions -
Dioxide              All Respiratory and
                     All Cardiovascular
             In exercising asthmatics:
                     Chest tightness,
                     Shortness of breath, or
                     Wheezing
                                Changes in pulmonary function
                                Respiratory symptoms in non-asthmatics
                                Non-asthma respiratory emergency room visits
f Some of the unqualified adverse health effects of air pollution may be associated with adverse health endpoints that we
have quantitatively evaluated (e.g., chronic respiratory damage and premature mortality).  However, it is likely that the value
assigned to the quantified endpoint may not fully capture the value of the associated health effect (e.g., chronic respiratory
damage may result in significant pain and suffering prior to mortality). As a result, we include such effects separately in the
unquantified health effects column.
JAppendix D includes detailed discussion of the scientific evidence for these potential health effects and includes illustrative
benefit calculations for them. Current uncertainties in our understanding of these effects do not support including these
quantitative estimates in the overall CAAA benefits estimate. However,  ozone-related mortality may be implicitly quantified in
the overall analysis as part of the PM mortality estimate because of the significant correlation between ozone and PM
concentrations.
* This analysis estimates avoided mortality using PM as an indicator of the criteria air pollutant mix to which individuals were
exposed.
                                                  53

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
sumptions  introduce greater uncertainty into  the
results than others.  This section characterizes these
key assumptions and the associated uncertainties to
allow the reader to gain a better understanding of
the potential for misestimation of avoided  health
effects.  In  addition, health benefits are presented as
ranges to reflect the aggregate effect  of  the  uncer-
tainty in key variables (see  Results section below).
This section discusses the most important analytical
assumptions of this modeling effort,  grouped into
the following categories: (1) exposure analysis, (2)
selection and application of C-R functions, and (3)
estimation of changes in PM-related mortality.



    The key analytical assumptions involved in esti-
mating exposure to criteria air pollutants relate to
two steps: die extrapolation of air quality data from
monitors and the mapping of population  data to air
quality data.

    As discussed above, actual  ambient air pollution
data arc available only  for a limited number of moni-
tor sites that arc not uniformly distributed  across
the U.S.  Thus, to estimate  the impact of air pollu-
tion changes on the health  of the  U.S. population,
data from monitors are extrapolated to the cells of a
grid that  covers the 48 contiguous states and  are
matched with population  data for each grid-cell.
Essentially,  the extrapolation method uses data from
die closest set of monitors surrounding a  grid-cell to
compute a  weighted average concentration for that
cell.  Monitors closer to the grid cell are assumed to
yield a more accurate estimate of air  quality  in  the
cell; thus data from these  monitors  receive more
weight than data from more distant monitors when
calculating an air quality estimate for the  cell.3  The
resulting estimates are uncertain because the geogra-
phy, weather, land use, and other  factors influenc-
ing air pollution may  differ significantly  between a
grid cell and the monitor or monitors used to  gener-
ate estimates of air quality, especially as  the  moni-
tor-to-grid-cell distance grows.4  As a result, they may

    3  Specifically, monitor data  are weighted based, oil the
inverse of the distance between the monitor and  the  grid-cell
center. Addition;!] information on the extrapolation method is
provided in Appendix D.
    4  In order to address  this issue for long-distance extrapola-
tion (i.e., grid  cells greater  than 50 kilometers from a monitor),
the method is modified to  also incorporate air quality modeling
predictions for the source and target locations.  See Appendix D
for details.
not sufficiently capture local variation  in air pollu-
tion levels (e.g., hot spots).

    However, since the uncertainty in these  extrapo-
lated values is inversely proportional to the density
of monitors in a given area, and since air quality
monitors  are more prevalent in high pollution areas
than  in low  pollution areas, this extrapolation
method estimates the  air quality in high pollution
areas  (where the potential benefits of the CAAA are
greatest)  with greater  certainty than in low pollu-
tion areas.  Thus, grid-cell  ozone estimates in  the
eastern U.S., where  ozone  levels and ozone moni-
tor density are higher, are likely to be more  accurate
than those  in the west, where monitor coverage is
more sparse.   Also, estimates of concentrations of
criteria pollutants, which are measured  by a greater
number of  monitors nationwide (PM, ozone, SO,,),
are expected to be less uncertain than estimates for
CO and NO , which are measured bv  considerably
            X
fewer  monitors.

    Air pollutant concentration changes are  mapped
to grid-cell  population  data  derived from U.S. Cen-
sus bureau data,  and extrapolated to  future years
using population growth estimates from the U.S.
Bureau of Economic Analysis.  There  arc  two  key
assumptions associated with  this population map-
ping.   First, we assume the  population  in each grid
cell grows at the same rate as  the state population as
a whole.  As a result, exposures (and potential ben-
efits) in individual grid  cells  may be either under- or
over-estimated if population growth varies from the
state average during the 1990 to 2010 period. This
uncertainty  is likely to  be more significant in larger
states such as California and Texas, which may have
more  geographic  variability in growth patterns.
Also, the  effect of this assumption  may be  less  sig-
nificant for large population  centers because their
growth rate better approximates the growth rate of
the state as  a whole.   Second, we assume in the ex-
posure analysis that the population in the grid cell is
similar in terms of its  activity patterns and  demo-
graphic characteristics to the populations in the stud-
ies from which  the C-R functions are derived. This
is a potentially  significant uncertainty which is dis-
cussed further in the next section and in  Appendix D.
                                                    54

-------
                                                                Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
ofC-R Functions

    We rely on the most recent available, published
scientific literature to ascertain the relationship be-
tween air pollution and  adverse human health ef-
fects.  The uncertainties underlying those published
studies and our method for selecting studies that
could  be used to derive  C-'R functions likely con-
tributes  to the uncertainty  of the health effects re-
sults.  For example, the uncertainty  associated with
the current state  of the  published scientific  litera-
ture could potentially have two  contradictory influ-
ences  011 the  results  of this  analysis.  First, to the
extent that the published literature may collectively
overstate the  effects  of pollution, our analysis will
overstate the benefits of CAAA-related pollution
reduction.  This overestimation is possible  because
scientific journals tend to publish research report-
ing significant associations between pollution and
disease more  often than  research that fails to find
such associations.  On the  other hand, our analysis
may underestimate overall health benefits of the
CAAA because, as the state of the science  evolves,
current pollutant/health effect associations may be
found to be  stronger than  previously thought, and
new associations may be identified.  For example, in
recent years, studies have  shown the  potential  health
benefits  from  reductions in  ambient PM to be much
greater than previously believed.  To the extent that
the present analysis  does not include health effects
whose link to air  pollution has not been subject to
adequate scientific inquiry,  this analysis may under-
state CAAA-related health  benefits.

    Our method of identifying appropriate C-R func-
tions  for use in the benefits analysis  may also intro-
duce uncertainty.  We  evaluate studies using  the nine
selection criteria summarized in  Table 5-2  and de-
scribed 111 detail in Appendix D.  These criteria in-
clude consideration of whether the study was peer-
reviewed, the  study design and location, and charac-
teristics of the study population, among others. The
selection of C-R functions  for  the benefits analysis
is guided by the goal  of achieving a balance  between
comprehensiveness and scientific defensibility.  How-
ever, to the extent that this  selection process may
lead to the exclusion of valid  studies, the process in-
troduces uncertainty into the analysis. The overall
effect  of this  uncertainty is expected to be minor,
given the emphasis of the selection process on scien-
tific validity.  Appendix D lists the studies selected
for each category of health effects, and presents the
associated  C-R functions for each criteria pollutant.

    Once the C-R  functions have been  selected, un-
certainty may also enter the analysis due  to  both
within-study and  across-study variation in C-R  func-
tions for individual health effects.  Within-study
variation refers to the  uncertainty  and  error that may
surround a given study's estimate  of a C-R function.
Health effects studies  provide both "best estimates"
of the relationship between air quality  changes and
health effects and a measure of the statistical uncer-
tainty of the relationship.  We use statistical simula-
tion modeling techniques to evaluate the overall
uncertainty of the  results given the uncertainties as-
sociated  with individual studies.    Across-study varia-
tion refers  to the fact that  different published  stud-
ies  of the  same pollutant/health  effect relationship
typically do not  report identical  findings; in some
instances the differences are substantial. These dif-
ferences can exist even between equally reputable
studies and may result in health effect estimates that
vary considerably.

    Across-study variation can result from two pos-
sible causes.  One possibility is that  studies report
different estimates of the single true  relationship
between  a  given pollutant and a health effect due to
differences in study design, random chance,  or  other
factors.  For example, a hypothetical study conducted
in New  York and one conducted in Seattle may re-
port different C-R functions  for the  relationship
between  PM and mortality  in part because of differ-
ences  between these  two  study  populations  (e.g.,
demographics, activity patterns).  Alternatively,
study results may differ because they are in fact esti-
mating different  relationships;  that is, the same re-
duction  in  PM in New7 York and Seattle may result
in different reductions in premature mortality.  This
may result  from a number of factors,  such as differ-
ences in  the relative sensitivity of these two popula-
tions to  PM pollution  and differences  in the compo-
sition of PM in these  two locations.5  In either case,
where we  identify multiple studies that are appro-
    5  PM is a mix of particles of varying size and chemical
properties.  The composition oi PM can vary considerably irorn
one region to another depending on the sources oi pardculate
emissions  in each region.
                                                   55

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Table 5-2
   Summary of Considerations Used in Selecting C-R Functions
    Consideration
                                                      Comments
   Peer reviewed     Peer reviewed research is preferred to research that has not undergone the peer review
   research          process.

   Study type         Among studies that consider chronic exposure (e.g., over a year or longer) prospective
                     cohort studies are preferred over cross-sectional studies (a.k.a. "ecological studies")
                     because they control for important confounding variables that cannot be controlled for in
                     cross-sectional studies. If the chronic effects of a pollutant are considered more important
                     than its acute effects, prospective cohort studies may also be preferable to longitudinal time
                     series studies because the latter type of study  is typically designed to detect the effects of
                     short-term (e.g. daily) exposures, rather than chronic exposures.

   Study period       Studies examining a relatively longer period  of time (and therefore having more data) are
                     preferred, because they have greater statistical power to detect effects. More recent
                     studies are also preferred because of possible changes in pollution mixes, medical care,
                     and life style overtime.
   Study population
                  Studies examining a relatively large sample are preferred. Studies of narrow population
                  groups are generally disfavored, although this does not exclude the possibility of studying
                  populations that are potentially more sensitive to pollutants (e.g., asthmatics, children,
                  elderly).  However, there are tradeoffs to comprehensiveness of study population.
                  Selecting a C-R function from a study that considered all ages will avoid omitting the
                  benefits associated with any population age category.  However, if the age distribution of a
                  study population from an "all population" study is different from the age distribution in the
                  assessment population, and if pollutant effects vary by age, then bias can be introduced
                  into the benefits analysis.

Study location     U.S. studies are more desirable than non-U.S. studies because of potential differences in
                  pollution characteristics, exposure patterns, medical care system, and life style.

Pollutants         Models with more pollutants are generally preferred to models with fewer pollutants, though
included in        careful attention must be paid to potential collinearity between pollutants.  Because PM has
model             been acknowledged to  be an important and pervasive pollutant, models that include some
                  measure of PM are highly preferred to those that do not.

Measure of PM    PM25 and PM-io are preferred to other measures of particulate matter, such as total
                  suspended particulate matter (TSP), coefficient of haze (COH),  or black smoke (BS) based
                  on evidence that PM2.s  and  PM-|0 are more directly correlated with adverse health effects
                  than are these other measures of PM.

Economically      Some health effects, such as forced expiratory volume and other technical measurements
valuable health    of lung function, are difficult to value in monetary terms. These  health effects are not
effects            quantified in this analysis.
   Non-overlapping
   endpoints
                  Although the benefits associated with each individual health endpoint may be analyzed
                  separately, care must be exercised in selecting health endpoints to include in the overall
                  benefits analysis because of the possibility of double counting of benefits. Including
                  emergency room visits in a benefits analysis that already considers hospital admissions, for
                  example, will result in double counting of some benefits if the category "hospital
                  admissions" includes emergency room visits.
priate for estimating a given health effect, we use
the multiple C-R estimates, applied to the entire U.S.,
to derive a range of possible  results for that health
effect.


    Whether this  analysis estimates  the C-R relation-
ship between a pollutant and a given health endpoint
using a single  function from  a single study or using
multiple  C-R  functions from several studies, each
C-R relationship  is  applied throughout the U.S. to
                                                      generate health  benefit estimates.  However,  to  the
                                                      extent that pollutant/health  effect relationships  are
                                                      region-specific, applying a location-specific C-R func-
                                                      tion at all  locations in the U.S. may result in overes-
                                                      timates of health effect  changes in some locations
                                                      and underestimates of health effect changes in other
                                                      locations.   It is  not possible, however, to know  the
                                                      extent or  direction of the overall effect on  health
                                                      benefit estimates introduced by application of a single
                                                      C-R function to the entire U.S.  This may be a  sig-
                                                      56

-------
                                                                 Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
nificant uncertainty in the analysis, but the  current
state of the scientific literature  does  not allow for a
region-specific estimation of health benefits.



    This section discusses  the estimation of one of
the most serious health impacts of air pollution: pre-
mature mortality associated with PM  exposure. This
section consists of three parts.  It  begins with a dis-
cussion of the  uncertainties surrounding the PM/
mortality relationship.  Then, it  presents specific
factors to  consider when selecting a PM mortality
C-R function.  It ends with a brief discussion of the
advantages and disadvantages of the study we selected
for the PM mortality  analysis: Pope  et  al., 1995.

                     in the PM


    Health researchers have consistently linked air
pollution,  especially PM, with  excess mortality.  A
substantial body of published  scientific  literature
recognizes a correlation between elevated PM con-
centrations and increased mortality rates.  However,
there is much about this  relationship that is still un-
certain.6  These uncertainties include:

    •   Causality.  For  this analysis, we  assume a
        causal relationship between  exposure to el-
        evated PM and premature mortality, based
        011 the evidence of a correlation  between PM
        and mortality reported in the scientific lit-
        erature.  This  assumption is necessary be-
        cause the epidemiological  studies on which
        this analysis relies, by design, can not defini-
        tively prove causation.

    •   Other Pollutants.  PM concentrations are
        correlated  with the concentrations of other
        criteria pollutants, such as ozone and  CO,
        and it is unclear how much each pollutant
        may  influence elevated mortality rates.  Re-
        cent studies have  explored  whether ozone
        and CO may have mortality effects indepen-
        dent of PM, but we do not view the evidence
        as  sufficient to include such effects  in the
        overall  CAAA-related  health benefits esti-
        mate.7 As a result, we use the reported PM/
        mortality relationship as a proxy for the
        mortality effects of the air pollutant mixture.

        Shape of the C-R Function.  The  shape  of
        the true  PM mortality C-R  function is un-
        certain, but this analysis  assumes  the  C-R
        function  to have a log-linear form (as derived
        from  the  literature)  throughout the relevant
        range of exposures.8  If this is not the  cor-
        rect form of the C-R function, or if certain
        scenarios  (e.g., 2010 Pre-CAAA) predict con-
        centrations well  above the range of values
        for which  the  C-R function was fitted,
        avoided mortality may be mis-estimated.

        Regional Differences.  As discussed earlier,
        significant variability exists in the results  of
        different  PM studies.  This variability  may
        reflect regionally-specific C-R functions re-
        sulting from regional differences in factors
        such as the physical and chemical composi-
        tion of PM.  If true regional differences ex-
        ist, applying these C-R functions to regions
        other than  the study location would result
        in mis-estimation of effects in  these regions.

        Exposure/Mortality Lags.  It is currently
        unknown whether there is a time  lag — a
        delay  between changes in PM exposures and
        changes in mortality rates  — in the chronic
        PM/mortality relationship.  The existence
        of such a lag could be important for  the valu-
        ation  of benefits, if one were to assume that
        lagged incidences of premature mortality
        should be discounted  over the period be-
        tween when the fatal increment of exposure
        is  experienced and premature mortality ac-
        tually occurs.  Although there  is  no specific
        scientific evidence of the existence or struc-
        ture  of a PM effects  lag, current scientific
        literature  on adverse health effects such  as
        those associated  with PM (e.g., smoking-re-
        lated disease) leaves us skeptical that all  inci-
    '  Appendix D discusses the evidence linking both ozone
and CO with mortality. Tt also describes and presents the re-
sults of an illustrative analysis estimating CAAA-related reduc-
tions in ozone-related mortality using currently available stud-
    5  The morbidity studies used in this analysis may also be
subject to many of the uncertainties listed in this section.
    8  C-R functions for other health effects may be assumed to
be linear or log-linear.  See Appendix D for more  details.
                                                    57

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        dences  of premature mortality associated
        with a given incremental change in PM ex-
        posure would occur in the  same year as the
        exposure reduction.  This same  literature
        implies that lags of up to a fewf years are plau-
        sible, and we chose to assume a five-year lag-
        structure, with 25 percent  of deaths  occur-
        ring in the first year, another 25 percent in
        the second year, and 16.7 percent in each of
        the remaining three years.

        Cumulative Effects.  We attribute the PM/
        mortality relationship  used in this study
        (Pope et al., 1995) primarily to  PM-associ-
        ated cumulative damage to  the cardiopulmo-
        nary system, since the short-term mortality
        estimates reported in time-series studies ac-
        count for only a minor  fraction of total ex-
        cess mortality.  However, the relative roles
        of exposure duration and exposure level re-
        main unknown at this time.

                 of a PM            C-R
    Function

    In addition to the study selection criteria listed
in Table 5-2, we consider three additional  factors
when selecting a PM mortality  function.  The  first
focuses on the  PM indicator (i.e., PM10 or PM23), the
second focuses on whether the stud}' measured short-
term  or long-term PM exposure, and the third fo-
cuses 011 whether the study used a cohort or  eco-
logic  design.

    Current research suggests  that particle  size  mat-
ters \vhen estimating the health impacts of  PM.  Par-
ticulate matter is a heterogeneous  mixture that in-
cludes particles of varying sizes.   Fine PM is gener-
ally viewfed as  having a more harmful impact  than
coarse PM, especially  for coarse particles larger  than
10um in aerodynamic diameter, although it is not
clear  to what extent this may differ by the type  of
health effect or the exposed population.  While one
cannot  necessarily assume  that coarse PM  has no
adverse impact on health, we prefer the use of PM0 5
as the best currently available measure of the impact
of PM on mortality.9

    9  Due to the relative abundance of studies using PM1C, how-
ever, and the reasonably good correlation between PM,  and
PM  the 812 prospective analysis also uses PM.,. studies to esti-
mate the impact of PM on non-mortality health effects.
    Two types of exposure studies (short-term and
long-term)  have been used to estimate a PM/mortal-
ity relationship.  Short-term exposure studies attempt
to relate short-term (often day-to-day) changes in PM
concentrations and  changes in daily mortality rates
up to several days after a period of elevated PM con-
centrations.   Long-term exposure  studies examine
the potential relationship between longer-term (e.g.,
annual) changes in exposure to PM  and annual mor-
tality  rates.  Researchers  have  found significant cor-
relations using both types  of studies; however,  for
this analysis, we  rely exclusively on long-term stud-
ies  to quantify  PM mortality effects, though  the
short-term studies provide additional scientific evi-
dence supporting the PM/mortahty relationship.

    Because short-term  studies focus  only on  the
acute effects  associated  with  daily  peak exposures,
they are unable to evaluate the degree to  which  ob-
served excess  mortality is premature,10  and they may
underestimate the C-R coefficient because they do
not account for  the cumulative  mortality effects of
long-term exposures (i.e., exposures over many years
rather than a  few days).  Long-term studies, on  the
other hand, are able  to discern changes in mortality
rates  due to long-term exposure to elevated air pol-
lution concentrations, and are not limited to mea-
suring mortalities that occur within a few days of a
high-pollution event (though  they  may not predict
cases of  premature mortality that were only has-
tened by a few days).  Consequently, the use of C-R
functions derived from long-term studies  is likely to
result in a more complete assessment of the effect of
air pollution  on mortality  risk.  However, to  the
extent that long-term studies fail to capture  acute
mortality effects  related  to peak exposures, the  use
of long-term  mortality studies  may underestimate
CAAA-related avoided mortality benefits.

    Among long-term PM studies, \ve prefer studies
using a prospective  cohort  design to those using an
ecologic or population-level  design.   Prospective

    10  This can be important in  cost-benefit analysis if benefits
are estimated in  terms of life-years lost. In short-term studies
evaluating peak pollution events, it  is likely that many  of the
''excess mortality" cases represented individuals who were al-
ready suiiering impaired health, and ior whom  the high-pollu-
tion event represented an exacerbation oi an already serious
condition. Based on the episodic studies  only, however, it is
unknown how many of the victims would have otherwise lived
only a few more days or weeks,  or how many would have re-
covered to enjoy many years of a healthy life in the absence of
the high-pollution event.
                                                    58

-------
                                                               Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
cohort studies follow individuals forward in  time for
a specified period, periodically  evaluating  each
individual's exposure and health status.  Population-
level ecological studies assess the relationship between
population-wide health information (such as counts
for daily mortality) and ambient levels of air pollu-
tion.  Prospective cohort studies  are preferred be-
cause they are better at controlling a source of un-
certainty known as  "confounding."  Confounding
is the mis-estimation of an association that results  if
a study does not control for factors that are corre-
lated  with both  the  outcome of interest (e.g.,  mor-
tality) and the exposure of interest (e.g., PM expo-
sure).  For example,  smoking is associated with  mor-
tality. If populations in high PM areas tend to smoke
more than populations in low  PM areas, and a PM
exposure study does  not include smoking as a factor
in its model, then the  mortality effects of smoking
may be erroneously  attributed  to PM, leading to an
overestimate of  the risk from PM. Prospective co-
hort studies are  better at controlling  for confound-
ing than ecologic studies because the former follow
a group of individuals forward in time and can gather
individual-specific information on  important risk
factors such as smoking.  However, it is always pos-
sible, even in well-designed studies, that a  relevant
risk factor (e.g., climate, the presence of other pol-
lutants) may not have been adequately  considered
or controlled for.  As a result, it is possible  that dif-
ferences  in mortality rates ascribed to differences in
average PM levels may be due, in part, to some  other
factor or factors  (e.g., differences  among communi-
ties in diet, exercise, ethnicity, climate, industrial
effluents, etc.) that have not  been  adequately ad-
dressed 111 the exposure models.

    The Pope Study

    Three recent studies have examined the  relation-
ship between mortality and long-term exposure to
PM:  Pope et al. (1995), Dockery et al. (1993), and
Abbey et al.  (1991). Of these  three studies, we pre-
fer using the Pope et al. study as the basis for devel-
oping the primary PM mortality estimates in this
analysis.  Pope et al. studied the largest cohort, had
the broadest geographic scope, and effectively  con-
trolled for potentially significant sources  of  con-
founding.
    Pope  et al. examined a much larger population
(over 295,000) and many more locations (50 metro-
politan areas)  than either the  Dockery study or the
Abbey study.  The Dockery study covered a cohort
of over 8,000 individuals in six U.S. cities, and the
Abbey study covered  a cohort of 6,000 people in
California.  In particular, the cohort in the Abbey
study was considered substantially too small and too
young to  enable the detection of small increases in
mortality risk.  The study was  therefore  omitted
from consideration in  this analysis. Even though
Pope et al. (1995)  reports a smaller  premature  mor-
tality response to  elevated PM than Dockery  et al.
(1993), the results  of the Pope study are nevertheless
consistent with those of the Dockery study.

    Pope  et al., (1995)  is unique in that it followed a
largely white and middle class population.  The use
of this study  population reduces the potential for
confounding because it decreases the likelihood that
differences in premature mortality across locations
were attributable  to differences in socioeconomic
status or related factors  rather than  PM.  However,
the demographics  of the study population may also
produce a downward bias in die  PM mortality  coef-
ficient, because short-term studies  indicate that the
effects of PM tend to be significantly greater among
groups of lower socioeconomic status.

    Although  it is the strongest of the  PM cohort
studies, Pope et al. does have some limitations.   For
example, Pope et  al. did not consider the migration
of cohort members across  study cities, which would
cause exposures to be  more similar  across individu-
als  than  those indicated by assigning city-specific
annual average pollution levels to each  member of
the cohort.  As intercity migration  increases among
cohort members,  the exposure experienced by mi-
grating individuals will tend toward an intercity
mean.  If this  migration is significant and is ignored,
approximating true  differences  in  exposure levels
by differences in city-specific annual  average PM lev-
els  will exaggerate changes in exposure,  resulting in
a downward bias of the PM coefficient.   This occurs
because a given difference in mortality rates is being
associated with a larger difference in PM levels than
that actually experienced by individuals  in the study
cohort.  When the relationship between elevated PM
exposure  and  premature mortality derived from the
                                                  59

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Pope et al.  study is applied  in the present analysis,
the effect of the potential mis-specification of expo-
sure due to migration in the underlying study is to
underestimate PM-related mortality  reduction ben-
efits attributable to the CAAA.

    Also,  Pope et al. only included  PM when esti-
mating a C-R function.  Because PM concentrations
are correlated with the concentrations of other  cri-
teria air pollutants  (e.g., ozone), and because these
other pollutants may be correlated with premature
mortality  (see Appendix D), the PM risk estimate
may be overestimated because it includes the mor-
tality impacts of these confounders.  However, in
an effort to avoid overstating benefits, and because
the evidence associating mortality with PM  expo-
sure is stronger than for other  pollutants, the  812
Prospective analysis uses PM as  a surrogate for  PM
and  related criteria pollutants.

    Although we use the Pope study exclusively to
derive our primary estimates of avoided mortality,
die C-R function based on Dockery et al. (1993) may
provide a  reasonable alternative estimate.  While the
Dockery et al. study used  a  smaller  sample of indi-
viduals from fewer cities than the study  by Pope et
al., it features improved exposure estimates, a slightly
broader study population (adults  aged 25 and older),
and  a follow-up period nearly twice  as long as that
of Pope et al. We  present an alternative estimate of
the premature adult mortality associated with long-
term PM exposure based on  Dockery et al. (1993) in
Chapter 8 and in Appendix D. We emphasize, how-
ever, that  the estimate  based  on Pope et al. (1995) is
our primary estimate of the  effect  of the 1990 Amend-
ments  on this important health effect.



Results

    This section presents a  summary of the  differ-
ences in health effects resulting from improvements
in air  quality between the  Pre-CAAA and  Post-
CAAA scenarios. Table 5-3  summarizes the CAAA-
related avoided health effects in 2010 for each study
included in  the analysis. The mean  estimate  is pre-
sented as  the Primary  Central estimate, the 5th per-
ccntilc observation from the statistical uncertainty
modeling  is presented  as the Primary Low estimate,
and  the 95th pcrcentile observation  is presented as
the Primary High estimate of the number of avoided
cases of each endpomt.11  To provide context for these
results, Table 5-3 also expresses the mean reduction
in incidence  for each adverse health effect as a per-
centage of the baseline incidence  of that effect (ex-
trapolated to the appropriate future year)  for the
population considered (e.g., adults over 30 years of
age).   In general, because the differences in air qual-
ity between  the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios are
expected to increase from 1990 to 2010  and because
population is also expected to increase during that
time, the health benefits attributable to the CAAA
are expected to increase consistently from  1990 to
2010.  .More  detailed results are presented  in Appen-
dix D.



    Table 5-3 summarizes the  avoided mortality due
to reductions in PM exposure in  2010 between the
Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios. As this  table shows,
our  Primary Central estimate implies  that  PM re-
ductions  due to the CAAA in 2010 will result in
23,000 avoided deaths, with  a Primary Low and Pri-
mary High bound on this  estimate of 14,000 and
32,000 avoided deaths,  respectively.  The Primary
Central estimate of 23,000 avoided deaths represents
roughly one percent of the projected  annual non-
accidental mortality of adults  aged 30  and older in
the year  2010.  Additionally, Table 5-4  summarizes
the distribution of avoided mortality  for 2010  by
age cohort, along with the  expected remaining life-
span (i.e., the life  years lost) for the average person
111 each age cohort.  The majority of the estimated
deaths occur in people  over the  age of 65  (due to
their higher baseline mortality  rates), and this group
has a shorter life expectancy relative to other age
groups. The life years lost estimates might be higher
if data were available for  PM-relatcd mortality in
the under 30 age group.
    1' The Primary Low, Primary Central and Primary High
health benefit estimates represent points on  a distribution of
estimated incidence changes for each health effect. This distri-
bution reflects the uncertainty associated with  the coefficient of
the C-R function for each health endpoint. More information
about C-R Junction uncertainty and the uncertainty modeling
that generates the results distributions is presented in Appendix
D.
                                                   60

-------
                                                                  Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
Table 5-3
Change in Incidence of Adverse Health Effects Associated with Criteria Pollutants in 2010
(Pre-CAAA minus Post-CAAA) - 48 State U.S. Population (avoided cases per year)

Endpoint
Mortality
ages 30 and older
Chronic Illness
chronic bronchitis
chronic asthma
Hospitalization
respiratory
admissions
cardiovascular
admissions
emergency room
visits for asthma
Minor Illness
acute bronchitis
upper respiratory

Pollutant

PM

PM
03

PM, CO, NO2,
S02, 03
PM, CO, NO2,
SO2, O3
PM, O3

PM
PM


5th %

14,000

5,000
1,800

13,000
10,000

430

0
280,000

2010
mean

23,000

20,000
7,200

22,000
42,000

4,800

47,000
950,000


95th %

32,000

34,000
12,000

34,000
100,000

14,000

94,000
1,600,000
% of Baseline
Incidences for
the mean
estimates a
2010

1.00%

3.14%
3.83%

0.62%
0.86%

0.55%

5.06%
0.86%
symptoms
lower respiratory            PM
symptoms
respiratory illness           NO2
moderate or worse          PM
asthmac
asthma attacks0           O3, PM
chest tightness,             SO2
shortness of breath,
or wheeze
shortness of breath          PM
work loss days              PM
minor restricted           O3, PM
activity days / any of
19 respiratory
symptomsd
restricted activity            PM
daysc
 240,000

  76,000
  80,000

 920,000
    290
  26,000
 3,600,000
25,000,000
 520,000

 330,000
 400,000

 1,700,000
 110,000

  91,000
 4,100,000
31,000,000
10,000,000     12,000,000
 770,000

 550,000
 720,000

 2,500,000
 520,000

 150,000
 4,600,000
37,000,000
                   13,000,000
 3.57%

10.44%
 0.24%

 1.04%
0.003%

 1.69%
 0.94%
 2.15%
                      1.00%
a The baseline incidence generally is the same as that used in the C-R function for a particular health effect. However, there are a few
exceptions. To calculate the baseline incidence rate for respiratory-related hospital admissions, we used admissions for persons of all
ages for International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes 460-519; for cardiovascular admissions, we used admissions for persons of
all ages for ICD codes 390-429; for emergency room visits for asthma, we used the estimated ER visit rate for persons of all ages; for
chronic bronchitis we used the incidence rate for individuals 27 and older; for the pooled estimate of minor restricted activity days and
any-of-19 respiratory symptoms, we used the incidence rate for minor restricted activity days.
b Percentage is calculated as the ratio of avoided mortality to the projected baseline annual non-accidental mortality for adults aged 30
and over.  Non-accidental mortality was approximately 95% of total mortality for this subpopulation in 2010.
0 These health endpoints overlap with the "any-of-19 respiratory symptoms" category. As a result, although we present estimates for
each endpoint individually, these results are not aggregated into tine total benefits estimates.
d Minor restricted activity days and any-of-19 respiratory symptoms have overlapping definitions and are pooled.
                                                    61

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    We report non-fatal health effects estimates in a
similar manner  to estimates of premature mortali-
ties: as a range of estimates for each quantified health
cndpoiiit, with the range dependent on the quanti-
fied uncertainties in  the underlying concentration-
response functions.   The range of results for 2010
only is characterized  in Table 5-3 with 5th  percen-
tile, mean, and 95th percentile estimates which cor-
respond  to the  Primary  Low, Primary Central, and
Primary High estimates, respectively.  All estimates
are expressed as new  cases avoided in 2010, with the
following exceptions.  Hospital admissions reflect
admissions for a range of respiratoty and cardiovas-
cular  diseases, and these results, along with emer-
gency room visits for asthma, do  not necessarily rep-
resent the avoidance of new cases of disease (i.e., air
pollution may simply exacerbate an  existing condi-
tion, resulting in an emergency room visit or hospi-
tal admission).   Further, each  admission  is only
counted once, regardless  of the length of stay in the
hospital.  "Shortness of breath" is expressed in  terms
of symptom days: that is, one "case" represents one
child  experiencing shortness of breath for one day.
Likewise, "Restricted Activity Days" and "Work
Loss Days" are  expressed in person-days.
                                                         Of


                      This section  discusses the health effects associ-
                  ated with non-criteria air pollutants  regulated by the
                  Clean  Air Act Amendments of 1990.   It first dis-
                  cusses the effects of pollutants known as "air tox-
                  ics", and then summarizes the effects associated with
                  stratospheric ozone depleting substances.

                                      of Air Toxics

                      In addition to addressing the control of criteria
                  pollutants, the  Clean Air  Act Amendments re-
                  vamped regulations for air toxics — defined as non-
                  criteria pollutants which can  cause adverse effects to
                  human health and to ecological resources — under
                  section 112 of the Act.   Among other changes, the
                  1990 Amendments establish a list of air toxics  to  be
                  regulated,  require EPA to establish  air toxic  emis-
                  sions standards based  on maximum achievable  con-
                  trol technology  (MACT standards), and  include a
                  provision that  requires  EPA  to establish more  strin-
                  gent air  toxic  standards  if MACT controls  do not
                  sufficiently protect the  public health against residual
                  risks.  Control  of air toxics is expected to result both
                  from these changes and from incidental control due
                  to changes in criteria  pollutant programs.
     Table 5-4
     Mortality Distribution by Age in Primary Analysis (2010 only), Based on Pope et al. (1995)a
              Age Group
Proportion of Premature Mortality by Age
Life Expectancy (years)
                Infants
              not estimated
1-29
30-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
75-84
85+
not estimated
1%
4%
6%
12%
24%
30%
24%
-
48
38
29
21
14
9
6
     ' Results based on PM-related mortality incidence estimates for the 48 state U.S. population.
     1 Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.
                                                   62

-------
                                                                Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
    For several decades, the primary focus of risk
assessments and control programs designed to reduce
air toxics has been cancer. According to present EPA
criteria, over 100 air toxics are known or suspected
carcinogens.  EPA's  1990  Cancer Risk study indi-
cated that as many as 1,000 to 3,000  cancers  annu-
ally may be attributable to the air toxics for which
assessments were  available  (virtually all of this esti-
mate came from assessments of about a dozen well-
studied pollutants).12  We note, however, that the
results of this analysis are based, in part,  on conser-
vative, upper-bound  estimates of chemical  specific
risk factors.

    In addition to cancer, inhalation of air toxics
compounds can cause a wide variety of health ef-
fects, including neurotoxicity, respiratory problems,
and  adverse reproductive and developmental effects.
However,  there has  been considerably less  work
done  to assess the magnitude of non-cancer effects
from  air toxics.

    Air toxics can also cause adverse  health effects
via non-inhalation exposure routes.   Persistent
bioaccumulating pollutants, such as mercury and
dioxins, can be deposited into water or soil and sub-
sequently taken up by living organisms.  The pol-
lutants can biomagnify through the food chain and
exist  111 high concentrations when  consumed by
humans in foods such as fish or beef.  The resulting
exposures can cause adverse effects in humans.

    Finally, there are  a host of other  potential eco-
logical and welfare effects  associated with air toxics,
for which  very  little  exists in the  way of quantita-
tive analysis.  Toxic effects of these pollutants have
the potential to disrupt both terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems and  contribute  to adverse welfare effects
such as fish consumption advisories in the  Great
hakes.13
    *2 These pollutants included PIC (products of incomplete
combustion), 1,3-butadieiie, hexavalent chromium, benzene,
formaldehyde,  chloroform,  asbestos,  arsenic,  ethylene
dibromide, dioxiri, gasoline vapors, and ethylene dichloride. See
U.S. EPA, Cancer Risk from Outdoor Exposure to Air 'Toxics.
EPA-450/1-90-0041. Prepared by EPA/OAR/OAQPS.

    1J U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
"Deposition of Air Pollutants to the Great Waters, First Report
to Congress," May  1994.  EPA-453/R-93-055.
    Unfortunately, the effects of air toxics emissions
reductions could not be  quantified for the present
study.  Unlike criteria pollutants, monitoring data
for air toxics are relatively scarce, and the  data that
do exist cover only a handful of pollutants.  Emis-
sions inventories are very limited and inconsistent,
and  air quality modeling has only been performed
for a few source categories.   In addition, the scien-
tific  literature on the effects of air toxics is  generally
much weaker than that available for criteria pollut-
ants. Appendix I presents a list of research needs
identified by the Project Team which, if met, would
enable at least a partial  assessment of air toxics  ben-
efits in  future section 812 prospective  studies.

                             for Provisions to
Protect

    We estimate benefits of stratospheric ozone pro-
tection  programs by relying on analyses conducted
to support a scries of regulatory support documents
for these provisions.  The series of basic steps to ar-
rive  at physical  effects  estimates — from emissions
estimation,  atmospheric modeling, exposure assess-
ment, and dose-response characterization — is simi-
lar to that used to estimate effects  of criteria pollut-
ants, but the details  of each modeling step are vastly
different. The emissions  and atmospheric modeling
yields estimates of changes  in  ultraviolet-b (UV-b)
radiation, and the exposure and dose-response analy-
ses then yield estimates of the effects of changes in
UV-b radiation, including human  health, welfare,
and  ecological  effects.  Appendix G provides  a de-
tailed description of the  methodology and sources
used to generate these estimates.  Several of the ben-
efits can be  identified but cannot yet be reliably quan-
tified, and so are described qualitatively.

    The quantified physical effects estimates of sec-
tions 604 and  606 of Title VI, the provisions that
provide the primary controls  on production and re-
lease of CFCs and  HCFCs generate about 98 per-
cent of the monetized  quantified benefits  estimate.
The quantified  health  benefits include the follow-
ing:  reduced incidences of mortality and morbidity
associated  with  skin  cancer  (melanoma  and
nonmelanoma); and reduced  incidences of cataracts
                                                   63

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
and  then: associated pain and  suffering.14  Using the
change in UV radiation dose,  we estimate the num-
ber of additional cases of skin  cancer (melanoma and
nonmelanoma) and cataracts.   Because  the  baseline
levels of all of these UV-related health  effects tend
to be  higher for older people and  for those with
lighter  skins,  EPA's method  for projecting future
incremental skin  cancers and  cataracts  incorporates
these factors in its  benefits estimates.15  We present
a brief summary of these benefits in Table  5-5, and
the analysis is described in detail in Appendix  G.


    To calculate  the number  of deaths from mela-
noma, the model  uses a dose response function simi-
                   lar to the C-R functions  for criteria pollutants.  For
                   nonmelanoma, the model estimates  the number  of
                   deaths by assuming that a fixed percentage of the
                   total nonmelanoma cases will result in death.16 We
                   estimate that  from 1990 to  2165  sections  604 and
                   606 will result in 6.3 million avoided deaths  from
                   skin cancer, 27.5 million  avoided cataract cases, and
                   299.0 million cases of non-fatal skin cancers (mela-
                   noma and nonmelanoma).  The unquantified effects
                   of sections 604 and 606 include  avoided pain and
                   suffering from skin cancer and human health and
                   environmental benefits outside the United  States.
         Table 5-5
         Major Health Benefits of Provisions to Protect Stratospheric Ozone
         (CAAA Sections 604, 606, And 609)
           Health Effects- Quantified
            Estimate
         Basis for Estimate
         Melanoma and nonmelanoma
         skin cancer
         (fatal)
6.3 million lives saved from skin
cancer in the U.S. between 1990
and 2165
Dose-response function based on UV
exposure and demographics of
exposed populations.1
         Melanoma and nonmelanoma
         skin cancer
         (non-fatal)
299 million avoided cases of non-
fatal skin cancers in the U.S.
between 1990 and 2165
Dose-response function based on UV
exposure and demographics of
exposed populations.1
         Cataracts
27.5 million avoided cases in the
U.S. between 1990 and 2165
Dose-response function uses a
multivariate logistic risk function based
on demographic characteristics and
medical history. 1
         Health Effects- Unquantified
         Skin cancer: reduced pain and suffering
         Reduced morbidity effects of increased UV.  For example,
                reduced actinic keratosis (pre-cancerous lesions resulting from excessive sun exposure)
                reduced immune system suppression.

         Notes:
           1 For more detail see EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone (1988).
           2 Note that the ecological effects, unlike the health effects, do not reflect the accelerated reduction and
           phaseout schedule of section 606.
            Benefits due to the section 606 methyl bromide phaseout are not included in the benefits total because
           annual incidence estimates are not currently available.
     4  Quantitative estimates presented in Appendix G also
include reduced crop damage associated with UV-b radiation
and tropospheric ozone; reduced damage to fish harvests associ-
ated with LJV-b radiation; and reduced polymer degradation
from UV-b radiation. The derivation of these effects is described
in more detail in Chapter 7.

    13  The dose-response equation is (fractional change in inci-
dence) = (fractional change in UV-b  dose + 1)° -1, where b (the
biological  amplification factor) equals the percent change in in-
cidence associated with a one percent change in dose.  More
iniormation about the origins oi  the models can be iouiid in
Appendix G.
                       16  Scotio, Fears, and Fraumeni, U.S. Department oi Health
                   and Human Sendees, I\:IH, "Incidence of Nonmelanoma Skin
                   Cancer in the United States," 1981, pages 2, 7, and 13.
                                                      64

-------
                                                                   Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
                     in  the
    As  discussed  above, and in greater detail in Ap-
pendix  D, a number of important assumptions and
uncertainties in the physical effects analysis may in-
fluence the estimate of monetary benefits  presented
in this study.  Several of these key uncertainties, their
potential directional bias  (i.e., overestimation  or
underestimation), and the  potential significance  of
                        each of these uncertainties  for  the  overall net ben-
                        efit results of the analysis are summarized in Table
                        5-6. As shown  in this table, the decisions made  to
                        overcome  the  problems  of limited data, the inad-
                        equacy of the currently available scientific literature,
                        and other constraints do  not clearly bias the overall
                        results of this analysis in one particular direction.
     Table 5-6
     Key Uncertainties Associated with Human Health Effects Modeling (continued)
      Potential Source of Error
 Direction of Potential
 Bias for Net Benefits
      Estimate
         Likely Significance Relative to
    Key Uncertainties in Net Benefit Estimate*
     Application of C-R
     relationships only to those
     subpopulations matching the
     original study population.
Underestimate.          Potentially major.  The C-R functions for several
                       health endpoints (including PM-related premature
                       mortality) were applied only to subgroups of the U.S.
                       population (e.g., adults over 30) and thus may
                       underestimate the whole population benefits of
                       reductions in pollutant exposures.  In addition, the
                       demographics of the study population in the Pope et
                       al. study (largely white and middle class) may result
                       in an underestimate of PM-related mortality, because
                       the effects of PM tend to be significantly greater
                       among groups of lower socioeconomic status.
     No quantification of health
     effects associated with
     exposure to air toxics.
Underestimate
Potentially major.  According to EPA criteria, over
100 air toxics are known or suspected carcinogens,
and many air toxics are also associated with adverse
health effects such as neurotoxicity, reproductive
toxicity, and developmental toxicity. Unfortunately,
current data and methods are insufficient to develop
(and value) quantitative estimates of the health
effects of these pollutants.
     Use of long-term global
     warming estimates in Title VI
     analysis that show more
     severe warming than is now
     generally anticipated.
Overestimate (for Title
VI estimate only)
Potentially major.  Global warming can accelerate
the pace of stratospheric ozone recovery; if warming
is less severe than anticipated at the time the Title VI
analyses were conducted, the modeled pace of
ozone recovery may be overestimated,  suggesting
benefits of the program could be delayed, perhaps
by many years. The magnitude of estimated Title VI
benefits suggests that the impact of delaying
benefits could be major.	
     The quantitative analysis of
     Title VI (see next section)
     does not account for
     potential increases in
     averting behavior (i.e.,
     people's efforts to protect
     themselves from UV-b
     radiation).
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Potentially major.  Murdoch and Thayer (1990)
estimate that the cost-of-illness estimates for
nonmelanoma skin cancer cases between 2000 and
2050 may be almost twice the estimated cost of
averting behavior (application of sunscreen).  Our
Title VI analysis relies on epidemiological studies,
which incorporate averting behavior as currently
practiced.   Omission of future increases in averting
behavior, however, may overstate the benefits of
reduced emissions of ozone-depleting chemicals.
Benefits could be understated if individuals alter their
behaviors in ways that could increase exposure or
risk (e.g., sunbathing more frequently).  A recent
European study by Autier et al. (1999) found that the
use of high  sun protection factor (SPF) sun screen is
associated with increased frequency and duration of
sun exposure.
                                                     65

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
      Table 5-6
      Key Uncertainties Associated with Human Health Effects Modeling (continued)
       Potential Source of Error
Direction of Potential
Bias for Net Benefits
      Estimate
         Likely Significance Relative to
    Key Uncertainties in Net Benefit Estimate*
      Analysis assumes a causal
      relationship between PM
      exposure and premature
      mortality based on strong
      epidemiological evidence of
      a PM/mortality association.
      However, epidemiological
      evidence alone cannot
      establish this causal link.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Potentially major.  A basic underpinning of this
analysis, this assumption is critical to the estimation
of health benefits. However, the assumption of
causality is suggested by the epidemiologic evidence
and is consistent with current practice in the
development of a best estimate of air pollution-
related health benefits.  At this time, we can identify
no basis to support a conclusion that such an
assumption results in a known or suspected
overestimation bias.
      Across-study variance /
      application of regionally
      derived C-R estimates to
      entire U.S.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Potentially major.  The differences in the expected
changes in health effects calculated using different
underlying studies can be large.  If differences reflect
real regional variation in the PM/mortality
relationship,  applying individual C-R functions
throughout the U.S. could result in considerable
uncertainty in health effect estimates.
      Estimate of non-melanoma
      skin cancer mortality
      resulting from reductions in
      stratospheric ozone is
      calculated indirectly, by
      assuming the mortality rate
      is a fixed percentage of non-
      melanoma incidence.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Potentially major.  New data on the death rate for
non-melanoma skin cancer may significantly
influence the Title VI mortality estimate.  Some
preliminary estimates suggest that this estimate may
need to be adjusted downward.
      The baseline incidence
      estimate of chronic bronchitis
      based on Abbey et al.  (1995)
      excluded 47 percent of the
      cases reported in that  study
      because those reported
      "cases" experienced a
      reversal of symptoms during
      the study period. These
      "reversals" may constitute
      acute bronchitis cases that
      are not included in the acute
      bronchitis analysis (based on
      Dockery et al., 1996).	
Underestimate.
Probably minor. The relative contribution of acute
bronchitis cases to the overall benefits estimate is
small compared to other health  benefits such as
avoided mortality and avoided chronic bronchitis.
      CAAA fugitive dust controls
      implemented in PM non-
      attainment areas would
      reduce lead  exposures by
      reducing the re-entrainment
      of lead particles emitted prior
      to 1990. This analysis does
      not estimate these benefits.
Underestimate
Probably minor. While the health and economic
benefits of reducing lead exposure can be
substantial (e.g., see section 812 Retrospective
Study Report to Congress),  most additional fugitive
dust controls implemented under the Post-CAAA
scenario (e.g.,  unpaved road dust suppression,
agricultural tilling controls, etc) tend to be applied in
relatively low population areas.
      Exclusion of C-R functions
      from short-term exposure
      studies in PM mortality
      calculations.
Underestimate
Probably minor. Long-term PM exposure studies
may be able to capture some of the impact of short-
term peak exposure on mortality; however the extent
of overlap between the two study types is unclear.
                                                     66

-------
                                                              Chapters: Human Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants
Table 5-6
Key Uncertainties Associated with Human Health Effects Modeling (continued)
 Potential Source of Error
Direction of Potential
Bias for Net Benefits
      Estimate
          Likely Significance Relative to
    Key Uncertainties in Net Benefit Estimate*
Age-specific C-R functions
for PM related premature
mortality not reported by
Popeetal. (1995).
Estimation of the degree of
life-shortening associated
with PM-related mortality
used a single C-R function
for all applicable age groups.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Unknown, possibly major when using a value of life
years approach. Varying the estimate of degree of
prematurity has no effect on the aggregate benefit
estimate when a value of statistical life approach is
used, since all incidences of premature mortality are
valued equally. Under the alternative approach
based on valuing individual life-years, the influence
of alternative values for numbers of average life-
years lost may be significant.
Assumption that PM-related
mortality occurs over a
period of five-years following
the critical PM exposure.
Analysis assumes that 25
percent of deaths occur in
year one, 25 percent in year
two, and 16.7 percent in
each of the remaining three
years.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Probably minor. If the analysis underestimates the
lag period, benefits will be overestimated, and vice-
versa.  However, available epidemiological studies
do not provide evidence of the existence or potential
magnitude of a lag between exposure and incidence.
Thus, an underestimate of the lag seems unlikely.  If
the assumed lag structure is an overestimate, even if
benefits are  fully discounted from the future year of
death,  application of reasonable discount rates over
this period would not significantly alter the monetized
benefit estimate.
Extrapolation of criteria
pollutant concentrations to
populations distant from
monitors.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Probably minor.  Extrapolation method is most
accurate in areas where monitor density is high.
Monitor density tends to be highest in areas with
high criteria pollutant exposures; thus most of this
uncertainty affects  low exposure areas where
benefits are likely to be low.  In addition, an
enhanced extrapolation method incorporating
modeling results is used for areas far (> 50 km) from
a monitor.
Exposure analysis in areas
beyond 50 km is based on a
new technique that relies on
the direct use of air quality
modeling results in
combination with adjusted
monitor data.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Probably minor.  The new technique is used for less
than 10 percent of the country for PM exposure, and
less than 15 percent for ozone.  The approach we
use should be more accurate than the alternative
approach of linear interpolation over long distances.
The new method nonetheless requires further testing
against monitor data to access its accuracy.	
Pope et al. (1995) study did
not include pollutants other
than PM.
Unable to determine
based on current
information.
Probably minor.  If ozone and other criteria pollutants
correlated with PM contribute to mortality, that effect
may be captured in the PM estimate.  Thus, PM is
essentially used as a surrogate for a mix of
pollutants. This uncertainty does make it difficult to
disaggregate avoided mortality benefits by pollutant,
however other studies (besides Pope) suggest that
PM is the dominant factor in  premature  mortality.
* The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team. The
Project Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could influence
the overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more; if an alternative assumption or approach is
likely to change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification of "probably
                                                67

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                     [Thispage left blank intentionally.]
                                                     68

-------
Economic   Valuation
of Human   Health
Effects
   The reduced incidence of physical effects is a
valuable measure of health benefits for individual
endpomts; however, to compare or aggregate ben-
efits across endpoints, the benefits must be mon-
etized.  Assigning a dollar value to avoided incidences
of each effect permits us to sum monetized benefits
realized as a result of the CAAA, and compare them
with the associated  costs.

   In the 812 prospective analysis, we have two
broad categories of benefits, health  and welfare ben-
efits. Human health  effects include mortality and
morbidity endpoints, which are presented in this
chapter. Welfare effects include agricultural and eco-
logical benefits, visibility, and worker productivity,
which are covered in the following chapter. We
obtain valuation estimates  from the economic lit-
erature, and report them in "dollars per case reduced
for health effects" and "dollars per unit of avoided
damage for welfare  effects".1 Similar to estimates of
physical effects provided by health studies, we re-
port each of the monetary values of benefits applied
111 this analysis in terms of a central estimate and a
probability distribution around that value.  The sta-
tistical  form of the probability distribution varies
by endpoint.  For example, we use a Weibull distri-
bution to  describe the estimated dollar value of an
avoided premature  mortality, while we assume  the
estimate for the value of a reduced case of acute bron-
chitis is uniformly distributed between a minimum
and maximum value.

   Although  human health benefits of the 1990
Amendments are attributed to reduced emissions of
criteria  pollutants (Titles I through  V) and reduced
emission of ozone  depleting substances (Title VI),
this chapter focuses only on the valuation of human
health effects attributed to the reduction of criteria
    : The literature reviews and process lor developing valua-
tion estimates are described ill detail ill Appendix I and in refer-
enced supporting reports.
pollutants.  The chapter begins with an brief review
of the economic concepts behind  valuing human
health effects in a cost-benefit context and a sum-
mary of the unit values applied to health  endpoints.
We follow with a discussion of how we derive valu-
ation estimates for specific health effects.  We then
present the results of this analysis. Wre conclude the
chapter with a review of the uncertainties associated
with benefits valuation.

    Our analysis indicates that  the benefit of avoided
premature  mortality risk reduction dominates the
overall net  benefit estimate. This is, in part, due to
the high monetary value assigned to the avoidance
of premature mortality relative to the unit value of
other health endpoints.  Because of the critical im-
portance of this endpoint in the study's results, this
chapter pays particular attention to  the major chal-
lenges to valuing mortality risk reductions and the
limitations of the estimate we  apply in this analysis.
There are also significant reductions in short  term
and chronic health effects and a substantial number
of health (and welfare)  benefits that we could not
quantify or monetize.

Valuation of
Estimates

    In an environmental benefit-cost analysis, the
dollar value of an environmental  benefit (e.g., a
health-related  improvement due to environmental
quality) enjoyed by an individual is the dollar amount
such that the person would be indifferent between
experiencing the benefit and possessing the money.
In general, the dollar amount required to compen-
sate a person for exposure to an adverse  effect is
roughly the same as the dollar amount a person is
willing to pay to avoid the effect. Thus, economists
speak of "willingness-to-pay"  (WTP) as the appro-
priate measure of the value of avoiding an adverse
                                            69

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
effect.  For example, the value of an avoided respira-
tory symptom would be a person's WTP to avoid
that symptom.

    For most goods, WTP can be observed by ex-
amining actual market transactions.  For example, if
a gallon of bottled  drinking water sells for one dol-
lar, it can  be  observed that at least some persons are
willing to  pay one dollar for such water.  For goods
that are not exchanged m the market, such as most
environmental "goods,"  valuation is not so  straight-
forward.  Nevertheless, a value may be inferred from
observed  behavior, such as through  estimation of
the WTP for mortality risk  reductions based  on
observed sales and prices of products that  result m
similar effects or risk  reductions,  (e.g., non-toxic
cleaners or bike helmets). Alternatively, surveys may
be used m an attempt to directly elicit WTP  for an
environmental improvement.

    Wherever possible in this analysis, we use esti-
mates of mean Wl'P. In cases where WTP estimates
are not available, we use die cost of treating or miti-
gating the effect as an alternative estimate.  For ex-
ample, for the valuation of hospital admissions we
use the avoided medical costs as an estimate  of the
value of avoiding the health effects causing the  ad-
mission.  These costs of illness (COI) estimates gen-
erally understate the true value of avoiding a  health
effect.  They tend to reflect the direct  expenditures
related to treatment  and not the utility  an individual
derives from improved health  status or  avoided
health effect.   As noted above, we use a  range of
values for most environmental effects, to support
the primary central estimate of net benefits.  Table
6-1 summaries the mean unit value estimates  that
we use m this analysis.  We present the  full range of
values m Appendix  H, including those used  to  de-
rive  the primary low and primary high  estimates, as
well  as values used to generate an  alternative value
for avoiding premature mortality.

            of              Mortality

    Some forms  of air pollution increase the prob-
ability that individuals  will  die prematurely.  Wre  use
concentration-response functions for mortality that
express  the increase in mortality risk as  cases of "ex-
       Table 6-1
       Health Effects Unit Valuation (1990 dollars)
Endpoint
Mortality
Chronic Bronchitis
Chronic Asthma
Pollutant
PM-io
PM10
03
Valuation
$4,800,000
$260,000
$25,000
(mean est.)
per case
per case
per case
Hospital Admissions
All Respiratory
All Cardiovasular
Emergency Room Visits for Asthma
SO2, NO2, PM-io & O3
SO2, NO2, & CO PM10 &
03
PM-IO&OS
$6,900
$9,500
$194
per case
per case
per case
Respiratory Illness and Symptoms
Acute Bronchitis
Asthma Attack or Moderate or
Worse Asthma Day
Acute Respiratory Symptoms
Upper Respiratory Symptoms
Lower Respiratory Symptoms
Shortness of Breath, Chest
Tightness, or Wheeze
Work Loss Days
Mild Restricted Activity Days
PM10
PM-IO&OS
SO2, NO2, PM-i, &O3
PM-i
PM-io
PM-io &SO2
PM10
PM-IO&OS
$45
$32
$18
$19
$12
$5.30
$83
$38
per case
per case
per case
per case
per case
per day
per day
per day
                                                   70

-------
                                                                Chapter 6: Economic Valuation of Human Health Effects
cess premature mortality" per time period (e.g., per
year). The benefit, however, is the avoidance of small
increases in the risk of mortality.  By summing indi-
viduals' WTP to avoid small  increases in risk over
enough individuals, we can  infer the  value of a sta-
tistical premature death avoided.2  For expository
purposes, we express this valuation as "dollars per
mortality avoided,"  or "value of a statistical life"
(VSL), even though  the actual valuation  is of small
changes in mortality  risk experience by a large num-
ber of people. The economic benefits  associated with
avoiding premature  mortality were the  largest cat-
egory of monetised benefits in the section 812 CAA
retrospective analysis (U.S.  EPA 1997) and continue
to be the largest  source  of monetized benefits  for
this prospective analysis.   .Mortality benefits, how-
ever, are also the  largest contributor to the range  of
uncertainty in monetized benefits.  For a more de-
tailed discussion of the factors affecting the valua-
tion of premature mortality sec Appendix H.

    The health science literature on air pollution
indicates that several  human characteristics affect die
degree to which mortality risk affects  an individual.
For example, some age groups appear to be more
susceptible to air pollution  than others (e.g., die eld-
erly and children). Health status prior to exposure
also affects  susceptibility.  At risk individuals include
those who have suffered strokes or are suffering from
cardiovascular disease and angina (Rowiatt, et  al.
1998).  An  ideal economic benefits estimate of mor-
tality risk reduction would reflect these human char-
acteristics, in addition to an individual's willingness
to pay (WTP) to improve one's own chances of sur-
vival plus  WTP to improve other  individuals'  sur-
vival rates.3  The  ideal measure would also take into
account the specific nature of the risk reduction com-
modity that is provided to individuals, as well as  the
context in which  risk is reduced.  To measure this
value, it is  important to assess how reductions in  air
pollution reduce the risk of dying from the time that
reductions take effect onward, and how  individuals

    2 Because people are valuing small decreases ill the risk of
premature mortality, it is expected deaths that are inferred.  For
example, suppose that a given reduction in pollution confers on
each exposed individual a decrease in mortal risk of 1/100,000.
Then among 100,000  such individuals, one fewer individual can
be expected to die prematurely .  If each individual's WTP  for
that risk reduction is $50, then the implied value of a statistical
premature death avoided  is $50 x 100,000 = $5 million.
    •' For a more detailed discussion oi altruistic values related
lo the value of Hie, see Jones-Lee (1992).
value these changes.  Each individual's survival curve,
or the probability of surviving beyond a given age,
should shift  as a result  of an environmental quality
improvement.  For example, changing the  current
probability of survival for an individual also  shifts
future probabilities of that individual's survival.  This
probability shift will differ across individuals because
survival  curves are  dependent on such characteris-
tics as age, health  state, and the current age to which
the individual is likely to survive

    Although a survival  curve approach provides  a
theoretically  preferred method for valuing the eco-
nomic benefits of reduced risk of premature  mortal-
ity associated with reducing air pollution, the ap-
proach  requires a great deal  of data to implement.
The  economic valuation literature does not yet in-
clude good estimates of the value of this risk reduc-
tion  commodity.  As a result, in  this study we value
avoided  premature mortality  risk using the value of
statistical life approach, supplemented by an alter-
native valuation based on a  value of statistical life
years lost approach.  We provide  a review7 of the
relevant  literature and a more detailed discussion of
our selected  approach in Appendix H.

    As in the retrospective, we use a  mortality risk
valuation estimate which is based on an analysis of
26 policy-relevant value-of-life studies (see Table 6-
2).  Five of  the 26  studies are contingent valuation
(CV)  studies, which directly  solicit WTP informa-
tion from subjects;  the  rest are wage-risk studies,
which base WTP estimates on estimates of the addi-
tional compensation demanded  in the labor market
for riskier jobs.  We used the best estimate from each
of the 26 studies to construct a distribution of mor-
tality risk valuation estimates for the section 812
study. A Weibull distribution, with a  mean  of $4.8
million and standard deviation of S3.24 million, pro-
vided the best fit to the 26 estimates.  There is con-
siderable uncertainty associated with this approach.
We discuss this issue in detail later in this chapter
and in Appendix  H.

    In addition, we developed alternative calculations
based on a life-years lost approach.  To employ the
value of statistical life-year (VSLY) approach, we first
estimated the age distribution  of those lives projected
to be saved by reducing air pollution.  Based  on life
expectancy tables, we calculate the life-years  saved
                                                    71

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  Table 6-2
  Summary of Mortality Valuation Estimates (millions of $1990)
                                        Type of          Valuation
               Study                   Estimate      (millions 1990$)
  Kneisner and Leeth (1991) (US)
Labor Market
  Smith and Gilbert (1984)
Labor Market
  Dillingham(1985)
Labor Market
  Butler (1983)
Labor Market
  Miller and Guria (1991)
Cont. Value
  Moore and Viscusi (1988a)
Labor Market
  Viscusi, Magat, and Huber(1991b)     Cont. Value
  Gegaxetal. (1985)
Cont. Value
  Marin and Psacharopoulos (1982)
Labor Market
  Kneisner and Leeth (1991)
  (Australia)
Labor Market
  Gerking, de Haan, and Schulze
  (1988)
Cont. Value
  Cousineau, Lacroix, and Girard
  (1988)
Labor Market
  Jones-Lee (1989)
Cont. Value
  Dillingham(1985)
Labor Market
  Viscusi (1978, 1979)
Labor Market
  R.S. Smith (1976)
Labor Market
  V.K. Smith (1976)
Labor Market
  Olson (1981)
Labor Market
  Viscusi (1981)
Labor Market
  R.S. Smith (1974)
Labor Market
  Moore and Viscusi (1988a)
Labor Market
  Kneisner and Leeth (1991) (Japan)     Labor Market
  Herzog and Schlottman (1987)
Labor Market
  Leigh and Folson (1984)
Labor Market
  Leigh (1987)
Labor Market
  Garen(1988)
Labor Market
  Source: Viscusi, 1992 and EPA analysis.
0.6
0.7
0.9
 1.1
 1.2
2.5
                       2.7
3.3
2.8
3.3
3.4
3.6
3.8
3.9
4.1
4.6
4.7
from each statistical  life  saved within each age and
gender cohort.  To value these statistical life-years,
we hypothesized a conceptual  model which depicted
the relationship between the  value  of life and the
value of life-years.  As noted in Chapter 5, the aver-
age number of life-years  saved across all age groups
for which data  were available  is  14 for PM-related
mortality. The average for PM, in particular, differs
from the 35-year expected remaining lifespan derived
from existing wage-risk studies.4   Using the  same
distribution of value of life estimates used above (i.e.

    ''  See, for example,  Moore and Viscusi (1988) or Viscusi
                   the Weibull distribution with a
                   mean estimate  of $4.8 million),
                   we estimated a distribution for the
                   value of a life-year and combined
                   it  with  the  total number of esti-
                   mated life-years lost.  The details
                   of these calculations are presented
                   in Appendix H.

                                Of


                   Chronic

                       The best available estimate of
                   WTP to avoid a case of chronic
                   bronchitis   (CB)  comes  from
                   Viscusi  et al. (1991).  The Viscusi
                   study, however, describes to the
                   respondents a severe case of CB.
                   We employ an  estimate of WTP
                   to avoid a pollution-related case
                   of CB that  is based on adjusting
                   the WTP to avoid a severe case,
                   as estimated by Viscusi et  al.
                   (1991),  to account for the likeli-
                   hood that an average case of pol-
                   lution-related CB is not as severe.

                       Wre use the mean of a distri-
                   bution  of WTP  estimates as the
                   central tendency estimate of WTP
                   to avoid a pollution-related case
                   of chronic bronchitis in  this
                   analysis.  The distribution incor-
                   porates uncertainty from three
^^^^~^^^^~   sources:  (1) the WTP to avoid a
                   case of  severe CB, as described by
 Viscusi ct al.,  1991; (2) the seventy level  of an aver-
 age pollution-related  case  of CB (relative to that of
 the case described by Viscusi ct al., 1991); and (3) the
 elasticity of WTP with respect to severity of the  ill-
 ness.  Based on assumptions about the distributions
 of each of these three  uncertain  components, we
 derive a distribution of WTP  to  avoid a pollution-
 related case of CB by statistical uncertainty analysis
 techniques.5  The expected value of this distribution,

     3  The statistical uncertainty analysis technique we used,
 which  is also known as simulation modeling, is a probabilistic
 approach to characterizing the  uncertainty or the distribution
 of potential values around a central estimate.
5.2
6.5
7.2
7.3
                       7.6
9.1
9.7
10.4
13.5
                                                    72

-------
                                                             Chapter 6: Economic Valuation of Human Health Effects
which is about $260,000, is taken as  the central ten-
dency estimate of WTP to avoid a pollution-related
case of CB. We describe the three underlying distri-
butions, and the generation of the resulting distri-
bution of WTP, in Appendix H.

    Chronic Asthma
relationship, could be comprised of just one symp-
tom or several.  At the high end of the range, the
valuation represents an aggregate of WTP estimates
for several individual symptoms.  The low end rep-
resents the value of avoiding a single mild symptom.

    Minor Restricted Activity
    The  valuation of this health endpoint requires
an estimate which reflects an individual's desire to
avoid the effects of chronic asthma throughout his
or her lifetime.   We derive this valuation estimate
from two studies that solicit values  from individuals
diagnosed  as  asthmatics.   Blumenschein  and
Johannesson (1998) generate an estimate of monthly
WTP, while  O'Conor and Blomquist (1997)  gener-
ate an annual WTP estimate.  In order to extend
monthly and  annual  WTP estimates over an
individual's lifetime, we adjusted the reported  esti-
mates to reflect the average life-years remaining and
age distribution  of the adult  U.S. population, given
that  chronic asthma is not expected to affect the av-
erage life expectancy.  The mean estimate of WTP
to avoid  a case of chronic asthma resulting from this
method  is  approximately  $25,000.



    In general, the values we assign to the respira-
tory-related ailments  in Table 6-1 are a combination
of WTP  estimates for individual  symptoms compris-
ing each  ailment.  For example, a willingness  to pay
estimate  to avoid the combination of specific upper
respirator}- symptoms defined in the  concentration-
response relationship measured by Pope et al. (1991)
is not available.  While that study defines upper res-
piratory  symptoms as one suite of ailments  (runny
or stuffy nose; wet cough; and burning, aching, or
red eyes), the valuation literature reports individual
WTP estimates for three closely matching symptoms
(head/sinus congestion,  cough, and  eye irritation).
We therefore use these available  WTP estimates and
a benefits  transfer procedure to estimate the value
of avoiding those symptoms defined in the concen-
tration-response  study.

    To capture the uncertainty associated with the
valuation of respiratory-related ailments, we incor-
porated a range  of values reflecting the fact that an
ailment,  as defined  in the concentration-response
    An individual suffering from a single  severe pol-
lution-related symptom or combination of symp-
toms may experience a Minor  Restricted Activity
Day (MRAD). Krupnick and Kopp (1988) argue that
mild symptoms will not be sufficient to  result in a
MRAD, so that WTP to avoid a MRAD  should ex-
ceed WTP to avoid any single mild  symptom.   On
the other  hand, WTP  to avoid a MRAD  should  not
exceed the WTP to avoid a work loss day (which
results when  the individual experiences more severe
symptoms).  No studies report an estimate for WTP
to avoid a day of minor restricted activity.  There-
fore, we derive for this analysis  a value from WTP
estimates  for avoiding  combinations of symptoms
which may result in a day of minor restricted activ-
ity  ($38 per day).  The  uncertainty range associated
with this value extends  from the highest value for a
single symptom to the value  for a work loss  day.
Furthermore, a distributional form is used which
reflects our expectations that the  actual value is likely
to be closer  to the central estimate than  either ex-
treme.




    The valuation of this benefits category reflects
the value  of reduced  incidences of hospital admis-
sions due  to respiratory or cardiovascular  conditions.
We use  avoided hospital admissions as a measure as
opposed to the number of avoided cases  of respira-
tory or  cardiovascular  conditions, because of the
availability of C-R relationships  for the hospital ad-
missions endpoint. Hospital admissions reflect a class
of health  effects linked to air pollution which are
acute in nature but more severe  than  die  symptom-
day measures  discussed above.

    As described in Chapter 5, our approach to esti-
mating the number of incidences for this category
involves reliance  on several concentration-response
(C-R) functions.   "Each concentration response func-
                                                  73

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
tion provides  an alternative definition of either res-
piratory  effects or cardiovascular effects, and may
be based on different pollutants.  For valuation of
the incidences, the current literature provides well-
developed and detailed cost estimates of hospitaliza-
tioti by health effect or illness.  Using illness-specific
estimates of avoided medical costs and avoided costs
of lost work-time, developed by Rlixhauser (1993),
we  construct cost of illness (COT) estimates that are
specific to the suite of health effects  defined by each
C-R function.  For example, we  use twelve distinct
C-R functions to quantify the expected change in
respiratory admissions.6  Consequently in this analy-
sis, we develop  twelve separate COI estimates, each
reflecting the  unique composition of health effects
considered in the individual studies.

    The use of COI estimates suggests we likely un-
derstand  the \X/TP to avoid these effects.   The valu-
ation of  any given health effect, such as hospitaliza-
tion, should reflect the value of avoiding associated
pain and suffering and lost leisure time, in addition
to medical costs and lost work time.  While the  prob-
ability distributions in this  analysis characterize a
range of potential costs  associated with hospitaliza-
tion, they do  not account for  the omission of fac-
tors from the  COI estimates such as  pain and suffer-
ing.  Consequently, the valuations for these end-
points most likely understate the  true social values
for avoiding hospital admissions due to respiratory
or cardiovascular conditions.

                          Provisions

    We develop monetary estimates of the health
benefits due to stratospheric ozone provisions  based
on  estimated incidences  presented in a series  of ex-
isting regulatory  support analyses.   To ensure con-
sistency with  the valuation strategy  of this analysis,
however, we  adjust certain parameters used in the
existing regulatory analyses of Title VI provisions.
Specifically, we re-evaluate the physical effects change
projected in  the RIAs using the discount rate and
the value of statistical life adopted  throughout the
rest of our present  study.   The net effect of these
changes is to  reduce the estimates of benefits  from
those found in the regulatory source support docu-

    L  For more detailed discussion of the various health effects
considered by each C-R function and methodology  for estimat-
ing the number of avoided hospital admissions, see Appendix
D.
ments.  The  most important change is the discount
rate.  Because the benefits of stratospheric  ozone
protection accrue over several hundred years, the
discount rate chosen can have an especially large in-
fluence on the benefits estimate.   The central esti-
mate  employed in  this analysis is  five percent; the
rate used in the source documents  is two percent.

    The value of statistical life (VSL) estimate  is also
an important factor in the calculations, because the
vast majority of benefits of stratospheric ozone pro-
tection result from avoided fatal skin cancer cases.
To reflect the uncertainty of the VSL estimates, we
employ the same statistical uncertainty aggregation
approach used in the criteria pollutant analysis, us-
ing a Weibull distribution  of VSL estimates as an
input.  Appendix G describes the details of these and
other changes made to ensure consistency between
our stratospheric ozone provision  benefits analysis
and our  criteria pollutant analyses.

              Of

    We combine the number of reduced incidences
of our health endpoints with our  estimated  values
of avoiding the health effect to generate  total  annual
monetized  human health benefits in 2000 and 2010.
We attribute  to  Titles  1 through  V of the  CAAA
total annual human health benefits  of S68 billion in
2000  and $110 billion  in 2010. We  summarize the
Post-CAAA  2010 monetized benefit in Table  6-3.
The table provides our central estimate, in addition
to the 5th and 95th percentile estimates for each ben-
efit category.

    There are two aspects  of our  results that war-
rant discussion.  The first is the valuation of prema-
ture mortality due to PM exposure.  The second is
our strategy to avoid double-counting when  aggre-
gating health benefits.  As  discussed  in Chapter 5,
premature  mortality is attributed  to PM exposure
and our primary  estimate reflects a lag between PM
exposure and premature mortality.  While this lag
does not alter the number of estimated incidences, it
does alter the monetization  of benefits.  Because we
value  the "event" rather than the present risk,  in this
analysis we assume that the value of avoided  future
premature  mortality should be discounted.  There-
fore,  the type of lag structure employed plays a di-
rect role in the valuation of this endpoint.
                                                   74

-------
                                                              Chapter 6: Economic Valuation of Human Health Effects
 Table 6-3
 Results of Human Health Benefits Valuation, 2010
                                         Monetary Benefits
                                         (in millions 1990$)
                                  5th %ile      Mean     95th %ile
Mortality
Ages 30+
Chronic Illness
Chronic Bronchitis
Chronic Asthma
Hospitalization
All Respiratory
Total Cardiovascular
Asthma-Related ER Visits

$ 14,000

$360
40

$75
93
0.1

$ 100,000

$ 5,600
180

$ 130
390
1

$ 250,000

$18,000
300

$200
960
3
 Minor Illness
    Acute Bronchitis
    URS
    LRS
    Respiratory Illness
    Mod/Worse Asthma1
    Asthma Attacks1
    Chest tightness, Shortness of
    Breath, or Wheeze
    Shortness of Breath
    Work Loss Days
    MRAD/Any-of-19	
      Total Benefits in 20102
$0
  4
  2
  1
  2
 20

  0
  0
300
680
      $2
       19
        6
        6
       13
       55

      0.6
      0.5
     340
    1,200
$ 110,000
 Note:
 1  Moderate to worse asthma and asthma attacks are endpoints included in the
 definition of MRAD/Any-of-19 respiratory effects. Although valuation estimates are
 presented for these categories, the values are not included in total benefits to avoid
 the potential for double-counting.
 2  Summing 5th and 95th percentile values would yield a misleading estimate of the
 5th and 95th percentile estimate of total health benefits. For example, the likelihood
 that the 5th percentile estimates for each endpoint would simultaneously be drawn
 during the statistical uncertainty analysis is much less than 5 percent. As a result,
 we present only the total mean.
    The primary analysis reflects a five-year lag struc-
ture.  Under this scenario, 50 percent of the  esti-
mated cases of avoided mortality occur within the
first two years.  The remaining 50 percent are  then
distributed across the next three years.   Our valua-
tion of avoided premature mortality applies a five
percent discount rate to the  lagged  estimates  over
the periods 2000 to 2005 and 2010 to 2015. We dis-
count over the period between the initial PM expo-
sure change (either 2000 or 2010) and timing of the
incidence.
                   Many  of the monetized health
               benefit categories include overlapping
               health endpoints, creating the poten-
               tial for double-counting.  In an effort
               to avoid overstating the benefits, we
               do not aggregate all of the quantified
               health effects.   For example, asthma
               attacks and moderate to worse asthma
               are considered components of the
               endpoint, "Any of 19 Respiratory
               Symptoms".   Consequently,  we
               present the results but do not include
               them 111  our reported  total  benefits
               figures.  In other cases, there are end-
               points included in our aggregation of
               benefit that appear to  have  overlap-
               ping health effects.  For those ben-
               efit categories that describe similar
               health effects, it is  important to keep
               in mind that estimated  incidences are
               based on unique portions of the popu-
               lation.

               Valuation
               Uncertainties

                   We addressed many valuation
               uncertainties explicitly and quantita-
               tively by expressing values as distri-
               butions (see  Appendix  II for a com-
               plete description of  distributions
               employed), using a computerized sta-
               tistical technique to apply the valua-
               tions  to physical effects (see Chapters
               5 and 8)  with the mean of each valu-
^^^^_^^^^  ation  distribution providing the foun-
               dation for the primary central esti-
 mate of total net benefits.  This approach does  not,
 of course, guarantee  that all uncertainties have been
 adequately  characterized,  nor that the valuation es-
 timates are unbiased.  It  is possible that the actual
 WTP to avoid an air pollution-related  impact is  out-
 side of the range of estimates used in this  analysis.
 Nevertheless, we assume  that the distributions  em-
 ployed are  reasonable approximations of the ranges
 of uncertainty, and that there is no compelling rea-
 son to believe that the mean values  employed  arc
 systematically biased (except  for the cost of illness
 values, which probably underestimate WTP).  There
 are, however, a limited number of health endpoints
  $5
   39
   12
   15
   29
  100

    3
  1.2
  380
1,800
                                                   75

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
for which a different valuation approach may yield
results significantly different from out primary cen-
tral benefit estimate.  For example, using a value of
statistical life  year approach in lieu of the  value of
statistical life method for valuing avoided premature
mortality yields  a mean estimate for this  benefit
which is approximately 45 percent lower than  our
primary  central estimate.  For those few endpoints
where reasonable alternative  valuation paradigms
yield significantly  different results from our preferred
approach, see our discussion in Chapter 8.

    The  potential for biases as introduced by ben-
efits transfer methodology  is applicable to all ben-
efits categories and, as noted in Table 6-4, the direc-
tion of its bias is unknown.   Because changes in
mortality risk  are the single most  important compo-
nent of  aggregate benefits, mortality risk valuation
is  also the dominant component of the quantified
uncertainty.   This category accounts for over 90
percent  of total  annual estimates under the Post-
CAAA scenario.   The  second largest benefits  cat-
egory, reduced risk of chronic bronchitis, valued at
approximately $5.6 billion per year in 2010,  accounts
for roughly  five percent of the total  estimated  ben-
efits.  Consequently, any  uncertainty concerning
mortality risk valuation beyond that addressed by
the quantitative  uncertainty  assessment (i.e., that
related to the Weibull distribution  with a mean value
of $4.8 million) deserves note.

                             Transfer

    One issue that  merits  special attention is  the
uncertainties and  possible biases related to the "ben-
                                            efits transfer" from  the 26 valuation source studies
                                            to valuation  of reductions in PM-related mortality
                                            rates.  Given the limitations of the current litera-
                                            ture, we  address  this source of uncertainty  qualita-
                                            tively in this  section. Although each of the  mortal-
                                            ity risk valuation  source studies  (see Table 6-2)  esti-
                                            mate the  average  WTP for a given reduction  in mor-
                                            tality risk, the degree of reduction in risk being val-
                                            ued varies across studies  and is not necessarily the
                                            same  as the degree of mortality risk reduction  esti-
                                            mated 111 this analysis.  The transferability  of  esti-
                                            mates of the value of a statistical  life  from the 26
                                            studies to the section 812 benefit  analysis rests on
                                            the assumption that,  within a reasonable range, WTP
                                            for reductions  in mortality  risk is  linear in  risk re-
                                            duction.  For example, suppose a study estimates that
                                            the average  WTP for a reduction  in mortality risk
                                            of 1/100,000 is  $50, but that the actual mortality
                                            risk reduction  resulting from a given pollutant re-
                                            duction is 1/10,000.  If WTP for reductions  in mor-
                                            tality risk is  linear in risk  reduction, then a WTP of
                                            S50 for a reduction of 1/100,000 implies a WTP of
                                            S500 for  a risk reduction  of 1/10,000 (which is ten
                                            times the risk reduction valued in  the  study).  Un-
                                            der the assumption  of linearity, the estimate of the
                                            value of a statistical life does  not depend on  the par-
                                            ticular amount  of risk reduction being valued.   This
                                            assumption  has been shown to be  reasonable  pro-
                                            vided the change in the  risk being valued is within
                                            the range of risks evaluated in the underlying stud-
                                            ies (Rowlatt et  al. 1998).

                                                Although the particular amount of mortality  risk
                                            reduction being valued in  a study may not affect the
                                            transferabilitv of the WTP estimate from the study
       Table 6-4
       Valuation  of CAAA Benefits: Potential Sources and Likely Direction of Bias
                                                                    Likely Direction of Bias in WTP
                                             Factor                  Estimates Used in this Study
Benefits Category
       Premature Mortality
                      Age
                      Degree of Risk Aversion
                      Income
                      Voluntary vs. Involuntary
                      Catastrophic vs. Protracted Death
                      Discounting over a latency period
Uncertain, perhaps overestimate
Underestimate
Uncertain
Underestimate
Uncertain, perhaps underestimate
Uncertain, perhaps underestimate
       Chronic Bronchitis
                      Severity-level                        Uncertain
                      Elasticity of WTP with respect to        Uncertain
                      severity
       All other benefit endpoints   Benefits Transfer
                                                         Uncertain
                                                   76

-------
                                                               Chapter 6: Economic Valuation of Human Health Effects
to the benefit analysis, the characteristics of the study
subjects  and the nature of the mortality risk being
valued in the study could be important.  Certain char-
acteristics of both  the population affected and the
mortality risk facing that population are believed to
affect the average WTP to  reduce  risk.  The  appro-
priateness of the mean of the WTP estimates from
the 26 studies for valuing the  mortality-related ben-
efits of reductions in pollutant concentrations there-
fore depends not only on the  quality of the  studies
(i.e., how well they measure what they are trying to
measure), but also  011  (1)  the extent to which the
subjects 111 the studies  are  similar to the population
affected by  changes in air pollution  and (2) the ex-
tent to which the risks being valued are similar.

    The substantial majority of the 26 studies relied
upon are wage-risk (or labor market) studies.   Com-
pared with  the  subjects in  these wage-risk studies,
the population most affected by air pollution-related
mortality risk changes is likely to be,  on average,
older and probably  more risk averse.  Some evidence
suggests that approximately  85  percent of those iden-
tified in short-term ("episodic") studies who die pre-
maturely from PM-related causes are over 65.7 The
average age  of subjects in wage-risk  studies, in con-
trast, would be  well  under  65, and probably  closer
to 40 years of age.

    The direction of bias resulting from the age dif-
ference is unclear.  We could argue that, because an
older person has fewer expected years  left to lose,
his or her WTP to reduce  mortality risk would be
less than that of a younger  person.  This hypothesis
is  supported by  one empirical study,  Jones-Lee et al.
(1985), which found WTP  to avoid mortality risk at
age 65 to be about  90 percent of what it is at  age 40.
On the other hand, there is reason to  believe that
those over 65 are, in general, more risk averse than
the general population. This would imply  that older
populations  are  likely to select occupations that are
relatively less  risky than  workers represented in
wage-risk studies or  the general  population.  Al-
though the list of 26 studies used here excludes stud-
ies that consider only much-higher-than-average oc-
cupational risks, there is nevertheless  likely to  be
some selection bias in the remaining studies, because
these studies are likely to be  based on samples of
    7  See Schwartz and Dockery (1992), Ostro et al. (1995),
and Chestnut (1995).
\vorkers who are, on average, more risk-loving than
the general population.  In contrast, older people as
a group exhibit more risk-averse behavior.

    There is substantial evidence that the income
elasticity of WTP for health risk reductions is posi-
tive (although  there  is uncertainty about the exact
value of this elasticity).   This implies that  individu-
als with higher  incomes and/or greater wealth should
be willing to pay more to reduce risk, all else equal,
than individuals with lower incomes or wealth.  The
comparison between the income, both actual and
potential,  or wealth of the workers in the wage-risk
studies versus  that of the population of individuals
most likely to  be affected by changes  in pollution
concentrations, however, is unclear.  One could ar-
gue  that because the elderly are relatively wealthy,
the affected population  is also wealthier,  011 aver-
age, than  are the wage-risk study subjects, who tend
to be middle-aged (on average) blue-collar workers.
On the other  hand, the wforkcrs in the wage-risk
studies \vill have potentially more years remaining
in which  to acquire streams of income  from future
earnings.  On net, the potential income comparison
is unclear.

    Although there may be several ways in which
job-related mortality risks differ from air pollution-
related mortality risks,  the most important differ-
ence may be that job-related risks are incurred vol-
untarily,  or generally assumed  to be,  whereas air
pollution-related risks  are incurred  involuntarily.
There is  some evidence8  that people will pay more
to reduce involuntarily incurred risks than risks in-
curred voluntarily.  If this is the case, WTP  estimates
based on  wage-risk studies may  understate WTP to
reduce involuntarily incurred air pollution-related
mortality risks.

    Another important difference  related to the na-
ture of the risk may be that some workplace mortal-
ity risks tend to involve sudden, catastrophic events,
whereas  air pollution-related risks tend to involve
longer periods of disease and suffering prior to death.
Some evidence suggests  that WTP  to avoid a risk of
a protracted death involving prolonged suffering and
loss of dignity and personal control is  greater than
the WTP  to avoid a  risk (of identical magnitude) of
sudden death.  To the extent that the mortality risks

    8 See,  lot example, Violette and Chestnut,  1983.
                                                   77

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
addressed in this assessment are associated with longer
periods of illness or greater pain and suffering than
are the risks addressed in the valuation literature,
the WTP measurements employed in the present
analysis would reflect a downward bias.

    Economic assessment of WTP for lagged mor-
tality effects also introduces  uncertainty.  For lack
of a more refined technique, our analysis relies on
the simplifying assumption  that lagged mortality
risks can be valued at the tune of the occurrence of
death, rather than at the time of exposure.  In subse-
quent development of the annual and present value
estimates, we  therefore discount the dollar benefits
estimate as if the full benefit  accrues only in the year
of death.   There are several  reasons to believe that
this  approach underestimates willingness  to pay.
Most importantly, while death may occur after a lag
period, morbidity effects may appear at any time
prior to  death,  including immediately upon expo-
sure.  It is not clear that other dose-response  assess-
ments capture the  full range of morbidity  effects,
direct and indirect, that might be associated  with a
latent fatal  exposure.  Other potentially important
factors include the use of a  financial discount rate,
which may or may not accurately represent the rate
at which individuals  might discount delayed health
benefits and the effect of knowledge of a fatal expo-
sure  011 valuation of a delayed effect, in other words
whether the valuation is affected by a prior  diagno-
sis of a fatal condition.

    We summarize the potential  sources of bias in-
troduced  by relying on wage-risk studies  to derive
an estimate of the WTP  to reduce air  pollution-re-
lated mortality risk in Table 6-4; the overall effect of
these multiple  biases is addressed in Table  6-5.
Among these potential biases, it is disparities in age
and income between  the subjects of the wage-risk
studies and those affected by air pollution which have
thus far motivated specific suggestions  for quantita-
tive adjustment;9 however, the appropriateness and
the proper magnitude of such potential adjustments
remain unclear given presently available information.
These uncertainties  are particularly acute given the
possibility  that age and income biases  might offset
each other m  the case of pollution-related mortality
risk aversion.  Furthermore, the  other  potential bi-
ases  discussed above, and summarized in Table 6-4,
add additional uncertainty regarding the transferabil-
ity of WTP estimates from wage-risk studies to en-
vironmental policy and program assessments.
      Chestnut, 1995; lEc, 1992.
                                                   78

-------
                                                              Chapter 6: Economic Valuation of Human Health Effects
Table 6-5
Key Uncertainties Associated with Valuation of Health Benefits
                                   Direction of Potential
   Potential Source of Error        Bias for Net Benefits
                                Likely Significance Relative to Key
                              Uncertainties on Net Benefits Estimate1
Benefits transfer for mortality
risk valuation, including
differences in age, income,
degree of risk aversion, the
nature of the risk, and
treatment of latency between
mortality risks presented  by PM
and the risks evaluated in the
available economic studies.
Unable to determine based
on currently available
information
Potentially major. The mortality valuation
step is clearly a critical element in the net
benefits estimate, so any uncertainties can
have a large effect.  As discussed in the text,
however, information on the combined effect
of these known biases is relatively sparse,
and  it is therefore difficult to assess the
overall effect of multiple biases that work in
opposite directions.
Benefits transfer for chronic
bronchitis, including
adjustments made to better
match the severity of the risks
modeled in the available
economic studies.
Unable to determine based
on currently available
information
Probably minor.  Benefits of avoided chronic
bronchitis account for about five percent of
total benefits, limiting the effect on net
benefits to a maximum of about seven
percent.  Steps taken  in the study to adjust
for severity using the best available empirical
information likely limit the effect to much less
than this maximum value.
Inability to value some
quantifiable morbidity
endpoints,  such as impaired
lung function.
Underestimate
Probably minor.  Reductions in lung function
are a well-established effect, based on
clinical evaluations of the impact of air
pollutants on human health, and the effect
would be pervasive, affecting virtually every
exposed individual.  There  is therefore a
potential for a major impact on benefits
estimates.  The lack of a clear symptomatic
presentation of the effect, however, could
limit individual WTP to avoid lung function
decrements.
Note:  1 The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team.  The
Project Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could influence
the overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more;  if an alternative assumption or approach is likely
to change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification of "probably minor."
                                                  79

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                     [Thispage left blank intentionally.]
                                                     80

-------
Ecological  and


Other  Welfare


Effects

   EPA's traditional focus in environmental ben-
efits assessment has  been on quantifying beneficial
impacts of environmental regulation on  human
health.  As we  have learned more about the effects
of anthropogenic stressors on ecological systems,
however, pursuit of environmental programs tar-
geted 011 reductions of damage to the environment
have become more common.  The CAAA Title IV
provisions, collectively referred to as the Acid Ram
Program, are a  good  example.  These provisions are
in place largely as the result of a major research ef-
fort to  better understand and quantify the effects of
sulfur and nitrogen oxides on natural systems sus-
ceptible to acid ram. Although the  benefits of this
program include improvements in human health, the
initial impetus was protection of ecological resources.

   We have designed this first section 812 prospec-
tive analysis to  be responsive to the  increased  focus
on the  importance of ecological resources by devot-
ing a great deal  of effort to characterizing and, where
possible, quantifying and monetizing the impacts of
air pollutants on natural systems. This increased fo-
cus is also partly a result of the outcome of EPA's
retrospective analysis, in which we identified an in-
creased understanding of and focus on ecological ef-
fects  as one of the important research directions for
the first prospective and subsequent analyses.  This
chapter presents the results of these  efforts.

   This chapter consists of four sections. First, we
provide an overview of our approach to estimating
the effects of air pollution on ecological systems.
Second, we provide a characterization of these ef-
fects in qualitative terms.  The second section con-
cludes with  a summary of the process for selecting
specific impacts which can be quantified  and mon-
etized using currently available methods.  Third, we
present the results of our quantitative and economic
analyses.  Finally, we discuss major uncertainties of
the ecological and other welfare effects analyses.
               Of


    Our analysis of ecological effects involves three
major steps:

    *   First, we identify and characterize ecologi-
       cal effects from air pollution.
    *   Second, we develop and implement selection
       criteria for more in-depth assessment of eco-
       logical impacts.
    •   Third, we perform quantitative and qualita-
       tive analyses to characterize a portion of the
       benefits  of the 1990  CAAA provisions.

    The first step involves taking a broad view of
pollutants controlled under the  CAAA and their
documented effects on ecological systems, both as
individual pollutants and, to  the extent possible, as
one component in  multiplc-strcssor effects on eco-
systems and their components.  We  organize our
analysis in terms of major pollutant classes and by
the  level of biological  organization at which  impacts
are  measured (e.g., regional ecosystem, local ecosys-
tem, community, population, individual, etc.).

    After completing the first step on a broad level,
the  second step involves narrowing the scope of sub-
sequent analyses.  While it is desirable to focus  ef-
fort 011 those impacts that are of greatest importance,
in practice the state of the science in ecological  as-
sessment largely dictates the subsequent focus of  the
analysis.  There exist only a handful of comprehen-
sive ecological assessments from which to draw con-
clusions about those effects that are  most important
either ecologically or in economic terms, and those
studies are potentially controversial in their meth-
ods and conclusions, in part  because of the incom-
plete understanding of many  of these effects.  As a
result, the categories of effects ultimately chosen  for
assessment here are necessarily limited by available
                                              81

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
methods and data.  As scientific understanding and
impact assessment methods grow more  comprehen-
sive, however, we expect that the focus of subsequent
analyses  will be on those effects whose avoidance
would have the  greatest potential ecological and/or
economic value.

    The  third step involves  implementing a wide
range of analyses to more exhaustively  characterize
specific effects of air pollution on ecological systems.
We provide quantitative estimates of the benefits  of
the 1990 CAAA for the following effects:

    *  eutrophication of estuaries associated with
       airborne nitrogen deposition;
    *  acidification of freshwater  bodies associated
       with airborne nitrogen and sulfur deposition;
       and
    *  reduced  forest growth associated with ozone
       exposure.

    In addition,  in tins chapter we present the meth-
ods  and results for quantitative analysis of other
welfare effects, including reduced agricultural yields
associated with ozone exposure, the impact of am-
bient participate matter on visibility, the effects  of
ozone on farm worker productivity, and the effects
of stratospheric  ozone on crop and fisheries yields.
These effects  have been identified as important cat-
egories of benefits in many previous analyses, includ-
ing the section 812 retrospective analysis.  As a re-
sult, these  effects were not considered  in the same
three step process used for other service flows.

    We  attempted to conduct quantitative analyses
of two other benefits categories: the accumulation
of toxics in freshwater fisheries associated with air-
borne toxics deposition; and aesthetic  degradation
of forests associated with ozone and airborne toxics
exposure.  However, we found that,  while some
quantitative methods exist to  evaluate these benefits,
key links are  missing in the analytic process. This  in
turn prevents development of defensible benefits es-
timates which can be reasonably associated with the
air quality and air pollutant deposition  patterns de-
veloped from our Post-CAAA and Pre-CAAA sce-
narios.  See Appendix E for more detailed discus-
sion of these service flows.  In addition, in assessing
nitrogen  deposition impacts to estuarine  systems, we
relied on a displaced cost approach with results that
we chose to omit from the primary benefits estimate
because of uncertainties in the methodology.  These
results are nonetheless reported in this chapter, but
are used for the purposes of sensitivity testing only.

    Because the breadth and complexity of air pol-
lutant-ecosystem interactions  do not  allow for com-
prehensive quantitative analysis of all the ecological
benefits of the CAAA, we stress the  importance  of
continued consideration of those impacts not val-
ued in this report in policy decision-making and in
further technical research.  Judging from the  geo-
graphic breadth and magnitude of the relatively
modest subset of impacts that we find  sufficiently
well-understood to quantify and monetize, it is ap-
parent that  the economic benefits of the  CAAA's
reduction of air pollution impacts on ecosystems are
substantial.

                            Of
of Air Pollution  on
Systems

    The purpose of this section is to provide an over-
view of potential interactions between air pollutants
and the natural  environment. We identify major
single pollutant-environment  interactions, as well  as
the synergistic impacts of ecosystem exposure  to
multiple air pollutants.  Although a wride variety  of
complex air pollution-environment interactions are
described  or hypothesized in the literature, for the
purposes of this analysis we focus on major aspects
of ecosystem-pollutant interactions.  Wre do this  by
limiting our review according to the  following crite-
ria:

        Pollutants regulated  by the CAAA.
    •    Known interactions between  pollutants and
        natural  systems   as   documented   in
        peer-reviewed literature.
    *    Pollutants present in  the atmosphere in suf-
        ficient  amounts after 1990 to cause signifi-
        cant damages to natural systems.

    Our understanding of air pollution effects on
ecosystems has progressed considerably during re-
cent decades.  Previously, air pollution was  regarded
primarily as a local phenomenon and concern was
associated with the vicinity  of industrial facilities,
                                                  82

-------
                                                                    Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
power plants or urban areas.  The pollutants of con-
cern were gaseous (e.g., sulfur dioxide and ozone) or
heavy metals (e.g., lead) and the observed effects were
visible stress- specific symptoms of injury (e.g.,  fo-
liar chlorosis).  The  most typical approach to docu-
menting the effects of specific pollutants  was a
dose-response experiment, where the objective was
to develop a regression equation describing the rela-
tionship between  exposure and some easily measured
effect  (e.g., growth,  yield or  mortality).  As analytic
methods unproved and ecology progressed, a broader
range of effects of air pollutants was identified and
understanding of  the mechanisms of effect improved.
Observations made on various temporal scales (e.g.,
long-term studies) and spatial scales (e.g., watershed
studies) led to the recognition that air pollution can
affect all organizational levels of biological systems.

    Our current understanding of ecosystem impacts
can be organized by the pollutants of  concern and
by the level of biological organization at which im-
pacts are directly measured.  We attempt to address
both dimensions  of  categorization  in this overview.
In Table 7-1 we  summarize  the major pollutants of
concern, and the documented acute  and long-term
ecological impacts associated with them.

    The summary in Table  7-1 is a highly condensed
version of the results of our  characterization of eco-
logical impacts.  In addition  to the pollutant-specific
effects outlined in the table,  it is important to iden-
tify the level of biological organization  and types of
ecosystems that are susceptible to these  types of ef-
fects. Tables 7-2 through 7-4 provide more detail on
pollutant-specific impacts  at a range of levels of bio-
logical organization.  It is important to note that the
interactions listed are intended to illustrate the range
of possible adverse effects.  For a more complete re-
view of air-pollutant-induced effects on  ecosystems,
see Appendix R.

         of Mercury

    Table 7-2 summarizes the  effects of mercury and
ozone on ecological systems.  To illustrate  the na-
ture of our review of effects, consider the  second
row in Table 7-2. This row summarizes the effects
of the air pollutants mercury and  ozone at the "indi-
vidual" level of biological organization.  As indicated
in die table, in a general sense air pollutants  can in-
duce  a direct physiological response in individuals
(analogous to that experienced by humans exposed
to pollutants), or an indirect effect either through
impacts on the individual's surroundings  or by weak-
ening the individual  and making it more susceptible
to other  stressors. "Mercury has several direct effects
to fauna, including effects to the central nervous
system and  the liver, while the documented direct
effects of ozone tend to be to a variety of plant func-
tions.  Indirect effects of mercury  are not well un-
derstood, but the indirect effects of ozone may serve
to compound  the direct effects to plants by  also
making the  plants more  susceptible to drought or
heat stress, for example.  This type of cataloging of
    Table 7-1
    Classes of Pollutants and Ecological Effects
Pollutant
Class
Acidic
Deposition
Nitrogen
Deposition
Hazardous Air
Pollutants
(HAPs)
Ozone
Major Pollutants and
Precursor Emissions
Sulfuric acid, nitric acid
Precursor emissions: Sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides
Nitrogen compounds (e.g.,
nitrogen oxides)
Mercury, dioxins
Tropospheric ozone
Precursor emissions: Nitrogen
Oxides and Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs)
Acute Effects
Direct toxic effects to
plant leaves and
aquatic organisms.

Direct toxic effects to
animals.
Direct toxic effects to
plant leaves.
Long-term Effects
Progressive deterioration of soil
quality. Chronic acidification of
surface waters.
Saturation of terrestrial ecosystems
with nitrogen. Progressive nitrogen
enrichment of coastal estuaries.
Conservation of mercury and dioxins
in biogeochemical cycles and
accumulation in the food chain.
Alterations of ecosystem wide
patterns of energy flow and nutrient
cycling.
                                                   83

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Table 7-2
    Interactions of Mercury and Ozone with Natural Systems At Various Levels of Organization
                                                              Examples of Interactions
Spatial Scale
Molecular and
cellular
Individual
Population
Community
Local Ecosystem
(e.g. .landscape
element)
Regional Ecosystem
(e.g., watershed)
Type of Interaction
Chemical and
biochemical processes
Direct physiological
response.
Indirect effects:
Response to altered
environmental factors or
alterations of the
individual's ability to cope
with other kinds of stress.
Change of population
characteristics like
productivity or mortality
rates.
Changes of community
structure and competitive
patterns
Changes in nutrient
cycle, hydrological cycle,
and energy flow of lakes,
wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles
within a watershed.
Region-wide alterations
of biodiversity.
Mercury in
streams and lakes
Mercury enters the body of
vertebrates and binds to
sulfhydril groups (i.e.
proteins).
Neurological effects in
vertebrates. Behavioral
abnormalities. Damages to
the liver.
Few interactions known.
Damages through
increased sensitivity to
other environmental stress
factors could occur, for
example, through
impairment of immune
response.
Reduced reproductive
success offish and bird
species. Increased
mortality rates, especially in
earlier life stages.
Loss of species diversity of
benthic invertebrates.
Not well understood.
Not well understood.
Ozone
Oxidation of enzymes of plants.
Disruption of the membrane
potential.
Direct injuries include visible
foliar damage, premature needle
senescence, reduced
photosynthesis, altered carbon
allocation, and reduction of
growth rates and reproductive
success.
Increased sensitivity to biotic
and abiotic stress factors like
pathogens and frost. Disruption
of plant-symbiont relationship
(mychorrhiza), and symbionts.
Reduced biological productivity.
Selection for less sensitive
individuals. Possibly
microevolution for ozone
resistance.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective advantage
for ozone-resistant species.
Loss of ozone sensitive species
and individuals. Reduction in
productivity.
Alterations of ecosystem-wide
patterns of energy flow and
nutrient cycling.
Region-wide loss of sensitive
species.
effects, while limited in its direct usefulness in a cost-
benefit framework, nonetheless does convey the wide
range of documented effects of air pollutants on eco-
logical resources.  These tables and the accompany-
ing text, found in Appendix E, also provide a frame-
work for  determining the extent to which impor-
tant factors  may not be well characterized by quan-
titative analysis, setting the stage for prioritization
of research needs.
    Table 7-3 provides a summary of the effects  of
nitrogen deposition 011 natural systems.  These im-
pacts are manifest in both terrestial  and coastal es-
tuarine systems.  In both types of systems, nitrogen
can be a growth-enhancing nutrient. As shown in
the rows characterizing  individual and population
level impacts, the effects  on many varieties of plants
are beneficial.  This growth can have other harmful
effects, however.  For example, excessive  growth  of
                                                  84

-------
                                                                   Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
   Table 7-3
   Interactions Between Nitrogen Deposition and Natural Systems
   At Various Levels of Organization
                                                              Examples of Interactions
                                                  Eutrophication and
                                                 Nitrogen Saturation of
                     Eutrophication of Coastal
Spatial Scale
Molecular and
cellular
Individual
Population
Community
Local Ecosystem
(e.g., landscape
element)
Regional Ecosystem
(e.g., watershed)
Type of Interaction
Chemical and
biochemical processes
Direct physiological
response.
Indirect effects:
Response to altered
environmental factors or
alterations of the
individual's ability to
cope with other kinds of
stress.
Change of population
characteristics like
productivity or mortality
rates.
Changes of community
structure and
competitive patterns
Changes in nutrient
cycle, hydrological cycle,
and energy flow of lakes,
wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles
within a watershed.
Region-wide alterations
of biodiversity.
Terrestrial Landscapes
Assimilation of nitrogen by
plants and microorganisms
Increases in leaf- size of
terrestrial plants.
Decreased resistance to
biotic and abiotic stress
factors like pathogens and
frost. Disruption of plant-
symbiont relationships with
mycorrhiza fungi.
Increase in biological
productivity and growth
rates of some species.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective
advantage for fast growing
species and individuals
that efficiently use
additional nitrogen. Loss
of species adapted to
nitrogen-poor
environments.
Magnification of the
biogeochemical nitrogen
cycle. Progressive
saturation of
microorganisms, soils, and
plants with nitrogen.
Leaching of nitrogen from
terrestrial sites to streams
and lakes. Acidification of
aquatic bodies.
Eutrophication of estuaries.
Estuaries
Assimilation of nitrogen by
plants and microorganisms.
Increase in growth of marine
plants.
Injuries to marine fauna through
oxygen depletion of the
environment. Loss of physical
habitat due to loss of sea-grass
beds. Injury through increased
shading. Toxic blooms of
plankton.
Increase in biological
productivity. Increase of growth
rates (esp. of algae and marine
plants).
Excessive algal growth.
Changes in species
composition. Decrease in sea-
grass beds.
Magnification of the nitrogen
cycle. Depletion of oxygen,
increased shading through
algal growth.
Additional input of nitrogen
from nitrogen-saturated
terrestrial sites within the
watershed.
marine organisms can lead to eutrophy, a state where
the enhanced surface growth of plants shields bot-
tom growing plants  from sunlight, causing them to
die and, in extreme cases, lead to low dissolved oxy-
gen, or anoxic, conditions that impair a wide range
of species  and ecological functions.  These  effects
are described in the  table in the rows characterizing
effects at the community  and ecosystem levels.  For
this reason, isolated  analysis of the effects of nitro-
gen on individuals or populations  may provide mis-
leading results; by the same token, analyses which
ignore the beneficial effects of nitrogen in  certain
types of systems may lead to similarly misleading-
results.  These complex linkages across biological
levels of organization suggest that, when feasible, a
systems level approach to  ecological assessments  is
preferable to isolated analyses  of effects at lower or-
ders of organization.

         of Acid

    Table 7-4 provides  a summary of the effects of
acid deposition on forest  and freshwater systems.
The direct effects of acid deposition in lakes and
streams include effects on fish  species, as charaterized
in the  row describing individual-level effects.  These
                                                  85

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Table 7-4
    Interactions Between Acid Deposition and Natural Systems At Various Levels of Organization
                                                               Examples of Interactions
                                                                          Acidification of Streams
Spatial Scale
Molecular and
cellular
Individual
Population
Community
Local Ecosystem
(e.g., landscape
element)
Regional Ecosystem
(e.g., watershed)
Type of Interaction
Chemical and
biochemical processes
Direct physiological
response
Indirect effects:
Response to altered
environmental factors or
alterations of the
individual's ability to
cope with other kinds of
stress.
Change of population
characteristics like
productivity or mortality
rates.
Changes of community
structure and
competitive patterns
Changes in nutrient
cycle, hydrological cycle,
and energy flow of lakes,
wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles
within a watershed.
Region-wide alterations
of biodiversity.
Acidification of Forests
Damages to epidermal
layers and cells of plants
through deposition of
acids.
Increased loss of nutrients
via foliar leaching.
Cation depletion in the soil
causes nutrient
deficiencies in plants.
Concentrations of
aluminum ions in soils can
reach phytotoxic levels.
Increased sensitivity to
other stress factors like
pathogens and frost.
Decrease of biological
productivity of sensitive
organisms. Selection for
less sensitive individuals.
Microevolution of
resistance.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective
advantage for acid-
resistant species. Loss of
acid sensitive species and
individuals. Decrease in
productivity. Decrease of
species richness and
diversity.
Progressive depletion of
nutrient cations in the soil.
Increase in the
concentration of mobile
aluminum ions in the soil.
Leaching of sulfate, nitrate,
aluminum, and calcium to
streams and lakes.
Acidification of aquatic
bodies.
and Lakes
Impairment of ion interactions
offish at the cellular level.
Decreases in pH and increase
in aluminum ions causes
pathological changes in gill
structure offish.
Aluminum ions in the water
column can be toxic to many
aquatic organisms through
impairment of gill regulation.
Acidification can indirectly
affect submerged plant species,
because it reduces the
availability of dissolved carbon
dioxide (CO2).
Decrease of biological
productivity of sensitive
organisms. Selection for less
sensitive individuals.
Microevolution of resistance.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective advantage
for acid-resistant species. Loss
of acid sensitive species and
individuals. Decrease in
productivity. Decrease of
species richness and diversity.
Measurable declines of
decomposition of some forms
of organic matter, potentially
resulting in decreased rates of
nutrient cycling.
Additional acidification of
aquatic systems through
processes in terrestrial sites
within the watershed.
effects are not as straightforward as they might ap-
pear, however, because it is not only the acidity (pH)
of the water itself that causes  the effect but the in-
creased leaching of metals,  particularly aluminum,
which takes place in acidic (low pH) environments
that contributes substantially to the effects on fish.
These effects will vary widely from place to  place
according to the mineral content of the soil near the
lake and the lakebed sediment, as well as the natural
resistance of the lake in  absorbing acid deposition
(i.e., its buffering capacity).  Other important effects
characterized in the table include the ability of acid
deposition to deplete cation concentrations in ter-
restrial ecosystems;  increase the  concentration  of
aluminum in soils;  and leach nutrients, sulfates, and
metals to surrounding streams and lakes.  Effects  of
note at the individual level include foliar damage  to
trees.
                                                   86

-------
                                                                    Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
    A few general points emerge from our review of
ecological effects:

    •    Air pollutants  have indirect effects  that are
        at least as important as direct toxic effects
        on living organisms.  Indirect effects include
        those in which the pollutant alters the physi-
        cal or chemical environment (e.g., soil prop-
        erties), the plant's ability to compete for lim-
        ited resources (e.g.,  water, light), or the
        plant's  ability  to withstand pests or patho-
        gens.  Examples  are excessive availability of
        nitrogen, depletion of nutrient cations 111 the
        soil by acid deposition, mobilization  of toxic
        elements such  as aluminum, and changes in
        winter hardiness.  As is tine for other com-
        plex interactions, indirect  effects are more
        difficult  to observe than direct toxic  relation-
        ships between air pollutants and biota, and
        there may be  a variety of interactions that
        have  not yet been detected.

    *    There is  a group of pollutants that tend to
        be conserved in the landscape after they have
        been deposited to ecosystems.  These con-
        served pollutants are transformed  through
        biotic and abiotic processes within ecosys-
        tems, and accumulate in biogeochemical
        cycles.  These pollutants include, but are not
        limited to, hydrogen ions (H+), sulfur (S)
        and nitrogen (N) containing substances, and
        mercury  (Ilg).  Chronic deposition  of these
        pollutants can  result in progressive increases
        in concentrations and  cause injuries due to
        cumulative effects.   Indirect,  cumulative
        damages caused by chronic exposure (i.e.,
        long-term, moderate concentrations)  to these
        pollutants may increase in magnitude over
        time frames of decades  or centuries with very
        subtle annual  increments  of change.  Ex-
        amples are N-saturation of terrestrial ecosys-
        tems, cation depletion  of terrestrial ecosys-
        tems, acidification of streams and lakes, and
        accumulation  of mercury  in aquatic food
        webs.

    •    Damages to ecosystems  are most likely
        caused  by a combination  of environmental
        stress factors.  These include anthropogenic
        factors  such  as air pollution and other envi-
        ronmental stress factors such as low tempera-
        ture, excess or limited water, and limited
        availability of nutrients.  The  specific com-
        binations of factors differ among regions and
        ecosystems where declines have been ob-
        served.  Accurately predicting the impacts
        of multiple  stress  factors is an  extremely dif-
        ficult task, but this is  an area  of very active
        research among ecologists.

    •   Pollutant-environment interactions are com-
        plicated by the fact that biotic  and abiotic
        factors in ecosystems change dramatically
        over time.  Besides oscillations on a  daily-
        basis, and changes in a seasonal rhythm, there
        are  long-range successional developments
        over time periods of years, decades, or even
        centuries.  These temporal variations occur
        111 polluted  and pristine ecosystems, and no
        single point in time or space can be defined
        as representative of the entire system.


                                    to


    Based on this broad overview of effects, we iden-
tify  a  set of pollutant-environment interactions
which  are amenable to more  detailed  quantification
and  monetization.  We evaluate the long list of ef-
fects and seek categories where a defensible link  ex-
ists between changes  in air pollution emissions and
the quality or quantity  of the ecological service  flow,
and  where economic models  are available to mon-
etize these changes.  The use of these  criteria greatly
constrains the range of impacts that can be treated
quantitatively.  While the previous section identi-
fies  many pollutant-ecosystem interactions, only a
handful are  understood and have been  modeled to
an extent  sufficient to  reliably quantify their impact.

    The theoretical basis of economic benefits  as-
sessment is that ecosystems provide services to man-
kind, and that those services  have economic value.
The  application of  this theory requires the isolation
of service flows that have market values  or are oth-
erwise  amenable to available methods  for determin-
ing value in the absence of formal markets.  Avail-
able  methods do not exist to  comprehensively value
all service flows for any particular ecosystem or  ag-
gregation of ecosystems.   Generally, we are limited
                                                  87

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
to those service flows that are either sources of ma-
terial inputs or associated with natural amenities  that
involve active recreation.  Impacts  to  these service
flows that can be  valued  tend to manifest themselves
immediately and can be readily measured and assessed
in terms of the established cause and effect relation-
ships.


    Based on the constraints of economic  valuation
methods and data, we select from the host of ecosys-
tem impacts identified in the previous section a set
of service flows as candidate endpoints for analysis.
The list of service flows  establishes the  potential
scope of economic analysis for ecological effects  fea-
sible  in the  context of the present study.  Table 7-5
                           presents the service flow impacts  that we quantita-
                           tively estimate in  this analysis plus  those  effects that
                           currently cannot be quantified for each  of the four
                           ecological pollutant categories discussed in Table 7-1.


                               From the list of effects in Table 7-5, we further
                           limited  the  quantitative  and qualitative analyses con-
                           ducted  to reflect the available model coverage.  The
                           results  are summarized  in Table  7-6.  The relatively
                           short list of effects in Tables 7-5 and 7-6 demonstrates
                           that,  of the great  number of known impacts of air
                           pollution, only a  subset can be assessed  quantita-
                           tively.  Note that  for one category of effects, nitro-
                           gen deposition  impacts to estuarine systems, we re-
                           lied on a displaced cost approach (described below)
         Table 7-5
         Ecological Effects of Air Pollutants
             Pollutant
      Quantified Effects
       Unquantified Effects
         Acidic Deposition
Impacts to recreational
freshwater fishing
Impacts to commercial forests
(e.g., timber, non-timber forest products)
Impacts to commercial freshwater fishing
Watershed damages (water filtration
flood control)
Impacts to recreation in terrestrial
ecosystems (e.g. forest aesthetics,
nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for nonacidified ecosystems  (e.g.
biodiversity values)
         Nitrogen
         Deposition
Additional costs of alternative or
displaced nitrogen input controls
for eastern estuaries
Impacts to commercial fishing,
agriculture, and forests
Watershed damages (water filteration,
flood control)
Impacts to recreation in estuarine
ecosystems (e.g. Recreational fishing,
aesthetics, nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for non-eutrophied ecosystems
(e.g. biodiversity values)
         Tropospheric
         Ozone Exposure
Reduced commercial timber
yields and reduced tons of carbon
sequestered
Impacts to recreation in terrestrial
ecosystems (e.g. forest aesthetics,
nature study)
Reduced existence value and option
values for ozone-impacted ecosystems
         Hazardous Air
         Pollutant (HAPS)
         Deposition
No service flows quantified
Impacts to commercial and recreational
fishing from toxification of fisheries
Reduced existence value and option
values for non-toxified ecosystems (e.g.
biodiversity values)

-------
                                                                     Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
       Table 7-6
       Summary of Endpoints Selected for Quantitative Analysis
                 Endpoint
          Analysis
      Geographic Scope
       Lake acidification impacts on
       recreational fishing
Quantification of improved fishing
with monetization of recreational
value
Case study of New York State
       Estuarine eutrophication
       impacts on recreational and
       commercial fishing
Quantification of improved fishing
with monetization of displaced
costs of alternative
eutrophication control methods
Case studies of Chesapeake Bay,
Long Island Sound, and Tampa
Bay (with illustrative extensions to
East Coast estuaries)
       Ozone impacts on commercial
       timber sales
Quantification of improved timber
growth with monetization of
commercial timber revenues
National assessment
       Ozone impacts on carbon
       sequestration in commercial
       timber
Quantification of improved
carbon sequestration
National assessment
that we chose to omit from the primary benefits es-
timate because of uncertainties in the methodology.
These results  are nonetheless reported in  this chap-
ter, but are  used for the purposes of sensitivity test-
ing only.  In the next section we discuss  die meth-
ods, results, and caveats of the analyses of these se-
lected endpoints.

Results

    In  this  section we  summarize the methods used
for, and results  obtained from, our quantitative and
economic analyses of selected service flows. We first
review  the methods for each analysis, and  then
present a summary of key quantitative results.  For
a more detailed description of methods and results,
see Appendix E.

            Eutrophication


    Atmospherically derived  nitrogen makes  up a
sizable  fraction  of total nitrogen inputs in estuaries
in the eastern United States. Airborne nitrogen depo-
sition accounts for a significant fraction of the  total
nitrogen loads to coastal estuaries, particularly on
the East and  Gulf coasts.  For example, the most
recent estimates for the Chesapeake Bay indicate air-
borne deposition accounts for over 40 percent of the
total nitrogen  load to the estuary; in Galveston Bay,
the share is almost 50 percent.  When nitrogen en-
ters estuaries  it can cause eutrophication, or an in-
creased nutrient load that, in excess, changes the
ecosystem's structure and function  and affects eco-
                 logical service flows.  Many  state governments and
                 multi-state regional authorities have expressed in-
                 creasing concern about the control of airborne ni-
                 trogen deposition as an important source of nitro-
                 gen loading.

                     Our analysis of the effects of nitrogen deposi-
                 tion followed two tracks. We  first attempted to quan-
                 tify the service flows affected  by and the damages
                 associated with eutrophication, and derive dose-re -
                 spoiisc relationships and valuation strategics for each
                 of the key service flow categories (for example, rec-
                 reational  fishing).  The derivation of dose-response
                 relationships  between atmospheric nitrogen loading
                 and ecological effects, however, is complicated by
                 the dynamic nature of ecological systems. In addi-
                 tion to being characterized by non-linear, "thresh-
                 old" type responses, estuarine ecosystems are  simul-
                 taneously influenced by a variety of stressors (both
                 anthropogenic and natural).  This makes it difficult
                 to  quantify the nature and magnitude of ecological
                 changes expected to result from a change in a single
                 stressor such as nutrient loading.  Further, if the state
                 of the ecosystem has changed (as from oligotrophic1
                 to  eutrophic)  the removal of  the  initial stressor does
                 not necessarily mean a rapid return to the prior state.
                 This complicates the quantitative benefits assessment
                 of controlling nitrogen  deposition through the
                 CAAA.
                     1  Oligotrophy refers to a state of relatively low nutrient
                 enrichment and low productivity of aquatic ecosystems.  In con-
                 trast, eutrophy refers to a state of relatively high nutrient load-
                 ing  and  higher  prod uc li vi t y,  soine Limes lea ding   lo
                 overenrichmeiit  and reduction in ecological service flows  due
                 Lo waLer quality decline.
                                                   89

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Our second track relies on a displaced cost ap-
proach to benefit estimation.  To reduce excess nu-
trient loads (including nitrogen) to local  estuaries,
many coastal communities are pursuing a range of
abatement options.  These options include waste-
water and  stormwater discharge point source con-
trols as  well as urban  non-point  and agricultural
non-point source controls for runoff from the land.
If atmospheric nitrogen depostion is reduced, the
need for these types of expenditure to control other
sources of nitrogen loading is also lessened, and the
displaced control  expenditures  represent  a benefit
to society.

    Displaced or avoided cost approaches are not
always  justified.  In order to  establish  that the costs
would truly be avoided, and to ensure that the  avoid-
ance of that cost represents a real benefit to society,
we need to show that realistic and enforceable nitro-
gen reduction goals exist for each evaluated estuary.
Without specific targets or reduction goals, it is not
possible to suggest that there are specific control
expenditures  to be displaced.  Therefore, we choose
case  study estuaries that most closely meet  this crite-
rion: Chesapeake  Bay, Long Island Sound, and
Tampa  Bay.  These areas have established nitrogen
reduction programs that rely  primarily  on reductions
of effluent from point sources as well as reductions
in non-point source  discharges.  Information on the
reduction goal and potential abatement options for
meeting those goals allows us to estimate the por-
tion  of the goal that can be met by the CAAA, as
well  as the associated cost savings.2

    The benefits valuation derived using the dis-
placed-costs approach  should be  interpreted cau-
tiously for  two  reasons.  First, it is an estimation of
capital costs that serve more purposes than mitigat-
ing nitrogen inputs into  the estuaries of concern.
Water treatment works are intended to provide waste
water treatment for  a variety of pollutants and may
be required even in the absence of deposition  of air-
borne nitrogen.  Second, the nitrogen loading tar-
gets  for the estuaries are not concrete, strictly en-
forced limits, based on certain knowledge of the ca-
pacity  of the estuaries to accept nitrogen inputs.
    z  With increasing populations, controls of alternative
sources (e.g., automobile and utility emissions) may be needed
simply to meet the original target or goal.  If the CAA amend-
ments  are necessary just to achieve the target reductions, then
we are actually measuring alternative costs and not avoided costs.
Instead, the targets may change over time as knowl-
edge of the effects of nitrogen to these estuaries
change.  For these reasons, and because  of the un-
certainty about the ability of local and regional enti-
ties to enforce the nitrogen  reduction targets,  we
calculate estimates of displaced costs for these three
estuaries but  do not include them in the primary
benefits estimate for the  CAAA.

    Our approach involves three basic steps.   First,
we  estimate the total loading of nitrogen  to each of
the three target estuaries.  We use nitrogen deposi-
tion estimates from the  RADM model, generated
for each 80 km x 80 km grid cell in the eastern U.S.
We then estimate  the ultimate fate of deposited ni-
trogen through a GIS-based model of nitrogen "pass-
through."  The pass-through  is the  share of nitrogen
deposited that is ultimately transported to the cstua-
rinc waters rather than retained by the land.   Pass-
through factors vary by land use, from about 20 per-
cent (for forests and wetlands) to  100 percent (for
open water).   We  estimate the nitrogen  loading for
each scenario, and the within-year, cross-scenario
differences are the reduced nitrogen deposition at-
tributed to the CAAA.  We  present these estimates
in the  second  column of Table 7-7.

    Second, we estimate the  marginal costs of alter-
native abatement actions which  could  be imple-
mented in  the three case study estuaries. We develop
our displaced-cost estimate by assuming that deci-
sion makers will choose  to forego the most costly
nitrogen abatement projects first.  That is, we as-
sume  that  reduced deposition and the resulting load-
ings reduction will eliminate  the need  for additional
point or non-point source controls at the high end
of the  marginal cost curve. We summarize those re-
sults 111 the third and fourth  columns of Table 7-7.

    Third,  we  multiply the reduced nitrogen  load-
ing attributed  to  the CAAA by the marginal  cost
estimate to arrive at a range of estimates of displaced
cost, ensuring that the  reduction in airborne nitro-
gen is  less than or  equal to the potential tonnage
reduction achieved by the displaced, high marginal
cost abatement strategies.  We present our results in
the last column of Table 7-7.  Our estimates suggest
that the displaced  cost is substantial for the large
Chesapeake Bay and Long Island  Sound estuaries,
and more modest  for Tampa Bay.  The Chesapeake
                                                  90

-------
                                                                   Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
   Table 7-7
   Estimated Displaced Costs for Three Estuaries
Estuary
Long Island
Sound
Chesapeake
Bay
Tampa Bay
Reduced N Deposition in
2010(millions of pounds)
12.8
58.1
1.8
Low Marginal
Cost($/lb/yr.)
$2
$6
$6
High Marginal Cost
($/lb/yr.)
$8
$22
$38
Estimated Annual
Displaced Costs in
2010 ($millions)
$26-$ 100
Central Estimate: $63
$350-$1,300
Central Estimate: $820
$11 -$68
Central Estimate: $40
Bay and  Long Island  Sound watersheds together ac-
count  for about 40 percent of the total estuarine
watershed area on  the East  (Atlantic) coast that  is
sensitive to nitrogen deposition, while Tampa Bay
accounts for about  two percent of the sensitive wa-
tershed area for the Gulf coast.

                of Freshwater

    During the 1970s and 1980s, "acid rain" came to
be known to the public as a phenomenon that in-
jures trees, forests, and water bodies throughout
Europe and in some  areas of the United States and
Canada. One of the goals of the  CAAA was to ad-
dress the problem of acidification of terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems  caused by acidic  deposition. To
assess  this effect we conducted a quantitative analy-
sis of benefits derived from a reduction in acidifica-
tion of aquatic bodies as they  relate to recreational
fishing in die Adiroiidacks region of New York  State.

    As discussed earlier in this  chapter, acidification
of water bodies  is a complex process.  Airborne ac-
ids, 111  the form of  sulfur and  nitrogen compounds,
are deposited to water bodies and surrounding drain-
age areas, with the potential to  change the pH of the
water body.  Many  water bodies are relatively  resis-
tant and can absorb a great deal of deposition before
pH changes substantially. This buffering capacity  is
referred to as acid neutralizing  capacity  (ANC).
Once pH begins to be affected, a scries of interac-
tions occur, the most important of which is the leach-
ing of aluminum from sediments and surrounding-
soil and  the  suspension of this metal in the water
column.  While acidic pH presents a direct stress to
aquatic organisms,  it is the combined effect of pH
and aluminum exposure that presents the  greatest
risk. Lakes  in the Adirondacks region of New York
State are particularly susceptible to acidification be-
cause they have low baseline ANC, relative to  wa-
ter  bodies in other areas of the country.

    Because of these complex physical and chemical
interactions, acidification stress is typically evaluated
by application of a model  that simulates these pro-
cesses, and requires data on  individual lake chemis-
try  and sediment composition.  We relied on the
scenario-specific atmospheric deposition data (both
sulfur  and nitrogen) from the RADM air quality
model  (see Chapter 4 and  Appendix  C)  as an input
to EPA's Model of Acidification of Groundwatcr in
Catchments (MAGIC).  MAGIC  generates several
measures of the impact of  sulfur and  nitrogen depo-
sition on lake  acidity, including ANC and pH.3  We
used the pH outputs to classify lakes where recre-
ational fishing might be impaired, and those estimates
were used in an economic model of recreational fish-
ing behavior in New York State to develop economic
estimates of the impact of acid rain on  recreational
fishing resources  in that state.

    We summarize  the results of our analysis of eco-
nomic  benefits of avoided  Adirondacks acidification
attributable to the  CAAA in 2010 in Table 7-8. The
range of annual benefits from the CAAA are  f 12
million to |49 million  using the low-end assump-
tions on the threshold of effect (pH 5.0), and f 82 to
$88 million  for the high-end  assumptions on the ef-
fects threshold (pH 5.4). Higher pH  (or, less acidic)
threshold  assumptions lead to greater damage esti-
mates,  because more lakes cross the less acidic thresh-
old.  We calculate our benefits results by comparing
    3 For more iniormaiion on EPA's MAGIC model see Cosbv
el al. (1985a); as referenced in Appendix E.
                                                  91

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Table 7-8
       Annual Economic Impact of Acidification in 2010 (Millions of 1990 Dollars)
Year Scenario
1990 Base Year
2010 Post-CAAA
Pre-CAAA
Range of CAAA Benefits in 2010
Range of Economic Impact
Low Estimate Central Estimate High Estimate
$61
$24 to $61
$73
$12 to $49
$320
$261 to $281
$349 to $363
$50 $82 to $88
the suite of Post-CAAA 2010 estimates of total dam-
ages to the corresponding suite of estimates using
Pre-CAAA deposition.  The impact of nitrogen satu-
ration  in the surrounding terrestrial environment is
reflected in the range of estimates presented in Table
7-8.  If surrounding soils are saturated, less deposited
nitrogen will remain on the land and  more nitrogen
will enter the water bodies, increasing the stress on
the aquatic ecosystem.  This phenomenon is reflected
by the higher damage estimates for saturated versus
non-saturated scenarios, other factors equal, although
our model  shows no effect of saturation in the 2010
Pre-CAAA low estimate.  The results we  present
are in line with those generated from previous analy-
ses that  find annual  benefits  to the Adirondacks of
halving utility emissions to be approximately in the
millions  to tens of millions of dollars.4

            Timber Growth
with

    The  third category of effects we quantify is im-
proved commercial timber growth  through the re-
duction of tropospheric ozone concentrations attrib-
utable  to the CAAA.   There  is substantial scientific
evidence to suggest that elevated ozone concentra-
tions in the troposphere disrupt ecosystems by dam-
aging and slowing the growth of vegetation.   In this
analysis, we  examine one  aspect of these impacts,
reduced commercial timber growth. Much of the lit-
erature on the effects of ozone  on tree growth is
based on laboratory exposures of seedlings  or leaf-
scale experiments in the field.  Estimates from those
studies have been used in previous analyses, making-
use of professional judgment as an interpretive tool,
but always with strong caveats about the potential
applicability of the seedling and leaf-scale results to
tree growth and, in particular, the rate of accumula-
tion of wood mass  that is important for commercial
timber production.5  In an attempt to overcome these
issues, we  sought to find a concentration-response
relationship that would provide a more defensible
and broadly applicable basis for estimating effects
on tree growth.

    Our analysis makes use of the  Net Photosyn-
thesis and Evapo-Transpiration model II (PiiET II),
a biological model  of timber stand  productivity to
estimate the impacts of ozone on timber yields.  The
PnET II model was designed to estimate the com-
bined effects of several stressors on die rate of net
primary productivity  (NPP), a measure of the rate
of photosynthesis.  NPP in a tree does not necessar-
ily all go towards accumulation of wood mass; some
may  be allocated to  root growth, leaf growth, or
other tree functions. The  PnET II model provides a
means to measure both NPP and wood mass growth,
as well as die effect  on trees of several stressors com-
bined.  One important stressor to acknowledge in
an analysis  of the effects of ozone on trees is drought
stress.  Ozone has the effect of reducing water loss in
trees by stimulating the closing of stomata through
which water is transpired.  As a result, in drought
stress conditions, ozone can have  beneficial effects
on tree growth.  The PnET II model reflects the
impact of this  factor  in combination with other di-
rect effects of ozone on tree function.

   We used the PnET II model to provide estimates
of timber stand responses  to ozone  exposure under
each of the scenarios  examined in this analysis.  We
aggregated tree growth results by region, with sepa-
rate estimates for hardwoods and softwoods, and used
them as inputs to  the Timber Assessment Market
    ^  For alternative estimates see, lor example, Eriglin el al.
(1991), Mullen and Menz (1985), and Morey and Shaw (1990), as
referenced in Appendix E.
    :> See de Steiger el al. (1990) ior an example oi the genera-
tion of tree growth dose-response estimates based on professional
judgement.
                                                  92

-------
                                                                  Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
                                                O
Model (TAMM), an economic model of the for-
est sector maintained by the United States For-
est Service.  There  are three stages to the eco-
nomic estimation.   First, forest growth rate in-
formation generated by PnET  II is provided to
the Aggregate Timber Land Assessment  System
(ATLAS), the forest  inventory tracking com-
ponent of TAMM.  Growth rate information  is
provided for each of the forest production re-
gions defined by TAMM.6   Second, ATLAS
generates an estimate of forest inventories in
each major region,  which in turn serves as in-
put  to  the market component  of TAMM.    i|
Third, TAMM estimates the future  harvests and
market responses in each region.

   Our analysis suggests that  there is a signifi-  	
cant  and measurable difference in timber har-
vests  attributable to ozone exposure under the Post-
CAAA and Pre-CAAA scenarios.  At the outset of
our modeling  period, the early 1990s, virtually no
change is measured in forest harvest volumes.  This
result occurs because increases in growth rates do
not substantively affect timber volume over a short
period of time.   By the end of our modeling period,
nearing 2010, increased growth rates over the previ-
ous decade(s) begin to affect overall forest yields of
harvestable timber.  This is observed in Figure 7-1 as
an increasing annual benefit estimate  over the  mod-
eling period.  The shape of the benefits time-series
reveals a production spike in  the 2007 to 2008 pe-
riod.  This spike is due to a large anticipated harvest
of Southeast U.S. timber  due to forest maturity dur-
ing this period.  The spike would occur even  in the
absence of the CAAA, but is elevated  by the CAAA
due to increased growth rates projected under the
Post-CAAA scenario.  Although this change is small
in percentage terms relative to total  economic sur-
plus  generated by the timber  sector,  it  contributes
to a  large portion of the commercial timber benefits
estimate over the 1990-2010 period.

   We calculate the cumulative value of annual ben-
efits  based on the discounted  stream  of the annual
differences in consumer and producer surplus from
    6 TAMM includes Canadian as well as U.S. timber produc-
tion regions because of the important influence of Canadian tim-
ber supply on the U.S. market.  This analysis reflects modeling
of Canadian timber regions and their impact on U.S. produc-
tion, but we did not simulate changes in ozone in Canadian re-
gions.
                                              Figure 7-1
                                              Annual Economic Welfare Benefit of Mitigating Ozone
                                              Impacts on Commercial Timber: Difference Between
                                              the Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA Scenarios
                                                  $1,150T
                                                «  $950-
                                                   $750
                                                *-  $550
                                                o
                                                V)
commercial timber harvests under the Post-CAAA
and Pre-CAAA ozone exposure scenarios from 1990
to 2010.  Discounting annual benefits to  1990 using
a five percent discount rate, the total cumulative
benefits estimate is approximately $1.9 billion.  These
estimates are incorporated into the primary central
estimate by developing  a range of annual estimates
for the  year 2000, based  on model  results for the
period 1998 to 2002, and the year 2010, based on
model results for the period 2005 to 2010.  The aver-
aging of results across several years to generate our
target year  results avoids the  potential problem of a
particular   year's  results   (such  as  for  2010)
mischaracterizing the full time series of estimates
when we later calculate  the net present value of ef-
fects.

Reduced Carbon Sequestration
Associated with Reduced Timber
Growth

    Forest ecosystems help mitigate increasing atmo-
spheric concentrations of carbon dioxide  by seques-
tering carbon  from the  atmosphere.  These ecosys-
tems convert atmospheric carbon into biological
structures  (e.g., wood) or substances needed  in the
tree's physiological processes. As described above,
however,  ozone reduces  the growth of forests,
thereby limiting the amount of carbon  that is  se-
questered.   Sequestered carbon can help mitigate glo-
bal climate  change that has been linked  to anthro-
pogenic emissions of carbon and other greenhouse
gases.
                                                 93

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    We used the timber  inventory output of the
TAMM/ATLAS modeling system (described above),
in  combination with a forest  carbon  model
(FORCARB), to estimate changes in carbon storage
in each of four ecosystem  components: trees, forest
understory, forest floor, and soil.  The estimates from
FORCARB, however, do not account for 'leakages"
of carbon back to the atmosphere as wood or wood
products decay and  decompose over time.  To esti-
mate the amount of carbon that is sequestered over
the  long-term, we  used  a  second  model,
HARVCARB,  to estimate  the life-cycle of harvested
forest  timber and thereby adjust the forest carbon
sequestration estimates  of FORCARB.
    The results of these calculations yield estimates
of long-term increases in carbon storage  as a result
of the  CAAA provisions of 8 million metric  tons of
carbon per  year by the year 2000, and 29 million
metric tons of carbon per year by  the year 2010.
Because of  the great uncertainties in assessing the
mitigating effect of carbon sequestration on global
climate change, and the  economic value of avoiding
climate change, we do not attempt to monetize this
category of benefit.

Otter              of

    There were two additional categories of ecologi-
cal effects for  which we considered developing eco-
nomic  estimates; however, we abandoned the exer-
cise when key  portions of the analysis proved to be
excessively problematic.  Aesthetic degradation of
forests, the  first of  these  additional categories,  was
supported by a benefits  transfer of contingent valu-
ation studies of individual willingness to pay  to avoid
foliar damage.  This  category of effects, however,
proved too difficult  to link to the specific air quality
scenarios we evaluated.  In other words, available
scientific methods and data on the visual appearance
of forest stands and their impact on perceived forest
aesthetics make  it  difficult  to  precisely describe
changes in  forest aesthetics.   Evaluation of the  sec-
ond additional effect category, toxification of fresh-
water fisheries, was limited by the lack of toxic depo-
sition and exposure data as well as by  the limitations
of available economic estimates of the impacts of
toxics  on recreational and commercial fishery re-
sources.  (See  Appendix E for a more detailed dis-
cussion of these service flows).  These and many other
ecological benefit categories could not be quantified
given current data and methods and are thus not re-
flected in our overall benefits  estimates.

Valuation of Other



    As discussed earlier in this chapter, tropospheric
ozone affects the growth of a wide range  of plant
species, including agricultural crops.  Our agricul-
tural benefits analysis relies  on crop-yield loss  C-R
functions  derived from the National Crop Loss As-
sessment Network (NCLAN) research and a national
economic model of the agricultural sector (AGSIM).
The NCLAN-denved relationships use a sum of
hourly ozone concentration at or above 0.06 ppm
(SUM06) as a measure of ozone exposure for the .May
to September ozone season; these exposure estimates
arc derived from the ozone air quality modeling re-
sults discussed in Chapter 4.   Where the C-R func-
tions  require  a longer time period of ozone concen-
trations, for example, for winter crops  or when the
growing or harvest season for summer crops extends
beyond the end  of September, we rely on 1990 moni-
tor data to estimate ozone exposure, conservatively
using the same estimates for  both Pre-CAAA and
Post-CAAA  scenarios.  The NCLAN  functions
cover  the following crops:  corn,  cotton, peanuts,
sorghum, soybeans, and  winter wheat.

    The AGSIM agricultural sector model takes the
yield  loss information,  incorporates  agricultural
price, farm policy, and other data for each year, and
then estimates production levels for each crop and
the economic benefits to consumers and producers
associated with these production levels.  The crop
coverage in the AGSIM model  includes a wider range
of crops than the NCLAN data inputs, adding  bar-
ley, oats,  hay, rice, and  cottonseed.  The broader
crop coverage ensures that the  model addresses price
and production quantity effects on  potential substi-
tute crops that might be related to  the effects in the
six NCLAN  crops.   We  estimate economic effects
using a range of C-R outcomes for  several crops, to
reflect the variation in ozone  sensitivity among the
various crop  cultivars.  Our central estimate is the
expected value  of the range of results that emerge
from  the economic model.
                                                 94

-------
                                                                     Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
    Our results indicate significant beneficial effects
of ozone reductions in the agricultural  sector.   Our
Primary Central estimate of the benefit  in 2000 is
$450  million; the annual benefit rises to $550 mil-
lion in 2010.  Our estimated uncertainty around the
Primary Central estimates, however, is very broad.
For example, in 2010, the Primary Low estimate is
$7.1  million,  and the Primary High is SI,100 mil-
lion.  The uncertainty range reflects  variation in the
ozone response of crop  cultivars  and uncertainty
about the suitability of alternative crop cultivars for
the soil types  and climate  conditions in various agri-
cultural regions.  See Appendix F for more details
on the methods and results of the C-R functions and
economic modeling for agricultural  effects.

    Visibility

    As  outlined  in Chapter 4, air pollution impairs
visibility in both residential and recreational settings.
An individual's willingness to pay to avoid reduc-
tions  111 visibility differs in these two settings.  Im-
pairments in  residential visibility are  experienced
throughout an  individual's  daily life and activities.
Visibility in recreational settings, on  the other  hand,
is experienced by visitors to areas with notable vis-
tas.  For the  purposes of this report, we interpret
recreational settings applicable for this category of
effects  to include National Parks throughout the
nation.  Other recreational settings  may also be ap-
plicable, for example  National Forests, state parks,
or even hiking trails or roadside areas, but a lack of
suitable economic valuation literature to  identify
these  other areas, as well as a lack of visitation data
m some cases, prevents us from generating estimates
for those recreational vista areas.

    We derive a residential visibility valuation  func-
tion from the Chestnut and Dennis  (1997) published
estimates for  the Eastern U.S. These estimates are
based on original research conducted by McClelland
et al.  (1990) in two Eastern cities (Atlanta and Chi-
cago).  Because of technical concerns  about the
study's  methodology, however, we calculate a ben-
efits  estimate  but omit the results from the primary
benefits estimates.'   For recreational visibility, we
    '  The two technical concerns involve the method of adjust-
ing the contingent valuation survey results for non-response, and
the failure to include adjustments for the "warm glow"  effect,
or the  tendency of respondents to indicate higher willingness to
pay for an environmental good because of a strong desire to
improve the environment  in general.
derive values from die the Chestnut and Rowe (1989)
study of WTP for visibility in three park regions  in
the Western, Southwestern,  and Eastern U.S.8   In
both  cases, the valuation function takes the follow-
ing form:

            HHWTP  = B * ln(VR1/VR2)
    where:

        HHWTP = annual WTP per household for
        visibility changes
        VR1  = the starting  annual average visual
        range
        VR2 = the annual average visual  range after
        the change in air quality
        B  = the estimated visibility coefficient.

    The form  of this  valuation function is designed
to reflect the way individuals perceive and  express
value for changes in  visibility. In general terms, ex-
pressed WTP  for visibility changes varies with the
percentage change in visual range, a measure that is
closely related  to, though not exactly analogous  to,
the Deciview  index used in  Chapter  4.  We use a
central  B coefficient  for residential visibility of 141,
as reported in Chestnut and Dennis (1997).  For rec-
reational visibility, the coefficients vary based on the
region of study and whether the household is within
or outside of the National Park region studied. Iii-
region coefficients are higher than those for out-of-
region households.  The in-region estimates  for Cali-
fornia, the Southwest, and Southeast are $105, $137,
and  $65, respectively; the corresponding out-of-re-
gion estimates are S73, $110, and $40, respectively.
The derivation and application of these valuation
functions are described in more detail in Appendix
H.  The results of this procedure suggest visibility is
an important category of CAAA benefits; the Pri-
mary Central estimate for 2010, for  example, indi-
cates annual recreational visibility  benefits  of $2.9
billion.

              Productivity

    We base  the valuation of worker productivity
on a  study that measures the decline in worker pro-

    3  The visibility valuation function, and the sources of esti-
mates  for the coefficients for the functions, were  originally de-
veloped as part of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program (NAPAP), and were  subjected to peer-review as part
of that program.
                                                    95

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
ductivity among outdoor farm workers exposed to
ozone (Crocker and Horst, 1981).  In our analysis,
we estimate the value of reduced productivity at f 1
per 10 percent increase in ozone concentration.  This
estimate reflects valuing  reduced  productivity in
terms of the reduction  in percentage of daily income
incurred by the average worker  engaged in strenu-
ous outdoor labor.

                           Provisions

    The quantified  benefits of stratospheric ozone
protection  provisions are dominated by  the reduced
health effects expected from reductions  in UV-b ra-
diation; the  derivation of health benefits  of these
                     provisions is  discussed in Chapter 5.  We summarize
                     other categories of benefits associated with reduced
                     UV-b radiation in Table 7-9.   The quantified ben-
                     efits include: reduced crop damage; and reduced poly-
                     mer degradation. To estimate  crop damage, we  ap-
                     ply the results of existing studies on the relationship
                     between crops and UV-b radiation to the changes in
                     UV-b radiation predicted  by the emissions  and at-
                     mospheric models.9  The  polymer damage function
                     is based on a study by Horst (1986).  The estimated
                     total cumulative benefits associated with these eco-
                     logical and other welfare effects are about 2  percent
                     of the total cumulative benefits of the Title VI pro-
                     visions.
                                                            '*  Sources oi dose-response relationship for crops and UV-
                                                        b: Teramura and Murali (1986)  and Rowe and Adams (1987).
                                                        Source of dose-response relationship for crops and tropospheric
                                                        ozone: Rowe and Adams (1987).
     Table 7-9
     Quantified and Unquantified Ecological and Welfare Effects of Title VI Provisions
     Ecological Effects- Quantified
         Estimate
            Basis for Estimate
     American crop harvests
     American crop harvests
Avoided 7.5 percent decrease   Dose-response sources: Teramura and Murali
from UV-b radiation by 2075    (1986), Rowe and Adams (1987)
Avoided decrease from
tropospheric ozone
Estimate of increase in tropospheric ozone:
Whitten and Gery (1986). Dose-response
source: Rowe and Adams (1987)
     Polymers
Avoided damage to materials
from UV-b radiation
Source of UV-b/stabilizer relationship: Horst
(1986)
     Ecological Effects- Unquantified
     Ecological effects of UV. For example, benefits relating to the following:
         •    recreational fishing
         •    forests
         •    marine ecosystem and fish harvests
         •    avoided sea level rise, including avoided beach erosion, loss of coastal wetlands, salinity of estuaries
             and aquifers
         •    other crops
         •    other plant species
         •    fish harvests
     Ecological benefits of reduced tropospheric ozone relating to the overall marine ecosystem, forests, man-made
     materials, crops, other plant species, and fish harvests
     Benefits to people and the environment outside the U.S.
     Notes:
       1) For more detail see EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone (1988).
       2) Note that the ecological effects, unlike the health effects, do not reflect the accelerated reduction and phaseout schedule
       of section 606.
       3) Benefits due to the section 606 methyl bromide phaseout are not included in the benefits total because the EPA provides
       neither annual incidence estimates nor a monetary value.
                                                    96

-------
                                                                      Chapter 7: Ecological and Other Welfare Effects
                 of
Results

    Although the effects of air pollutants on  eco-
logical  systems are likely to be  widespread, many
effects may be poorly understood and lack quantita-
tive  effects characterization methods and  support-
ing data.  In addition, many  of our quantitative re-
sults reflect an incomplete geographic scope of analy-
sis; for example, we generated monetized acidifica-
tion  results  only  for the Adirondacks region of  New
York State.  As a result, the quantitative results we
generate for the purposes of estimating the benefits
of the CAAA reflect only a small portion of the over-
all impacts of air pollution on ecological systems or
ecological service flows.
                                         Despite these limitations, it is important to rec-
                                     ognize the magnitude of the monetized ecological
                                     benefits that we could estimate  and reflect  those  re-
                                     sults  in  the overall  estimates  of benefits generated
                                     in die larger analysis.   Table 7-10 provides  a tabular
                                     summary of the results  documented  earlier in this
                                     chapter.  It is not possible to indicate the degree to
                                     which ecological benefits are underestimated, but
                                     considering the magnitude of benefits estimated for
                                     the select endpoints considered in our analysis, it is
                                     reasonable  to conclude that a comprehensive ben-
                                     efits assessment would yield substantially greater total
                                     benefits estimates.

                                         In Table 7-11 we  provide a  summary of benefits
                                     estimates for other welfare effects, including reduced
                                     agricultural yields,  impaired visibility, and decreased
      Table 7-10
      Summary of Evaluated Ecological Benefits (millions 1990$)
Description
of Effect
Freshwater
acidification
Reduced tree
growth - Lost
commercial
timber
Air
Pollutant
Sulfur and
nitrogen
oxides
Ozone
Geographic
Scale of
Economic
Estimate
Regional
(Adirondacks)
National
TOTAL MONETIZED
ECONOMIC BENEFIT
Range of
Annual Impact
Estimates in
2010
$12 to $88
$190 to $1000
$200 to $1,1 00
Primary
Central
Estimate
for 2010
$50
$600
$650
Primary Central
Cumulative
Impact Estimate
1990-2010
$260
$1,900
$2,200
Key Limitations
- Captures only
recreational fishing
impact
- Incomplete
geographic coverage
leads to underestimate
of benefits
- Uncertainties in
stand-level response to
ozone exposure
- Uncertainty in future
timber markets
- Partial estimate that
omits major
unquantifiable benefits
categories; see text
      Note: Estimates reflect only those benefits categories for which quantitative economic analysis was supported. A
      comprehensive total economic benefit estimate would likely greatly exceed the estimates in the table. Range of
      estimates for timber assessment is based on variation in annual point estimates for 2005 through 2010.
      Table 7-11
      Summary of Other Welfare Benefits (millions 1990$)
      Description
        of Effect
  Air
Pollutant
Geographic
  Scale of
 Economic
  Estimate
 Primary Central
Annual Estimate
 2000    2010
Primary Central
  Cumulative
   Estimate
  1990-2010
Key Limitations
      Reduced     Ozone
      Agricultural
      Yields
         National       $450     $550       $3,900      - Covers only major grain crops
                                                      - Omits effects on fruits and
                                                      vegetables
Impaired
Recreational
Visibility
Reduced
Worker
Productivity
Particulate National
Matter
Ozone National
$2,000
$460
$2,900
$710
$19,000
$4,400
- National Parks only
- Omits residential visibility
benefits
- Reflects effects on workers
engaged in strenuous outdoor
employment
      Note: Estimates reflect only those benefits categories for which quantitative economic analysis was supported.
                                                    97

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
worker productivity.  These estimates add substan-
tially to the total  non-health benefits  of the CAAA.
In particular, our estimates for the annual value of
avoiding visibility impairments  is $2,900 million by
2010, even through  this estimate does not reflect the
value of residential visibility  improvements.


Uncertainty


    Because  of the  limitations in the available meth-
ods and data, the benefits assessment in this  report
does not represent  a comprehensive estimate  of the
economic benefits  of the CAAA.  Moreover,  the
potential magnitude of long-term economic impacts
of ecological damages mitigated by the CAAA  sug-
gests that great care must be taken to consider those
ecosystem impacts that are not quantified here.  Sig-
nificant future  analytical work  and basic  ecological
and economic  research must be performed to build
a sufficient base of knowledge  and data to support
                         an adequate assessment of ecological benefits.  For
                         the current analysis,  this  incomplete  coverage of
                         effects represents the greatest source of uncertainty
                         in the ecological assessment.  This and other key
                         uncertainties are  summarized in Table  7-12.


                             Because the chronic ecological  effects of air pol-
                         lutants  may be poorly understood,  difficult to ob-
                         serve, or difficult to discern  from other influences
                         011 dynamic ecosystems, our analysis focuses on acute
                         or readily observable impacts.  Disruptions that may
                         seem inconsequential in the short-term, however, can
                         have  hidden, long-term effects through a series of
                         interrelationships that can  be  difficult or impossible
                         to observe, quantify, and  model.  This factor sug-
                         gests that many of our qualitative and quantitative
                         results may underestimate  the overall, long-term ef-
                         fects of pollutants  on ecological systems and re-
                         sources.
       Table 7-12
       Key Uncertainties Associated with Ecological Effects Estimation
       Potential Source of Error
  Direction of
   Potential
  Bias for Net
   Benefits
   Estimate
Likely Significance Relative to Key Uncertainties in Net
                  Benefit Estimate*
       Incomplete coverage of
       ecological effects
       identified in existing
       literature, including the
       inability to adequately
       discern the role of air
       pollution in multiple
       stressor effects on
       ecosystems.	
 Underestimate  Potentially major. The extent of unquantified and unmonetized
                benefits is largely unknown, but the available evidence suggests
                the impact of air pollutants on ecological systems may be
                widespread and significant. At the same time, it is possible that a
                complete  quantification of effects might yield economic valuation
                results that remain small in comparison to the total magnitude of
                health benefits.
       Omission of the effects of
       nitrogen deposition as a
       nutrient with beneficial
       effects.

       Incomplete assessment of
       long-term bioaccumulative
       and persistent effects of
       air pollutants.

       The PnET II modeling  of
       the effects of ozone on
       timber yields  relies on  a
       simplified mechanism of
       response (i.e., changes in
       net primary productivity).
 Overestimate    Probably minor.  Although nitrogen does have beneficial effects
                as a nutrient in a wide range of ecological systems, nitrogen in
                excess also has significant and in some cases persistent
                detrimental effects that are also not adequately reflected in the
                analysis.
 Underestimate  Potentially major. Little is currently known about the longer-term
                effects associated with the accumulation of toxins in ecosystems,
                but what is known suggests the potential for major impacts.
                Future research into the potential for threshold effects is
	necessary to establish the ultimate significance of this factor.
 Overestimate    Probably minor.  Existing evidence suggests that the growth
                changes PnET II projects are relatively large, however none of
                the currently available points of conparison fully address such
                issues as the impact of stand-level competition, and the net
                primary productivity results are within the range of results of other
                studies of environmental and anthropogenic stressors.
      The classification of each potential source of error reflects the best judgement of the section 812 Project Team. The Project
      Team assigns a classification of "potentially major" if a plausible alternative assumption or approach could influence the
      overall monetary benefit estimate by approximately five percent or more; if an alternative assumption or approach is likely to
      change the total benefit estimate by less than five percent, the Project Team assigns a classification of "probably minor."
                                                     98

-------
 Comparison  of
 Costs   and  Benefits
   In this chapter we present our summary of the
primary estimates of monetized  benefits  of the
CAAA from 1990 to 2010, compare the benefits es-
timates with the corresponding costs, and explore
some of the major sources of uncertainty in die ben-
efits estimates.  We also present the results of our
calculations using alternative assumptions for sev-
eral key input variables.

                             of the
CAAA

   Iii this section we provide an  overview of the
three types of analyses  conducted to estimate ben-
efits, present the annual  estimates of monetized ben-
efits for the human health, ecological, and welfare
analyses, and  then present an aggregate measure of
benefits from all titles of the CAAA  for  the full study
period.

Overview of

   Our primary estimates of the  monetized eco-
nomic benefits  for the  1990 to 2010 period derive
from three distinct analyses: (1)  the analysis of
changes  in human health effects associated with re-
duced exposures to criteria pollutants and the subse-
quent valuation of these changes, summarized and
described in Chapters 5 and 6; (2) the analysis of
monetized ecological and other welfare benefits (e.g.,
visibility), described in Chapter 7; and (3) the analy-
sis of the benefits of stratospheric ozone protection
provisions, summarized  briefly in Chapters 5, 6, and
7 and described in detail in Appendix G.

   We measure the benefits and present the results
from each of these analyses in slightly different ways.
For the  first two analyses, we generate annual esti-
mates of benefits that result from changes in expo-
sures in two target years  of the study, 2000 and 2010.
These estimates can be directly compared to the es-
timates of costs incurred in the target years, because
for the most part the annual benefits accrue in the
same year as the costs  are incurred.  There is one
exception, however: we  model the effect of particu-
late matter on premature mortality to occur over a
period of five years from the time of exposure. In
this case, we have accounted for the incidence of
premature mortality over the assumed lag period,
and discounted the valuation of this effect back to
the target year.

   The annual estimates provide an indication of
the trend in benefits accrued over the 20-year study
period.  To  generate a cumulative measure of ben-
efits over the full 20-year period, we must make an
assumption  about  the level of benefits that would
be realized in the years between the target years.  Wre
interpolate these values, assuming a linear trend in
both  costs and benefits over the 1990 to 2000 and
2000 to 2010 periods (assuming benefits and costs in
the starting year, 1990, are zero). In one portion of
the ecological benefits analysis, acidification, we gen-
erate  only a  single annual estimate for the target year
2010.  In that case, we assume a linear trend in an-
nual benefits over  the full 20-year study period.

   The third analysis, assessing changes in  strato-
spheric ozone and the resulting health effects, is dif-
ferent from the criteria pollutant analyses.  The long-
term nature  of the program, and the significant lag
effects associated with the processes of ozone deple-
tion over decades-long time scales, make it difficult
to generate a meaningful estimate for any single tar-
get year.  As a result, we could  not generate an an-
nual benefit  estimate that could  be reliably linked to
emissions reductions in  a single year and, by exten-
sion,  compared to the costs  incurred to achieve that
year's allocation of reductions in stratospheric ozone
depleting substances.  Instead, we generate  an annu-
alized equivalent of the  cumulative present value of
                                             99

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
benefits and costs of the Title  VI program.  These
annualized  equivalents  cannot be  ascribed  to  any
particular target year.

    These fundamental  differences  in the measure-
ment of benefits affect our presentation of benefits
estimates in this chapter.  Although  we generate  and
report an annual estimate of costs and  benefits of
Title VT provisions, we  encourage the  reader to  in-
terpret aggregations of these annual estimates with
those from  other titles of the CAAA with caution.
In particular, we discourage the use of these  CAAA
Title-specific benefit-cost ratios as the sole, or even
primary, basis for comparing the relative economic
value of Title VI versus other CAAA titles.  The
comparative benefit-cost ratios are  too sensitive to
important, highly uncertain analytical  assumptions
such as the  discount rate.

Summary of                         for
Human                Welfare

    As discussed above, we generate annual estimates
for the human health and welfare effects based  on
exposure analysis conducted for each of the two  tar-
get years of the  analysis, 2000 and 2010. The range
of estimates we  generate for the monetized benefits
of human health effects  incorporates both the quan-
tified uncertainty associated with  each of the health
effect estimates  and the  quantified uncertainty asso-
ciated with  the  corresponding economic valuation
strategy.   Quantitative estimates of uncertainties in
earlier steps of  the  analysis (i.e., emissions and  air
quality changes) could not be developed adequately
and are therefore not applied  in  the present study.
As a result, the range of estimates for monetized ben-
efits presented in this chapter is  more narrow than
would be expected  with a  complete accounting of
the uncertainties in  all analytical components.  The
characterization  of the uncertainty surrounding eco-
nomic valuation is discussed in detail  in Appendix
IT.  The characterization  of the uncertainty surround-
ing specific health effect estimates is  discussed in
Appendix D.  Below, we discuss the combined  ef-
fect of these two categories of uncertainty and  our
techniques for aggregating uncertainty  across end-
points and analyses.

    We assume that for each endpoint-pollutant com-
bination there are distributions for both  the con-
centration-response function and the valuation co-
efficients.  We combine these  distributions by using
a computerized,  statistical aggregation technique to
estimate the mean of the monetized benefit estimate
for each endpoint-pollutant combination and to char-
acterize  the uncertainty surrounding each estimate.1

    In the first step of our procedure, we employ
statistical analysis to generate mean estimates  and
quantified uncertainty  measures for the C-R func-
tion for each endpoint-pollutant combination.   For
many health  and welfare effects, only a single study
is available to use as the basis  for the C-R function.
In this  case, the best estimate of the mean of the
distribution of C-R  coefficients is the reported esti-
mate  in  the study.  The uncertainty surrounding the
estimate of the mean C-R coefficient is character-
ized by the standard error of the reported estimate.
This  yields a normal  distribution, centered at the
reported estimate of the mean.  If multiple studies
are considered for a given C-R function,  a normal
distribution  is derived  for each study, centered at
the mean estimate reported  in the study.  On  each
iteration of the aggregation procedure, a C-R coeffi-
cient  is  selected from an aggregate distribution of C-
R estimates for that endpoint.  The aggregate distri-
bution of C-R coefficients  is determined by a  vari-
ance-weighted aggregate distribution of values.

    In the second step, we estimate incidence for each
exposure analysis unit  (i.e., 8 km by  8 km cell in a
grid pattern)  in the  48  contiguous states, and aggre-
gate the results  into an estimate of the change in
national incidence of the health or welfare effects.
Through repeated iterations from  the  distribution
of mean C-R coefficients, we generate a distribution
of the estimated  change in incidence for each health
and welfare effect due  to the change in air quality
between the  Post-CAAA and  Pre-CAAA scenarios.

    Finally, in the third step we use computerized
statistical aggregation methods  once again to charac-
    *  The statistical aggregation technique applied is commonly
referred to as simulation modeling.  The technique involves many
re-calculations of results, using different combinations of input
parameters each time.  For each calculation, values from  each
input parameter's statistical  distribution are selected at random
to ensure that the calculation does not always result in extreme
values, or rely solely on low end or solely on high end input
parameters.  The aggregate distribution more accurately reflects
a reasonable likelihood of  the joint occurrence oi multiple in-
put parameters.
                                                   100

-------
                                                                      Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
terize the overall uncertainly surrounding monetized
benefits.   For each distinct health and welfare effect,
the aggregation procedure selects an estimated inci-
dence change from the distribution of changes for
that endpoint, selects  a unit value from the corre-
sponding distribution of economic valuation unit
values, and multiplies the two to generate a mon-
etized benefit estimate.  We then repeat  the  process
many times to generate a distribution of estimated
monetized benefits for each endpoint-pollutant com-
bination.  Combining  the results for the individual
endpoints using the aggregation procedure yields a
distribution of total estimated monetized  benefits for
each target year (2000 and 2010) .2  We  present the
results of this analysis  of  health effects in Table 6-3
in Chapter 6.

    The  ecological and welfare results are not cur-
rently amenable to  the same type of uncertainty
analysis.   The modeling procedures for estimating
the effects of sulfur and nitrogen deposition in acidi-
fying lakes, the effects of ozone in reducing timber
and agricultural  production, and the effects  of par-
ticular matter on visibility are all  subject to uncer-
tainty and require substantial resources simply to
develop  single estimates.  We describe  key uncer-
tainties in Chapter 7 and they are reflected in the
ranges of values  we present at the end of that chap-
ter.  The sources of uncertainty in these estimates,
however, cannot as easily be dis-
aggregated among physical  ef-
fects modeling and  valuation
components. The endpoints of
the ranges we present reflect rea-
sonable  alternative  choices in
key  input variables, but the
ranges cannot currently be inter-
preted as points on a  statistical
distribution of results.  For these
ecological effects, the  central es-
timate is the midpoint of the
ranges of values.  We then inter-
pret the  endpoints of the range
of estimates as  the upper and
lower bounds of a uniform dis-
tribution of values.   The uni-
                     form distribution is used when we aggregate the eco-
                     logical and other welfare effects analyses with the
                     analyses of human health.

                     Annual Benefits Estimates

                        We present the results of our aggregation of pri-
                     mary annual benefits estimates for Titles I through
                     V in Figure 8-1 below.  The figure provides a charac-
                     terization of both the primary central estimate  and
                     the range   of values generated by the aggregation
                     procedure  described above, for each of the two tar-
                     get years of the analysis (2000 and 2010).  The  Pri-
                     mary High estimate  corresponds to the 95th percen-
                     tile value from the aggregation, and the Primary Low
                     estimate corresponds to the 5th percentile value. The
                     total  benefits estimates are substantial; the Primary
                     Central estimate in 2010  is $110 billion.

                        Table 8-1 shows the detailed breakdown of ben-
                     efits estimates  for one of the two target years, 2010.
                     As shown  in the table, $100 billion of the $110 bil-
                     lion total benefit estimate in 2010, or roughly 90
                     percent, is  attributable to reductions in premature
                     mortality associated with  reductions in ambient par-
                     ticulate matter  and associated criteria pollutants. The
                     remaining benefits are divided among two broad
                     categories  of benefits:  avoided morbidity, the larg-
                     est component of which  is avoided chronic  bron-
Figure 8-1
Central, Low, and High Primary Benefits Results for
Target Years (in billions of 1990 dollars) - Titles I through V
     300-
«   250-
O
i=   200-
OQ
 0)
 c
 0)
 CD
 3
 o
      150-
     100-
      50-
                                                   Benefits
                  Benefits
                     	I^High 160
                         •« Central 71
                                                          ^High 270
                                                          •^Central 110
                                                          •< Low 26
                                                    2000
                                                    2010
    2 This procedure implicitly assumes independence between
the specific aggregation simulation draws from the distribution
of health and economic valuation estimates.
                                                  101

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                   Table 8-1
                   Criteria Pollutant Health and Welfare Benefits in 2010
                                                          Monetary Benefits (in millions 1990$)*
                                                                         Primary
Benefits Category
Mortality
Ages 30+
Chronic Illness
Chronic Bronchitis
Chronic Asthma
Hospitalization
All Respiratory
Total Cardiovascular
Asthma-Related ER Visits
Minor Illness
Acute Bronchitis
URS
LRS
Respiratory Illness
Mod/Worse Asthma1
Asthma Attacks1
Chest Tightness, Shortness of
Breath, or Wheeze
Shortness of Breath
Work Loss Days
MRAD/Any-of-19
Welfare
Decreased Worker
Productivity
Visibility - Recreational
Agriculture (Net Surplus)
Acidification
Commercial Timber
Aggregate Range of Benefits2
Primary Low

14,000

360
40

76
93
0.1

0.0
4.2
2.2
0.9
1.9
20
0.0
0.0
300
680

710
2,500
7.1
12
180
26,000
Central

100,000

5,600
180

130
390
1.0

2.1
19
6.2
6.3
13
55
0.6
0.5
340
1,200

710
2,900
550
50
600
110,000
Primary High

250,000

18,000
300

200
960
2.8

5.2
39
12
15
29
100
3.1
1.2
380
1,800

710
3,300
1,100
76
1,000
270,000
                   Note:
                       * The estimates reflect air quality results for the entire population in the US.
                       1 Moderate to worse asthma, asthma attacks, and shortness of breath are endpoints
                       included in the definition of MRAD/Any of 19 respiratory effects. Although valuation
                       estimates are presented for these categories, the values are not included in total benefits to
                       avoid the potential for double-counting.
                       2 The Aggregate Range reflects the 5th,  mean, and 95th percentile of the estimated credible
                       range of monetary benefits based on quantified uncertainty, as discussed in the text.
                                                          102

-------
                                                                       Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
      Table 8-2
      Present Value of Monetized Benefits for 48 State Population
                                           Present Value (millions 1990$, discounted to 1990 at 5 percent)
                                               Primary Low
                 Primary Central
                 Primary High
      Titles I through V (1990 through 2010)
$160,000
$690,000
$1,600,000
      Title VI (1990 through 2165)
$100,000
$530,000
 $900,000
chitis, comprises about 60 percent of the non-mor-
tality benefits; and avoided ecological and other wel-
fare effects, the largest component of which is im-
proved recreational  visibility, comprises about 40
percent.  Note that, because of the aggregation pro-
cedure used, and because we round all  intermediate
results to two significant digits for presentation pur-
poses, the columns of Table  8-1 may not sum to the
total estimate presented in the last row.3

Aggregate

    As discussed earlier in  this chapter, we  linearly
interpolate benefit estimates  between 1990 and 2000
and between 2000 and 2010 and  then aggregate the
resulting annual estimates across  the entire  1990 to
2010 period of the study to yield a present discounted
value  of total aggregate benefits for the period.  In
this section we discuss issues involved in each stage
of aggregation, as well as the results of the aggrega-
tion.

    As noted earlier, air quality modeling was car-
ried out only for the two target years (2000 and 2010).
The resulting annual benefit  estimates provide a tem-
poral  trend of monetized benefits across the period
resulting from  the annual  changes in  air quality.
They  do not, however, characterize  the uncertainty
associated  with  the yearly  estimates  for intervening
years.  In an attempt to capture uncertainty associ-
ated with these  estimates, we relied on  the ratios of
the 5th  percentile to  the mean and the 95th  percen-
tile to the  mean in the two  target years.  In general,
these ratios were fairly constant  across the target
    •'  The sum of benefits across endpoiiits at a given percentile
level does not result in the total monetized beneiits estimate at
the same percentile level in fable 8-1. For example, if the fifth
percentile benefits of the endpoints shown in Table 8-1 were
added, the resulting total would be substantially less than  $30
billion, the fifth percentile value of the distribution of aggregate
monetized benefits reported in Table 8-1.  This is because the
various health and welfare effects  are treated  as stochastically
independent, so that the probability that the aggregate monetized
benefit is less than or equal to lie sum of the separate five per-
centile values is substantially less than live percent.
       years, for a given cndpoint.  The ratios were  inter-
       polated between the target years, yielding ratios for
       the intervening years.  Multiplying the ratios for each
       intervening year by the central estimate generated
       for that year provided estimates of the 5th and 95th
       percentiles, which we use to  characterize uncertainty
       about the Primary  Central estimate.

          In Table 8-2 we present the cumulative  mon-
       etized benefits aggregated from 1990 to 2010.  We
       present the mean estimate from the aggregation pro-
       cedure, along with  the  Primary Low7 (i.e., 5th per-
       centile of the distribution)  and Primary High (i.e.,
       95th  percentile of the distribution) estimates, for all
       provisions of Titles  I through V and, then, separately
       for Title  VI.  Aggregating the  stream of monetized
       benefits across years involved discounting the stream
       of monetized benefits estimated for each year to the
       1990 present value (using a five percent discount rate).

       Aggregate            of Title ¥1 Provisions

          As described in summary form in Chapters 5, 6,
       and 7 and in detail  in Appendix G, expected human
       health benefits from Title VI provisions are substan-
       tial.  The  analysis we conducted is based largely on
       existing results from EPA Regulatory Impact Analy-
       ses for individual rules  promulgated under Title VI.
       To the extent possible, we adjusted existing estimates
       to reflect both the central estimates and uncertainty
       characterizations used in the  criteria pollutant analy-
       sts.  We made major adjustments  for both the value
       of statistical life (VSL)  and  the discount  rate.  We
       adjusted the  VSL estimate to reflect the Weibull dis-
       tribution  of VSL used in our analysis for other pro-
       visions.  As discussed in the  appendix, the choice of
       the discount rate for estimated benefits which ac-
       crue  over decades to century-long time spans pre-
       sents  special  problems.  Although we argue that a
       two percent discount rate is more  appropriate for
       such  long-term discounting,  for consistency in  this
       chapter we present estimates using the five percent
       discount rate  used throughout the rest of this study.
                                                   103

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The  results of the benefits calculations  in Ap-
pendix G indicate a cumulative central  benefit esti-
mate  of  $530 billion for Title VI  (see Appendix G
for details).  Using the same  aggregation techniques
for the valuation analysis described above, but only
for the  mortality valuation step, we  generate a  90
percent confidence interval around this  central esti-
mate  to derive Primary Low and Primary High esti-
mates of $100 billion to $900 billion, respectively.
We present these estimates in Table 8-2  above. The
annual human health  benefits from Title VI provi-
sions  steadily increase until about 2045, then decrease
until  2165, the last year in the  analysis. About  93
percent of the benefits  accrue from  2015 to 2165.
These benefit estimates  only  partially reflect poten-
tial averting  behaviors,  such as remaining  indoors
or increasing use of sun screens  or hats, which may
mitigate the effects of the UV-b exposure increases
estimated under the Prc-CAAA scenario.

                      Of
    Table 8-3 presents summary quantitative results
for the prospective assessment, with costs  disaggre-
gated by Title  and benefits disaggregated by major
category.  We  present annual,   	
primary estimate results for
each of the two target years of
the analysis, with all dollar fig-
ures expressed as  inflation-ad-
justed  1990 dollars.  The final
columns provide  net present
value estimates for costs and
benefits from 1990 to  2010 or,
in the case  of stratospheric
ozone protection provisions,
1990 to 2165, discounted to
1990 at five  percent.  The re-
sults indicate that the Primary
Central estimate  of benefits
clearly exceeds  the costs  of the
CAAA, for  each of the  two
target years and for the cumu-
lative  estimates  of  present
value over the 1990 to 2010 pe-
riod.
                     gating benefits by CAAA Title or even by pollut-
                     ant.  As the table indicates, a very high percentage
                     of the benefits is  attributable to reduced premature
                     mortality associated with  reductions in ambient par-
                     ticulate matter and associated criteria pollutants.  The
                     CAAA achieves ambient PM reductions through a
                     wide range of provisions controlling emissions of
                     both gaseous precursors  of PM that  form particles
                     in the atmosphere (sulfur  and nitrogen oxides as well
                     as, to a lesser extent, organic  constituents) and di-
                     rectly emitted PM (i.e., dust particles).  Because the
                     effects of these constituents on ambient PM are non-
                     linear,  and because some  precursor pollutants inter-
                     act with each other in ways which influence the to-
                     tal concentration of participates in the  atmosphere,
                     separating  the effects of individual pollutants on the
                     change in  ambient PM would  require many  itera-
                     tions of our air quality modeling system. These  dif-
                     ficulties in separating the  effects of individual emis-
                     sions reductions on the benefits  estimates also high-
                     light the need for an integrated air quality modeling
                     system that can more readily analyze multiple sce-
                     narios within reasonable time  and resource con-
                     straints. A tool of this nature could allow us to more
                     reliably and cost-effectively estimate  incremental
                     contributions to ambient  PM and  ozone concentra-
                     tion  reductions.
Table 8-3
Summary of Quantified Primary Central Estimate Benefits and Costs
(Estimates  in million 1990$)
Cost or Benefit
Category
Annual Estimates
2000
2010
Present Value
Costs:
Title I
Title II
Title III
Title IV
Title V
Total Costs, Title I-V
Title VI
$8,600
$7,400
$780
$2,300
$300
$19,000
$1,
$14,500
$9,000
$840
$2,000
$300
$27,000
400*
$85,000
$65,000
$6,600
$18,000
$2,500
$180,000
$27,000*
Monetized Benefits:
Avoided Mortality
Avoided Morbidity
Ecological and
Welfare Effects
Total Benefits, Title I-V
Stratospheric Ozone
$63,000
$5,100
$3,000
$71,000
$25
$100,000
$7,900
$4,800
$110,000
,000*
$610,000
$49,000
$29,000
$690,000
$530,000*
    The estimates in Table 8-3
reflect the difficulty we en-
countered  in reliably disaggre-
* Annual estimates for Title VI stratospheric ozone protection provisions are annualized
equivalents of the net present value of costs over 1990 to 2075 (for costs) or 1990 to 2165
(for benefits). The difference in time scales for costs and benefits reflects the persistence of
ozone depleting substances in the atmosphere, the slow processes of ozone formation and
depletion, and the accumulation of physical effects in response to elevated UV-b radiation
levels.
                                                   104

-------
                                                                          Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
    Table 8-4 provides the results of our compari-
son  of primary benefits  estimates to primary cost
estimates.  In the top half of the table we show both
annual and present value  estimates  for Titles I
through V, present value  estimates for Title  VI, and
a total  present value for  all  titles.  The "monetized
benefits" indicate both the Primary Central estimate
(the mean) from our statistical aggregation model-
ing analysis and the Primary Low and Primary  High
estimates  (5th and  95th percentile values, respec-
tively).   In the bottom half of the table we present
two  alternative methods  for  comparing benefits to
costs.   "Net benefits" are the Primary Central esti-
mates  of monetized  benefits less the Primary  Cen-
tral estimates  of costs. The table also notes the ben-
efit/cost  ratios implied by the benefit ranges.
    The conclusion we draw from Table 8-4 is that,
given  the particular data, models and assumptions
we believe are most appropriate at this time, our
analysis indicates that the benefits of the CAAA sub-
stantially exceed its costs.  Furthermore, the results
of the uncertainty analysis imply that it is extremely
unlikely that the monetized  benefits of the CAAA
over the  1990 to 2010 period could be less than its
costs.   Looking at Titles I through V,  the central
benefits  estimate exceeds costs by a factor of four to
one, whether we  are  looking at annual or present
value measures, and the high estimate exceeds  costs
by more than twice that factor (a ratio of nine or  ten
to one).  Using the Primary Low estimate of ben-
efits, the annual  estimates of benefits in 2000 and
2010 are slightly less than the annual costs for that
year.  The data also suggest that costs  for criteria
       Table 8-4
       Summary Comparison of Benefits and Costs (Estimates in millions 1990$)
Titles I through V
Annual Estimates
2000 2010
Present Value
Estimate
1990-2010
Title VI
Present Value
Estimate
1990-2165
All Titles
Total Present
Value
Monetized Direct Costs:
Low3
Central
High3
$19,000
$27,000
Not Estimated
$180,000
Not Estimated
$27,000
$210,000
Monetized Direct Benefits:
Lowb
Central
Highb
$16,000
$71,000
$160,000
$26,000
$110,000
$270,000
$160,000
$690,000
$1,600,000
$100,000
$530,000
$900,000
$260,000
$1,200,000
$2,500,000
Net Benefits:
Low
Central
High
($3,000)
$52,000
$140,000
($1,000)
$93,000
$240,000
($20,000)
$510,000
$1,400,000
$73,000
$500,000
$870,000
$50,000
$1,000,000
$2,300,000
Benefit/Cost Ratio:
Lowc
Central
Highc
less than 1/1
4/1
more than 8/1
less than 1/1
4/1
more than 10/1
less than 1/1
4/1
more than 9/1
less than 4/1
20/1
more than 33/1
1/1
6/1
12/1
       "The cost estimates for this analysis are based on assumptions about future changes in factors such as
       consumption patterns, input costs, and technological innovation. We recognize that these assumptions introduce
       significant uncertainty into the cost results; however the degree of uncertainty or bias associated with many of the
       key factors cannot be reliably quantified.  Thus, we are unable to present specific low and high cost estimates.
       b Low and high benefits estimates are based on primary results and correspond to 5th and 95th percentile results
       from statistical uncertainty analysis, incorporating uncertainties in physical effects and valuation steps of benefits
       analysis. Other significant sources of uncertainty not reflected include the value of unqualified or unmonetized
       benefits that are not captured in the primary estimates and uncertainties in emissions and air quality modeling.
       0 The low benefit/cost ratio reflects the ratio of the low benefits estimate to the central costs estimate, while the high
       ratio reflects the ratio of the high benefits estimate to the central costs estimate.  Because we were unable to reliably
       quantify the uncertainty in cost estimates, we present the low estimate  as "less than X," and the high estimate as
       "more than Y", where X and Y are the low and high benefit/cost ratios, respectively.
                                                     105

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
pollutant programs grow somewhat more  rapidly
than benefits from 1990 to 2000, but that benefits
grow more  rapidly from 2000 to 2010.

    The estimates for Title VI indicate that benefits
well exceed costs, even at the low benefits estimate.
This conclusion holds despite the relatively high dis-
count rate used  for the estimates in Table 8-4 (5 per-
cent)  a  value that most  analysts  would consider too
high for the long time period over which benefits of
this program are discounted (175 years).4  The total
estimates for all titles  of the CAAA also indicate ben-
efits in  excess of costs for the full range of primary
benefits.



    The approach to premature mortality  valuation
used 111  our primary  estimates is a method that al-
lows us to  aggregate the  benefits of reducing mortal-
ity risks with other monetized benefits of the  CAAA.
One of the  great advantages of the benefit-cost para-
digm is  that a wide range of quantifiable benefits can
be compared to costs to evaluate the economic effi-
ciency of particular actions.   Some analysts suggest,
however, that presentation of the results of a cost-
benefit  analysis  may mask the key assumptions that
are made to quantify all  benefits in monetary terms.
Another evaluative  paradigm, cost-effectiveness
analysis, is sometimes suggested as further evidence
of whether  the benefits of a regulatory program jus-
tify its costs.  Cost-effectiveness  analysis involves  es-
timation of the costs  per unit of benefit (e.g., lives
saved).  This type of analysis is most useful for com-
paring programs that  have similar goals, for example,
alternative  medical interventions or treatments that
can save a life or cure a disease.   They arc less readily
applicable  to programs  with multiple categories of
benefits, such as the  CAAA,  because the cost-effec-
tiveness calculation is based on  quantity of a single
benefit  category.  In  other words, we cannot readily
convert  reductions in new cases  of chronic bronchi-
tis, reduced hospital admissions, improvements in
visibility, and increased commercial timber and crop
yields to a single metric such as "lives saved."  For
    4  The primary central benefit-cost ratio for Tide VT using
a 3 percent discount rate is 44 to 1, higher than any of those
presented in Table 8-4 (see 'Table 8-6 below).  In addition, the
ratio using a 2 percent discount rale, the rate used in  the under-
lying RIA.S, is 75 to 1.  See Appendix G ior more detail on the
sensitivity oi Tide VI benefits to the choice oi discount rale.
these reasons, we prefer to  present our results in
terms of monetary benefits.

    Despite the risks  of oversimplification of ben-
efits, cautiously interpreted cost-effectiveness calcu-
lations may provide further evidence of whether the
costs incurred to implement the CAAA  are a rea-
sonable investment for the nation.  The most com-
mon cost-effectiveness metric, costs  per  life saved,
can be readily calculated from the information pre-
sented in this  report.   For example, we estimate the
total annual direct costs  of implementation of Titles
I through  V in 2010  to  be approximately  $27 bil-
lion.  In exchange for this expenditure, in  the year
2010 we avoid 23,000 cases of premature mortality
and gam estimated non-mortality benefits of about
$20 billion.  We can generate a net cost per life saved
by subtracting from costs the total  non-mortality
benefits, and then dividing by lives saved.  For Titles
I through V, we estimate a net cost per life  saved of
approximately $300,000 ($27 billion minus  $20 bil-
lion divided by 23,000).3  Although we are also con-
cerned  about  many of  the uncertain assumptions
required to generate cost per life-year saved estimates,
we include an estimate for illustrative  purposes.  For
the year 2010, the net cost per life-year saved esti-
mate implied  by the primary central  case results  is
$23,000 per life-year ($7 billion divided by  310,000
life-years saved).6

                         Of

    We can obtain additional insights  into  key as-
sumptions  and findings of the present study through
further analysis of potentially important variables
and inputs.  The estimated uncertainty ranges for
each endpomt category summarized in  Table 8-1
reflect the  measured uncertainty associated with two
aspects of the analysis: avoided physical  effects (both
health and welfare benefits) and economic valuation
of benefits.  In addition, in Chapter 3 we  conduct
quantitative sensitivity analyses of key  components
of die direct cost estimates.  For many other aspects
of our analysis, however, including emissions esti-
    = The illustrative calculations presented here do not reflect
discounting of the physical incidence of mortality.

    6 Because of Agency concerns regarding discounting of
physical effects,  the ratio presented here reflects undiscounted
life-years saved.   II  iuture years were discounted, the implicit
cost per liie-year saved would be significantly higher.
                                                   106

-------
                                                                     Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
mates, air quality modeling, and unquantified  cat-
egories of benefits, we are unable to conduct quanti-
tative analysis of uncertainty.  Instead, we have at-
tempted throughout this report to identify and char-
acterize major sources of uncertainty — we present
the results of these efforts  at the end of Chapters 2
through 7.  In this section, we provide a summary
evaluation of the relative importance of key sources
of uncertainty.

    Table 8-5 below provides a summary of both
quantified and unquantified  sources of uncertainty
and our estimates  of the impact of these sources of
uncertainty on the primary central estimates of ben-
efits and costs.  The table covers seven major catego-
ries of uncertainties:  measurement  uncertainties in
physical effects and valuation components of the
benefits analysis; measurement uncertainties  in esti-
mation of direct costs; alternative  assumptions for
PM-rclatcd mortality valuation; alternative assump-
tions  for  PM-relatcd mortality risk; unquantified
sources  of error in emissions and air quality  model-
ing; and omissions of key  benefits  categories.  The
table  entries cover quantitative analyses of uncer-
tainty, characterization of unquantified uncertainty,
and the potential effect of alternative modeling para-
digms for costs  and benefits.  Additional treatment
of alternative paradigms is necessary because  reason-
able people may disagree with our methodological
choices regarding these issues, and these  choices
might be  considered   to significantly influence the
results of the study.
                           Of


    As discussed previously in this chapter, we have
conducted quantitative uncertainty  analysis of our
benefits  estimates to reflect measurement  error in
two key  steps of the analysis: estimation of physical
effects and economic valuation.   We present the re-
sults of our analysis in Figure 8-1 and Table 8-1 above.
The  procedure used to generate these estimates  is
well-suited to analysis of uncertainties where the
probability of alternative outcomes can be quantita-
tively characterized in an objective manner.   For
example, most studies that estimate concentration-
response relationships report an estimate of the sta-
tistical uncertainty around the central estimate.  Be-
cause many estimates are available for the value of
statistical life, wre can use the discrete distribution of
the best  available estimates as a basis  for quantita-
tively characterizing the probability of alternative
values.   It is important to  recognize, however, that
this procedure reflects only a portion of the range of
possible  sources  of uncertainty in our benefits esti-
mates. Other, nonqualified sources of uncertainty
must also be factored into  conclusions about the ra-
tio of benefits to costs.

    As part of our analysis of key contributors to
uncertainty in benefits estimates, wre also  conducted
a sensitivity analysis to determine the physical ef-
fects estimation  and economic valuation variables
with the  greatest  contribution to the quantified mea-
surement uncertainty range.  We present  the results
of this sensitivity analysis in Figure 8-2. In this sen-
       Figure 8-2
       Analysis of Contribution of Key Parameters to Quantified Uncertainty
i-H
| $250-
s $200 -
1 $150~
=
M $100-
o

| $0^
^ 951h %ile



<



i

Mean
> (


5th %ile
1

T
> O ffi fl 9 9



ii ii

H | £ | ^ | .§ | | .§ | | | g | |
^ 1 il il o|| i|i §11 l|




0





1,8
^ i— I 0)
P ^ T3
"^ O 'o
CH CH
                       0
                                                  107

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table 8-5
Summary of Key Sources of Uncertainty and Their Impact on Costs and Benefits
Source of
Uncertainty
Measurement
error and
uncertainty in the
physical effects
and economic
valuation steps
Measurement
error and
uncertainty in
direct cost inputs
Value of
statistical life-
based estimates
do not reflect
age at death
Basis of estimate
of avoided
mortality from
PM exposure
Uncertainties in
Title VI health
benefits analysis
Uncertainties in
emissions and
air quality steps
Omission of
potentially
important
benefits
categories from
primary estimate
Description of Alternative Parameter
Inputs
Use a range of input assumptions to
reflect statistical measurement
uncertainty in concentration-response
functions, modeling of physical effects,
and estimation of economic values.
Most important input parameters are
value of statistical life and estimated
relationship between particulate matter
and premature mortality (see Chapters
5, 6, and 7).
Use alternative assumptions for key
input parameters for six of the highest
cost provisions. Conduct sensitivity
tests for each provision separately (see
Chapter 3, pages 30 to 32). As
discussed in Chapter 3 and in this
chapter, aggregation of provision-
specific results would be inappropriate.
Use estimates of the incremental
number of life-years lost from exposure
to ambient PM and a value of statistical
life-year as opposed to measuring
number of lives lost and a value of
statistical life (see Chapters 5 and 6).
The Dockery et al. study provides an
alternative estimate of the long-term
relationship between chronic PM
exposure and mortality (see Chapter 5).
Major uncertainties include: estimating
fatal cancer cases resulting from UV-b
exposure; not accounting for future
averting behavior; and not accounting
for future improvements in the early
detection and treatment of melanoma
(see Table 5-6).
Major uncertainties include:
underestimation of PM2 .5 emissions;
omission of changes in primary and
organic PM in eastern U.S.; emissions
estimation uncertainties in the western
U.S.; scarcity of PM25 monitors; and
lack of a fully integrated air quality and
emissions modeling system (see
Tables 2-5 and 4-7).
Non-quantified categories of impacts
summarized in Chapters 5 and 7.
Quantified but omitted categories
include household soiling, nitrogen
deposition, and residential visibility (see
Chapter 7).
Impact on Annual
Costs
None
High estimates for
some provisions are
$1 billion higher
than primary
estimate. Low
estimates are as
much as $2 billion
below primary
estimate
None
None
None
Uncertainties in
emissions estimates
affects some costs,
but net effect is
minor.
None
Estimates in 2010
Benefits
For Titles I through V,
effect of the use of
alternative input
assumptions ranges
from a $84 billion
decrease (5th
percentile) to a $160
billion increase (95th
percentile).
None
Decrease by $47
billion
Increase by $100 to
$150 billion
Not quantified, but net
effect is probably that
benefits estimates are
too high.
Not quantified, but net
effect is probably that
benefits estimates are
too low.
Increase by at least $8
billion, (does not
reflect unquantified
categories)
                                                        108

-------
                                                                        Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
sitivity analysis, we hold constant  all inputs  to  the
probabilistic uncertainty analysis except one —  for
example, the economic valuation of mortality.   We
allow that  one variable to vary across the estimated
range of that variable's uncertainty.  The sensitivity
analysis isolates the effect of this single source of un-
certainty on the  total measured uncertainty in esti-
mated aggregate  benefits.   The first uncertainty  bar
represents  the range associated with the total mon-
etized benefits of the Clean Air Act, based on analy-
sis  of quantifiable  components  of uncertainty, as
reported above.  This range captures  the  multiple
measurement uncertainties in the quantified benefits
estimation. The rest of the uncertainty bars repre-
sent die quantified  measurement uncertainty  ranges
generated by single variables.  As shown in Figure 8-
2, the most important contributors to aggregate quan-
tified measurement uncertainty are mortality valua-
tion and incidence, followed by chronic bronchitis
valuation and incidence.

                 Error      Uncertainty in
Direct

    As noted in  Chapter 3, explicit and implicit as-
sumptions about changes in consumption patterns,
input costs, and technological innovation are cru-
cial to estimating the direct compliance costs of the
CAAA.  For many of the  factors contributing to
uncertainty, the degree and, in some cases, the di-
rection of  the bias  are  unknown or cannot be deter-
mined.  Uncertainties and sensitivities can be  identi-
fied, however,  and  in many cases the potential mea-
surement errors can be quantitatively characterized.
We designed our sensitivity analyses of key input
parameters  to provide a sense  of the relative impor-
tance of various  input parameters  and assumptions
necessary to generate estimates of direct costs.  The
sensitivity  tests use ranges  of  input parameters  that
include all  reasonable  alternative estimates that we
could identity.

    The results indicate that the sensitivity of  our
primary central cost estimates  is not uniform across
provisions.  Low and high  estimates may vary by as
much as a factor of two.  Unlike  our quantitative
analysis of benefits, we do not assign probabilities
to the likelihood  of alternative input parameters.   In
our judgement, assignment of probabilities to these
alternative  outcomes would be  a largely subjective
task; we knowf of no objective means to develop these
probabilities.  As a  result, it would  be inappropriate
simply to add up the array of low and the array of
high estimates to arrive at an overall range of uncer-
tainty around the central estimates, because it is  un-
likely that a  plausible scenario could be  constructed
where  all the estimates are concurrently either at the
high or low  end of their individual plausible ranges.
A better interpretation of these results is that uncer-
tainty in key input parameters can have a significant
effect on the overall uncertainty of our estimates of
direct compliance costs and ultimately the net ben-
efits calculation.'

PM
on Life-years

    The primary analytical results we present ear-
lier in  this chapter assign the same economic value
to incidences of premature mortality regardless of
the age and health status of those affected.  Although
this has  been the traditional practice for  benefit-cost
studies  conducted within EPA, some  argue this may
not be  the most appropriate  method for valuation
of premature mortality caused by PM exposure.
Some short-term PM exposure studies suggest that a
significantly disproportionate share  of PM-related
premature mortality occurs among persons 65 years
of age  or older.   Combining standard life expectancy
tables with the limited available  data on  age-specific
incidence allows rough approximations of the num-
ber of life-years lost by those who die prematurely
as a result of exposure to  PM or, alternatively, the
changes  in lite expectancy of those who  are exposed
to PM.

    The ability  to  estimate,  however  roughly,
changes in age-specific life expectancy raises the is-
sue of whether  available measures of the economic
value of mortality risk reduction can, and should,
be adapted to measure the value of specific numbers
    •'  Although the analysis conducted here is a direct cost analy-
sis, other sources of uncertainty would also need to be consid-
ered for a social  cost: analysis. For example, forecasts of key
economic variables (e.g., interest rates), specification of produc-
tion functions, and the reliability of key supply and  demand
elasticities are all  important factors in social cost modeling that
contribute to measurement uncertainty.  In addition, most cur-
rent, social cost, analyses assume that markets are currently oper-
ating under optimally efficient, conditions. Emerging literature
suggests that a full accounting of the social costs and efficiency
impacts of environmental regulations could also include an as-
sessment of the incremental costs that reflect existing market
distortions, such as those  imposed by the current tax code.  Our
assessment of uncertainties in direct cost estimates do not re-
flect these considerations.
                                                   109

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
of life-years  saved.8  As stated in our retrospective
analysis, we have 011 occasion performed sensitivity
calculations that adjust mortality values for those
over age  65.  Nonetheless, as discussed in Appendix
H, the current state of knowledge and available ana-
lytical tools do not conclusively  support using a life-
years lost approach or any other approach which
assigns different  risk reduction  values to people of
different  ages or circumstances.  While we prefer an
approach which makes no valuation  distinctions
based on age or other characteristics of the affected
population, we present alternative results based on
a VSLY approach below.   The  method used to de-
velop life years lost estimates  is described briefly in
Chapter 5 and  Appendix D.  The method used to
develop VSLY estimates  is described in Appendix
H.

    The fourth  row of Table 8-5 summarizes the ef-
fect  of using a  VSLY approach  on results  for 2010.
The  results indicate that the choice of valuation meth-
odology significantly affects the estimate of the mon-
etized value of reductions in air pollution-related pre-
mature mortality.  However, the downward adjust-
ment which would result from applying a VSLY ap-
proach in lieu of a VSL approach does  not change
the basic conclusion of this study, since the central
estimate  of monetized benefits of the CAAA still
substantially exceeds the costs of compliance.

    We emphasize that the results of the VSLY ap-
proach to valuing avoided mortality benefits  repre-
sent  a crude estimate of the value of changes in agc-
specific life expectancy. These results should be in-
terpreted cautiously, due  to the several significant
assumptions required to generate a monetized esti-
mate of life years lost from the relative risks reported
in the Pope et al., 1995 study  and the available eco-
nomic literature.  These  assumptions  include, but
are not limited to: extrapolation of die age distribu-
tion  of the U.S. population in future  years; assump-
tions about the age-specificity of the  relative risk
reported by Pope et al., 1995; assumptions about the
life expectancy of different age groups, adjustment
    8  This issue was extensively discussed during the Science
Advisory Board  Council review of drafts of the retrospective
study.  The Council suggested it would be reasonable and ap-
propriate to show PM mortality benefit estimates based on value
of statistical life-years (VSL\) saved as well as the value of statis-
tical life (VSL) approach traditionally applied by the Agency to
all incidences oi premature mortality. Consistent with SAB
Council review advice ior the present study, we apply  the same
approach in lids  analysis.
of the life years lost estimates by an appropriate lag
period (if any); assumptions about the age-specific-
ity of the lag period (if any); derivation  of VSLY
estimates from VSL estimates; assumptions  about the
variation in VSLY with  age;  and selection  of an ap-
propriate rate at which to discount the lagged  esti-
mates of life  years lost.  Changes in any of these
assumptions could significantly affect the VSLY  ben-
efit estimate.   For  example, if we were to assume no
lag period  for PM-related mortality effects  instead
of the five-year lag structure  described in Chapter 5,
VSLY benefit estimates would increase  from $53
billion to |61 billion.  The  specific assumptions we
used in generating these results are discussed  in Ap-
pendix H.

PM
the Dockery Study

    As described in Chapter 5, we  chose to  use the
results of die Pope et al. (1995) study to  estimate the
magnitude of the effect of ambient PM exposure on
the incidence of premature mortality.  Alternative
estimates do exist in the literature,  however.   Al-
though we  chose the Pope study because of  its  cov-
erage of the largest number of cities and other tech-
nical advantages,  the  Dockery et al. (1993) study
provides a  credible and reasonable alternative to the
Pope study.  The Dockery study used  a  smaller
sample of individuals in  fewer U.S. cities than the
Pope study, but it features improved exposure  esti-
mates, a slightly broader study population (includ-
ing adults  aged  25 to 30),  and a follow-up  period
nearly twice as long as  that used in the  Pope study.

    Use of the Dockery study in place of the Pope
study would  substantially increase the benefits  esti-
mate.  As shown in the fifth row of Table  8-5, we
estimate that using the Dockery study  estimates
would increase the annual central benefits estimate
by $100 to $150 billion, more than doubling the to-
tal annual  benefits for Titles 1 through V  and, in
turn, doubling the estimated benefit-cost  ratio.

                 in Title VI


    As  discussed  in  Chapter 5  and Appendix G,
health benefits such as avoided mortality  from mela-
noma and non-melanoma skin cancers constitute the
majority of monetized  benefits resulting from Title
                                                  110

-------
                                                                     Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
VI  regulations on stratospheric ozone-depleting
chemicals.  Estimates of avoided mortality from skin
cancer due to reduced UV-b exposure between 1990
and 2165 represent over 90 percent of the total health
benefits of Title VI.  As a result, uncertainties re-
lated to avoided mortality estimation under Title VI
represent key uncertainties for our overall CAAA
benefits estimate.  Three main areas of uncertainty
are  important for our avoided mortality estimates
for  Title VI: dose-response relationships; predicting
averting behavior; and  predicting future medical
advancements.

    Because the literature on  the relationship  be-
tween exposure to ultraviolet rays and melanoma
and non-melanoma mortality is not as well devel-
oped as that for other health effects, the dose-response
functions  for both of these endpoints are character-
ized by significant uncertainty.  The association of
UV-b exposure with melanoma is controversial, al-
though studies suggest that sunlight exposure is  a
major environmental  risk factor for melanoma.  If
one assumes that a causal relationship exists between
UV-b rays and melanoma, uncertainty still remains
about three aspects of the nature of the dose-response
relationship.  Specifically,  the  relative contribution
of different wavelengths of light to melanoma de-
velopment, the critical exposure period   (e.g., acute,
intermittent, or chronic), and the existence (and
length)  of a latency period between UV exposure
and disease are all unclear. The effect of the first
two uncertainties  on our results  cannot be deter-
mined from available information.  If a significant
latency period exists, then the third uncertainty may
indicate that our analysis, which does not include  a
latency period, overestimates avoided melanoma
mortality benefits.  Because limited data on non-
melanoma mortality precluded the development of
a dose-response function  for this endpoint in  the
current analysis, our estimate of non-melanoma skin
cancer mortality resulting  from UV-b  exposure is
calculated indirectly, by assuming the mortality rate
is a fixed percentage of non-melanoma incidence.
New data on the  death rate for non-melanoma skin
cancer may significantly  influence this mortality es-
timate.

    Our analysis of avoided mortality also does  not
incorporate adjustments for future increases in avert-
ing behavior (i.e.,  efforts by individuals to protect
themselves from  UV-b radiation ).  Our estimates
rely on epidemiological  studies  that incorporate
averting behavior as currently practiced.  However,
if people would react to increased skin cancer risk in
the future by applying sun screen more frequently,
spending more time indoors or otherwise reducing
their UV-b exposure, then our estimate of avoided
mortality would significantly overestimate Title VI
benefits.   It is not  certain, though, that individuals
will pursue  such behavior, and studies show that
those engaging in averting behavior  may also alter
their behavior in ways that may increase exposure
or risk, counteracting the benefits of averting be-
havior.  For example, a recent study of young Euro-
peans by Autier et  al. (1999) found that the use of
high sun protection factor (SPF) sun screen is associ-
ated with  increased frequency and duration of sun
exposure.

    Finally, our analysis does  not adjust estimates of
future mortality for possible advances  in  medical
technology that  could lead to earlier  detection and
more effective treatment  of melanomas.  Such ad-
vancements  could significantly reduce the expected
future melanoma mortality, and by not adjusting for
such  developments, we may be overestimating
avoided melanoma  mortality.  However,  future re-
search may  also identify additional adverse human
health outcomes associated with UV exposure that
we  have not considered in this analysis, resulting in
an underestimate of Title
benefits.
                 in
and Air Quality

    The emissions estimates presented in this analy-
sis are a critical component of the overall analysis.
As the starting point for both costs and benefits, they
provide a consistent basis for evaluating the economic
efficiency of the CAAA.  Characterizing emissions
can be very difficult, however, particularly for those
source categories where emissions monitoring data
are  sparse or nonexistent.  In general, all our emis-
sions estimates are affected by three  major sources
of uncertainty:  estimation of the base-year inven-
tory, prediction  of the growth in pollution-generat-
ing activity, and assumptions about future-year con-
trols.

    Base-year emissions were estimated using emis-
sions factors that express the relationship between a
particular  human/industrial activity and the level of
                                                 111

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
emissions.  The accuracy of base-year emissions esti-
mates vanes from pollutant to pollutant, depending
largely on how directly the selected activity and
emissions correlate.  We likely estimated  1990 SO,
emissions with the greatest precision.  Sulfur diox-
ide emissions  are generated during combustion of
sulfur-containing  fuel and are directly related  to fuel
sulfur content.  In addition, we were able  to  verify
these estimates through  comparison with Continu-
ous Emission Monitoring (CEM) data.  As a result,
we were able to  accurately estimate SO,  emissions
using emissions factors based on data on  fuel usage
and fuel  sulfur content.  Nitrogen oxides  are also a
product of fuel combustion, allowing us to estimate
emissions of this pollutant using the same general
technique used  to estimate  SO, emissions.  However,
the processes  involved in  the formation of  NO
during combustion are  more complicated than those
involved in the formation of SO,; thus,  our NOx
emissions estimates arc more variable and less cer-
tain than SO,  estimates.

    Volatile organic compounds, like SO,  and NOx,
are  products  of fuel  combustion; however, these
compounds are also  a  product of evaporation.  To
estimate  evaporative emissions of this pollutant we
used emissions factors that relate changes in emis-
sions to changes in temperature.  Because  future
meteorological  conditions are difficult to predict,
the uncertainty associated with forecasting tempera-
ture influences the uncertainty in  our  VOC emis-
sions estimates.  The likely significance of this un-
certainty, in terms of its impact on the overall mon-
etary benefit present  in this  analysis,  is  probably
minor.

    Of particular importance, however, are  uncer-
tainties that affect the estimation of future year emis-
sions of particulate matter and  secondarily formed
PM precursors. In this  analysis we estimated primary
PM,g emissions based on  unit emissions that may
not accurately reflect the composition and mobility
of particles.  The ratio of crustal to  carbonaceous
particulate material, for example, likely  is  high as a
result of overestimation of the fraction of  crustal
material, primarily composed  of fugitive  dust, and
underestimation  of the  fraction of carbonaceous
material.   Because the  CAAA have  a greater  impact
on emissions sources that generate carbonaceous par-
ticles (mobile sources)  than on sources that  mainly
emit crustal material  (area sources),  we likely  under-
estimate the impact of the CAAA on reducing PM,
thereby reducing monetary benefits estimates.  The
uncertainty associated with estimating the  partition
of PM   emissions components  could conceivably
have a major impact  on the net benefit  estimate.
Compared to secondary PM25 precursor emissions,
however, changes in primary PM   emissions have a
relatively small impact on PM,5 related benefits.

    Our  future-year control assumptions are also a
source of uncertainty.  Despite our efforts to  mini-
mize  this uncertainty, w7hether each  of the  Post-
CAAA controls will be adopted, whether Post-
CAAA control programs will be more  or less effec-
tive than estimated, and whether unanticipated tech-
nological shifts will reduce future-year  emissions are
all unknown.  For example, the Post-CAAA scenario
includes implementation  of a region-wide NO  con-
trol strategy designed to regulate  the regional trans-
port of ozone.  However, the control program as-
sumed under the Post-CAAA scenario may not re-
flect the  NOx controls that are actually implemented
in a regional ozone transport rule.

    In addition to potential inaccuracies in the  emis-
sions  inventories used as air  quality modeling inputs,
there  are at least three sources of air quality model-
ing uncertainty that may have a major  effect on the
precision and accuracy of our projected changes in
air quality.  First, we estimate changes in PM  con-
centrations in the eastern U.S. based exclusively on
changes in die concentrations of sulfate and nitrate
particles.  By not accounting for changes in organic
and primary particulate  fractions, we  likely under-
estimate  the  impact of the CAAA on PM concen-
trations.  Second, by using separate air quality  mod-
els for individual pollutants and different geographic
regions, as opposed to a single integrated model, we
were unable to fully capture the interaction among
air pollutants or reflect transport of pollutants  or
precursors across the boundaries of the models cov-
ering the western and eastern states.  Third, the lack
of a well-developed modeling network for PM
means we must estimate monitored concentrations
of this pollutant based  on PM10 monitor estimates.
The direction and magnitude of bias  these limita-
tions  impose 011 net benefits estimate presented in
this analysis can not be determined based on current
information.

    Some model-related uncertainties, however, may
be mitigated  because  this analysis uses the air qual-
                                                 112

-------
                                                                      Chapters: Comparison of Costs and Benefits
ity modeling results in a relative, not absolute, sense.
We focus on  the change  in  air quality between the
Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios and not on the am-
bient concentrations projected by the  individual
models themselves.  Therefore, uncertainties that
affect a model's ability to  accurately predict the rela-
tive change  in concentration  of a pollutant from one
scenario to  another are more important in the  con-
text of this  study than those  that affect only the ab-
solute model results.  In addition, as  summarized in
the previous chapters, most of the uncertainties in
emissions estimation and air quality modeling  con-
tribute to a  conservative bias in our benefits results.
When faced with alternative approaches to emissions
and air  quality modeling,  we made explicit attempts
to choose parameters, assumptions and modeling-
strategies that would tend to understate benefits.

            of Potentially


    As described in Chapters 5 through 7  above, and
in more detail  in Appendix H, the primary estimate
reflects  application of a strict set of criteria for inclu-
sion of monetized benefits categories.  For example,
estimates of the value of  improved visibility in U.S.
residential areas indicate a positive value for this ser-
vice  flow, but the best available residential visibility
estimates rely  on an unpublished study of values in
the eastern U.S. Although our physical effects analy-
sis indicates significant visibility improvements in
all regions of the U.S., our application of the results
of the economic valuation literature  reflect a  con-
servative approach to valuation of improved visibil-
ity in the U.S.  While we believe our conservative
inclusion criteria for the primary benefits reflects
the greater uncertainty in  measuring some economic
values, we also believe that the statutory language of
section  812  clearly warns  against the practice of as-
suming  a default value of  zero for demonstrated cat-
egories of benefits.  Therefore, the last row of Table
8-5 presents the effect of using a somewhat  more
inclusive set of criteria for accepting benefits trans-
fer-based economic values.   In this alternative  case,
we included estimates for improved  residential vis-
ibility, displaced costs from  reduced airborne nitro-
gen loadings to estuaries, and reduced expenditures
for household soiling (which are not included in any
form in  the primary estimate).
    In addition to these quantified but omitted cat-
egories of benefits, there is a wide range of benefits
of the CAAA that we can  identify but cannot quan-
tify.   We present summaries of unquaiitified health
effects in Chapter  5 (Tables 5-1  and  5-5)  and
unquaiitified  ecological and welfare effects  in Chap-
ter 7  (Tables  7-5 and 7-9).   Two of the most impor-
tant omissions, in our judgement, are  the lack of any
quantified estimates   for the health  benefits of air
toxics control and the omission of the  systemic and
long-term ecological effects of mercury and other
persistent air pollutants.  The importance of these
two categories of effects are discussed in Chapters 5
and 7, respectively.



    In some  instances, the choice of discount rate
can have an important effect on the results of a ben-
efit-cost analysis; for  example, when the distribution
of costs and  benefits  throughout the time period are
very different from one another.  In this assessment,
the discount  rate affects annualized costs (i.e., amor-
tized  capital  expenditures), and the  discounting of
all costs and benefits  to 1990. Table 8-6 summarizes
the effect of alternative discount rates on the Pri-
mary  Central estimate results of this analysis.  The
estimates we  present  show that altering the discount
rate has only a small  effect on annual cost  and ben-
efit estimates.  In part, this is due to limitations in
our ability to conclusively identify costs as annual-
ized capital expenditures  or annual operating costs
in the underlying estimates.  As described  in Chap-
ter 3,  about $3 billion (or roughly  10  percent) of the
2010  estimate is annualized capital costs.  Varying
the discount rate, which we also use to  represent the
cost of capital, affects only  this component of costs.
The benefits estimates that employ a discount rate
include the mortality estimate, where  it is used as
part of our valuation  of the lag effect of PM mortal-
ity, and the chronic  asthma value, where  we use a
discount rate  to develop a lump-sum value  for avoid-
ance  of incidence  from an  annual payment value in
the underlying literature.

    Not surprisingly,  the effect of discount rates on
the net present value  benefit calculations is greater.
Nonetheless, the estimates  we present  in Table 8-6
show  that varying the discount rate assumption also
does  not change our overall conclusion  that the ben-
efits of the CAAA exceed  its costs.
                                                  113

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Table 8-6
       Effect of Alternative Discount Rates on Primary Central Estimates
       (Estimates in million 1990$)
                                                      Discount Rate Assumption
      	3%	5%	7%
       Annual Costs in 2010:
       Titles I through V	$26,600	$26,800	$26,900
       Annual Benefits:
       Titles I through V	$110,000	$110,000	$107,000
       Present Value of Costs:
       Titles I through V	$230,000	$180,000	$140,000
       Title VI                            $43,000              $27,000               $20,000
       Present Value of Benefits:
       Titles I through V                   $890,000             $690,000              $520,000
       Title VI                           $1,900,000            $530,000              $240,000
       Cumulative Net Benefits:
       Titles I through V                   $650,000             $510,000              $380,000
       Title VI	$1,860,000	$500,000	$220,000
       Benefit/Cost Ratio:
       Titles I through V	4/1	4/1	4/1
       Title VI                              44/1                 20/1                   12/1
                                                  114

-------
Emissions Analysis
    The prospective analysis examines the emissions
of eight air pollutants:  volatile organic  compound
(VOC), nitrogen oxides (NO,), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
carbon monoxide (CO), participate matter of ten
microns or less (PM10), participate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM25),
ammonia  (NH3), and  mercury (Hg).  Changes in
emissions of these pollutants were projected based on
two emissions control  scenarios: a) pre-1990 Clean
Air  Act  Amendments  ("Pre-CAAA")  scenario
assuming  that no  additional controls  would  be
implemented beyond those that were in place when
the CAAA were  passed; and  b) "Post-CAAA"
scenario  incorporating  the effects  of  controls
authorized by the 1990 Amendments. Comparison of
the resulting projections revealed the predicted impact
of the CAAA on  emissions.  In addition, these
estimates provided the basis  for the subsequent cost
estimation  and air quality modeling steps of the
prospective analysis.

    This  appendix summarizes the Pre- and Post-
CAAA emissions estimates  for each of the major
sources of VOC, NOX, SO2, CO, PM10, PM25, NH3,
and  Hg  and describes the  methodology for  the
Agency's projections.  EPA based its Pre- and Post-
CAAA emissions estimates on projections from 1990
base year  emissions   estimates.   For   all  of  the
pollutants, except particulate matter and mercury,1 the
Agency selected emissions levels taken from Version
3 of the National Particulates Inventory (NPI) to
serve as the baseline.   For both PM10  and PM25,
however, EPA updated NPI estimates to reflect the
emissions from the National Emission Trends (NET)
inventory.  Once  EPA finalized the base  year levels,
the Agency projected  1990  emissions to 2000  and
2010 under both the Pre- and Post- CAAA scenarios.
At the time the emissions data base selection was
made, the NPI was the most comprehensive source of
emission estimates of all criteria pollutant emissions.
Other available data sets, such as that available from
                                                  the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG),
                                                  were considered, but not selected because they were
                                                  limited to ozone precursor emissions.

                                                     EPA estimated future emissions  for all major
                                                  source categories:  industrial point sources, utilities,
                                                  nonroad engines/vehicles, motor vehicles, and area
                                                  sources.  To make these projections, for all but utility
                                                  sources, the Agency relied on emissions analysis that
                                                  incorporated growth forecasts and future year control
                                                  assumptions  about rule effectiveness  and control
                                                  efficiency.  In this analysis  EPA projected growth
                                                  largely based on anticipated changes in economic
                                                  activity, and treated the rule effectiveness and the rate
                                                  of control  efficiency as the key differences between
                                                  the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios.

                                                     EPA used the Integrated Planning Model (IPM)
                                                  to estimate utility emissions. With this optimization
                                                  model EPA forecasts emissions for the 48 contiguous
                                                  States  and the District of Columbia.  All existing
                                                  electric power generation units  are covered  in the
                                                  model, as well as independent power producers and
                                                  other cogeneration facilities that sell wholesale power,
                                                  if they were included in the North American Electric
                                                  Reliability Council  (NERC)  data base for reliability
                                                  planning.  The model considers  future capacity
                                                  additions by  both  utilities and independent  power
                                                  producers.   In addition,  this model  is capable of
                                                  producing  baseline  air  emission   forecasts  and
                                                  estimates of air emissions levels under various control
                                                  scenarios at  the national, and  NERC  region and
                                                  subregional, level.   A full explanation of the IPM
                                                  model and the assumptions EPA  used for this
                                                  prospective analysis  may be found  in  Analyzing
                                                  Electric Power Generation under the  CAAA. EPA,
                                                  July 1996.2

                                                     This appendix first provides an overview of Pre-
                                                  and Post-CAAA scenario development. It discusses
    A separate methodology was used to estimate mercury
emissions.   Mercury emissions  are discussed independently
beginning on page A-48 of this appendix.
                                                      This document was updated in March 1998 to describe
                                                 model refinements made for IPM Version 7.1 and the latest base
                                                 case forecasts. (EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Analyzing
                                                 Electric Power Generation under the CAAA. March 1998.)
                                              A-1

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
key factors influencing the 2000 and 2010 estimates,
such as the timing of modeling decisions with respect
to control programs and  available  data.  In  the
following section,  there is a comparison of  the
prospective analysis base year inventory and emissions
projections with other existing data.   Subsequent
sections  address the influence of Title 1 progress
requirements and the major sources of uncertainty,
and  provide  detailed breakdowns  of  emissions
projections  for  the five  major  source  categories
responsible for air pollution: industrial point, utility,
nonroad, motor vehicle, and area sources. For each of
these source categories this appendix provides:  (1) an
overview of the approach used to make the emissions
estimates; (2) a discussion of how base year emissions
levels were determined; (3) an explanation of how
growth projections were determined; (4) an outline of
the assumptions made for the control scenarios;  and
(5) a summary of the emissions estimates for both the
Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios.
Scenario  Development

    EPA projected emissions by adjusting 1990 base
year emissions to reflect projected economic activity
levels in 2000 and  2010,  and applying  future year
control   assumptions.    The resulting estimates
depended largely upon three factors: how the base
year inventory was selected, what indicators were used
to  forecast  growth, and  what  specific  regulatory
programs were incorporated in the Pre- and Post-
CAAA scenarios. These three factors are addressed in
Tables A-l through A-3.  Table A-l highlights the
approach EPA  used  to  establish the  base year
inventory.  The  indicators the Agency relied  on to
forecast  growth and predict future activity levels,
along with the  analytical  approach EPA  used to
project emissions, are shown in Table A-2. The Pre-
and Post-CAAA regulatory scenarios are summarized
in Table A-3.

    Of the factors  that influence EPA's emissions
projections for 2000 and 2010, the most significant is
the suite of air pollution regulations and programs the
Agency  incorporated in the Pre- and Post-CAAA
scenarios. For the Pre-CAAA scenario, air pollution
controls are frozen at their 1990 levels; only standards
and initiatives implemented prior to the CAAAs are
included. The Post-CAAA scenario, in addition to the
measures  contained in  the  Pre-CAAA  scenario,
incorporates emission controls associated with  the
1990  Amendments.   Due  to  the  necessity  of
developing  emissions   scenarios   early   in   the
prospective analysis process, the exact provisions of
some regulatory programs could not be foreseen.  For
example, decisions about how to translate the OTAG
recommendations   into   regional  NOX   control
requirements had not been made, so estimates were
made  on affected sources, geographic coverage,  and
control levels.

    EPA included in the Post-CAAA scenario:

    •   Title I  VOC and NOX reasonably available
        control technology (RACT) and reasonable
        further progress  (RFP) requirements  for
        ozone nonattainment areas (NAAs);

    •   Title  II   motor  vehicle  and  nonroad
        engine/vehicle provisions;

    •   Title III 2- and 4-year maximum achievable
        control technology (MACT) standards;

    •   Title IV SO2 and NOX emissions programs
        for utilities;

    •   Title V permitting system for primary sources
        of air pollution; and

    •   Title VI emissions limits for chemicals that
        deplete stratospheric ozone.

    This scenario also assumes the implementation of
a region-wide NOX cap and trade system for the entire
OTAG  domain3 and a similarly designed  trading
program for the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that
is consistent with Phase II of the Ozone Transport
Commission    (OTC)   NOX   Memorandum   of
Understanding (MOU). For motor vehicles, emission
reductions associated with a 49-State  low  emission
vehicle (LEV) program were also included in the Post-
CAAA  scenario.  A more detailed outline  of the
controls included in  both the Pre-  and Post-CAAA
scenarios is provided in Table A-3.
    The NOS control program incorporated in the Post-CAAA scenario
may not reflect the NOK controls that are actually implemented in a
regional ozone transport rule.
                                                A-2

-------
                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table A-1
Base Year Inventory - Summary of Approach
    Sector
                    Analysis Approach/Data Sources
Industrial Point
Sources
Utilities
1985 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) emissions
inventory grown to 1990 based on historical Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
earnings data.
PM10 emissions based on total suspended particulate (TSP) emissions and
particle-size multipliers.

The 1990 utility emission estimates are from the 1990 NPI.
Nonroad         Nonroad Engines/Vehicles (VOC, NOX, CO, PM10):  1991 Office of Mobile Sources
                (QMS) Nonroad Inventory.
                Nonroad Engines/Vehicles (SO2) and Aircraft, Commercial Marine Vessels,
                Railroads: 1985 NAPAP grown to 1990 based on historical BEA earnings data.
Motor Vehicles
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) travel data, MOBIL5a/PART5 emission
factors.
Area Sources    1985 NAPAP inventory grown to 1990 based on historical BEA earnings data and
                State Energy Data Systems (SEDS) fuel use data; emission factor changes for
                selected categories.
                                          A-3

-------
                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table A-2
Analysis Approach by Major Sector
  Sector
Growth Forecast
Analysis Approach
Industrial    1995 BEA Gross State Product (GSP)
Point        Projections by State/Industry.
                          VOC, NOX — Emission Reduction and Cost
                          Analysis Model (ERCAM): applies BEA
                          growth projection to base year emissions and
                          applies future year controls as selected by the
                          user.
                          PM10, SO2, CO — While no formal model
                          exists, the same basic approach applied in
                          ERCAM was used for these pollutants.
Utilities      Projections of heat input by unit based
            on National Electric Reliability Council
            (NERC) data, price and demand
            forecasts, and technology
            assumptions.
                          SO2, NOX — Integrated Planning Model (IPM).
                          VOC, PM10, CO — Base year emissions rates
                          or AP-42 emission factors applied to IPM
                          projected heat input by unit.
Nonroad     1995 BEA GSP and Population
            Projections by State/Industry.
                          VOC, NOX — ERCAM.
                          PM10, SO2, CO — ERCAM approach (no
                          formal model).
Motor       MOBILE Fuel Consumption Model
Vehicles     (FCM) National Vehicle Miles
            Traveled (VMT) Projection Scaled to
            Metropolitan/REST-of-State Areas by
            Population.
                          NOX, VOC, CO — ERCAM: applies MOBIL5a
                          emission factors to projected VMT by month
                          and county/vehicle type/roadway
                          classification.
                          PM10, SO2 — PART5 emission factors applied
                          to projected VMT.
Area        1995 BEA GSP and Population
            Projections by State/Industry, and
            USDA Agricultural Projections.
                          VOC, NOX —ERCAM.
                          PM10, SO2, CO — ERCAM approach (no
                          formal model).
                                          A-4

-------
                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table A-3
Projection Scenario Summary by Major Sector
  Sector
        Pre-CAAA
                  Post-CAAA*
Industrial
Point
RACT held at 1990 levels.
VOC and NOX RACT for all NAAs (except NOX waivers).
New control technique guidelines (CTGs) (VOC).
0.15 pounds per million British thermal unit (Ibs/MMBtu)
OTAG-wide NOx cap on fuel combustors of 250 MMBtu
per hour or above(NOx).
OTAG Level 2 NOX controls across OTAG States (NOX).
2- and 4- year MACT standards (VOC).
Ozone Rate-of-Progress (3 percent per year)
requirements (further reductions in VOC).
Utilities      250 ton prevention of
            Significant Deterioration
            (PSD) and New Source
            Performance Standards
            (NSPS) held at 1990 levels.
            RACT and New Source
            Review (NSR) held at 1990
            levels.
                            Title IV SO2 emission allowance program (SO2).
                            Title IV Phase I and Phase II emission limits for all
                            boiler types (NOX).
                            250 ton PSD and NSPS.
                            RACT and NSR for all non-waived (NOX waiver) NAAs
                            (NOX).
                            Phase II of the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
                            NOx memorandum of understanding (MOD) (NOX).
                            0.15 Ibs/MMBtu OTAG-wide seasonal NOX cap with
                            banking/trading (NOX).
Nonroad     Controls (engine standards)
            held at 1990 levels.
                            Federal Phase I and II compression ignition (Cl) engine
                            standards (NOX, PM).
                            Federal Phase I and II spark ignition (SI) engine
                            standards (VOC, CO, NOX).
                            Federal locomotive standards (NOX, PM).
                            Federal commercial marine vessel standards (NOX).
                            Federal recreational marine vessel standards (VOC,
                            NOX).
Motor       Federal Motor Vehicle Control
Vehicles     Program (FMVCP) — engine
            standards set prior to 1990.
            Phase 1  Reid vapor pressure
            (RVP) limits.
            I/M programs in place by
            1990.
                            Tier 1 tailpipe standards (Title II) (VOC, NOX).
                            49-State LEV program (Title I) (VOC, NOX, CO).
                            Phase 2 RVP limits (Title II) (VOC).
                            I/M programs for ozone and CO NAAs (Title I) (VOC,
                            NOX, CO).
                            Federal reformulated gasoline for ozone NAAs (Title I)
                            (VOC, NOX, CO).
                            California LEV (California only) (Title I) (VOC, NOX,
                            CO).
                            California reformulated gasoline (California only) (Title
                            I) (VOC, NOX, CO).
                            Diesel fuel sulfur content limits (Title II) (SO2, PM).
                            Oxygenated fuel in CO NAAs (Title I) (CO).
                                          A-5

-------
Table A-3
Projection Scenario Summary by Major Sector
  Sector            Pre-CAAA                            Post-CAAA*

Area        Controls held at 1990 levels.    VOC and NOX RACT requirements.
                                       New CTGs (VOC).
                                       2- and 4- year MACT standards (VOC).
                                       Ozone Rate-of-Progress (3 percent per year)
                                       requirements (further reductions in VOC).
                                       PM NAA controls (PM).
                                       Onboard vapor recovery (vehicle refueling) (VOC).
                                       Stage II vapor recovery systems (VOC).

*Also includes all Pre-CAAA measures.
                                         A-6

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Decisions  about  which control programs  to
include in the  Post-CAAA scenario and how their
emission reductions were modeled, were made during
the summer of 1996. While some adjustments to the
emission projection methods were made since that
time in response to review comments, opportunities
were not available to revise the emission projections
once air quality modeling was initiated using these data
sets.  The result is that there are  some differences
between the emissions modeling practices being used
currently in EPA  regulatory  analyses and  those
reflected in the  Section  812 Prospective.  As examples,
the VOC emission reductions of 7 and 10 year MACT
standards are not included in the Prospective, nor are
CO, NO^ SO2, and PM  emission benefits of any
MACT   standards.  Similarly,  the   NOX   State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Call affects 22 States, not
37, and OTAG Level 2 controls are not applied to all
non-electrical generating units (EGUs) NOX sources,
only to cement kilns and internal combustion engines.
Comparison of the
Base Year Inventory and
Emissions  Projections
with Other  Existing Data

    Comparison  of the  emissions estimates in the
prospective analysis to historical emissions estimates
drawn from EPA's  National  Air  Pollutant  and
Emissions Trends  reports (hereafter referred to as
Trends) can provide a check on the reasonableness of
our emissions inventories. In addition, comparison of
emissions projections  from the prospective analysis
with those of the Grand  Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission (GCVTQ study of western regional haze
(Radian,  1995; Science & Policy Associates, 1995;
Argonne, 1995)  provides  an  initial  test  of the
sensitivity of emissions  projections  to  baseline
inventories and growth assumptions. Analysis of PM
emissions and comparison of estimated PM data with
observed PM data presented in the 1997 National Air
Quality and Emissions Trends Report (EPA, 1998a)
also helps evaluate  the prospective study's emissions
estimation methods.
Post-CAAA  Emissions Estimates and
EPA Trends Data

    EPA publishes annual National  Air Pollutant
Emission Trends  reports that contain estimates of
historical trends in emissions of VOC, NO,, SO2, CO,
PM10, and lead (Pb).  Comparison of the Trends (EPA,
1997a)  and Post-CAAA estimates reveals that from
1990 to  1995,  VOC,  NOX,  SO2,  CO,  and PM10
emissions figures from both are similar.

    Figures A-l through A-5 display the Pre-CAAA,
Post-CAAA,  and  Trends,  emissions  estimates  for
VOC,  NO,, SO2, CO,  and  PM10 respectively.
Although the Post-CAAA and Trends emissions trends
are comparable for all five of these pollutants, there
are several instances where there are differences
between the  estimates from these  two different
sources. VOC emissions are highly variable from year
to year. To illustrate this fluctuation, annual Trends
estimates,  and  five year Trends  increments,  are
provided in Figure A-l for the years  1985 to 1996.
Although the 1990 Trends estimate is lower than the
prospective analysis' base year inventory, the general
emissions  trend  projected under  the Post-CAAA
scenario is  similar to that represented by the historical
EPA estimates .4
    4VOC emissions estimates not only fluctuate from year to
year, but also from Trends report to Trends report. Had the Trends
report published in October of 1996, a year earlier, been used as
the data source for Figure A-l, the 1990 Trends VOC estimate
would have been higher, not lower, than the prospective analysis'
base year inventory.
                                               A-7

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
             Figure A-1. Comparison of Pre-CAAA, Post-CAAA,  and  Trends  VOC
             Emissions  Estimates
                                                                                      • Pre-CAAA
                                                                                      Post-CAAA
                                                                                      - Trends
                                           Year
    As shown in Figure A-2, the 1995 Trends estimate
for NOX emissions exceeds the Post-CAAA NO
projection. The primary influence on NOX emissions
in the mid-1990s was the requirement to install RACT
on major stationary source NOX emitters in certain
ozone nonattainment areas, and the Northeast OTR.
Because the EPA Trends report is still in the process of
incorporating  the  State's  1996  periodic emission
inventories in the NET data base, it is believed that
the Trends values in Figure A-2 do not capture all of
the NOX emission reductions that have occurred to
date.   When these  State data are incorporated in
Trends, it is  expected that the 1990  to  1996 NOX
emissions trend line will more closely parallel the Post-
CAAA estimates.

    Comparison of  SO2  Post-CAAA and  Trends
estimates based upon the profiles plotted in Figure A-
3 shows that the 1995 Trends estimates are somewhat
lower than the corresponding prospective projection
line. This is because the Trends profile reflects  the
sudden reduction in SO2 emissions that resulted from
the implementation of  the  acid rain SO2  trading
program in the early 1990's.  While this reduction is
incorporated in the Post-CAAA scenario, it is not
captured until the year 2000 emissions projections;
plotting the corresponding trend line has the effect of
distributing these early  reductions over the entire
decade in constant annual increments. Between 1995
and 2000 the actual rate of SO2 reduction will almost
certainly slow so that by the year 2000 Post-CAAA
and Trends estimates will be much more comparable
than the 1995 levels depicted in Figure A-3.

    Post-CAAA  and Trends emissions  estimates  for
CO (Fig. A-4) and PM10 (Fig. A-5) respectively  are
similar for the years 1990 and 1995. For  PM10,  the
values used to develop the Pre- and Post-CAAA, and
Trends profiles were adjusted to eliminate the influence
of wind erosion, a natural source  of PM10 that can
cause significant fluctuation in emission  estimates
from year  to year.  Even  though this  source is
                                               A-8

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
controlled for, there is still significant variability in the
yearly historical PM10 emissions estimates.  To capture
this  variability in  the Trends  estimates,  instead  of
providing estimates  at five year increments,  annual
Trends emissions levels are displayed in Figure  A-5.
For the years since the adoption of the 1990 CAAA,
both the Trends estimates and the Post-CAAA scenario
projections show PM10 emissions remaining at the
same relative level.  The drastic  drop in the Trends line
from 1989  to 1990 is  the result of a change  in
methodology used to calculate  PM10 emissions.

    Figures A-l through A-5 contain Trends estimates
for 1980 and 1985 in addition to the 1990 and  1995
values primarily discussed above. This information is
included to  provide a  broader picture of actual
emissions levels over the last  15 years and to show
how  the general  historical  trends  in emissions
compare to the projected future trends under both the
Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios. Close comparison of
pre-1990 Trends estimates with  1990 to present Trends
estimates   and  prospective   analysis  projections,
however,  has  the  potential  to  be   misleading.
Beginning in 1990 there was a significant change in the
methodology used to estimate  Trends emissions.  The
1980 and 1985 figures presented here are  intended
only for general comparison.
                                                 A-9

-------
                                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

O

-------
                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Figure A-4. Comparison of Pre-CAAA, Post-CAAA, and Trends
    CO Emissions Estimates
w .2   60
l i-
o     40 +
20

 0
                  H—I-
                                   C&
                            Year
                                                     H—h
                                                               - Pre-CAAA
                                                                Post-CAAA
                                                               • Trends
Figure A-5. Comparison of Pre-CAAA, Post-CAAA, and Trends
PMio Emissions Estimates
Tn
Emissions in Short Tons
(Millions)
-^ -^ NJ NJ C
D Ol O Ol O Ol C

*-+-+-*^

Q Q Q
Year

— •— Pre-CAAA
Post-CAAA
—A — Trends

                                 A-11

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Prospective Analysis and GCVTC
Emissions Estimates

    The GCVTC conducted, for the Western States,
an air pollution analysis that projected emissions for
selected pollutants from 1990 base year levels for the
year 2000 and every tenth subsequent year up to 2040.
Comparison of the 2000 and 2010 GCVTC study and
prospective analysis Post-CAAA scenario projections
for the Western States indicate that although  their
estimates for NOX, SO2, and  PM25 are somewhat
different, these  differences arise  from  the use  of
different baseline inventories in the two studies, or
from specific regional reductions not incorporated in
the prospective study scenarios (Table A-4).

    NOX and SO2 base year figures in the prospective
analysis are approximately 10-15 percent higher than
the corresponding estimates in the GCVTC study.
The difference is most likely the result of the separate
inventories that are relied upon by the two analyses to
develop their respective base year emissions levels.
Version 3 of the NPI, the primary source of base year
emissions data for the prospective analysis, is largely
derived from 1985 emissions figures that are adjusted
to 1990 levels using BEA growth projections.  This
inventory does not capture the effect of new controls
and technology change on emissions between  1985
and 1990. The GCVTC base year estimates for NOX
and SO2, based primarily on State provided point
source emissions figures from one of the years  1990
to  1992, however, incorporate these effects.   As a
result, 1990 emissions estimates in the GCVTC study
are lower than those in the prospective analysis.

    Due to  the difference in the two studies' base year
NOX estimates, their projected absolute levels of NOX
emissions also differ.  Both studies, however, estimate
that NOX pollution will decrease at a similar  rate  from
1990 levels.  The prospective  analysis Post-CAAA
scenario shows a 16 percent drop by the year 2010,
while the GCVTC estimates a 17 percent reduction.
    SO2  projections for the two studies are not
characterized  by  similar percentage  changes  in
emissions. In fact, under the Post-CAAA scenario the
prospective  analysis estimates an  increase in SO2
emission from 1990 to 2010 of about 15 percent,
while the GCVTC study shows roughly an 11 percent
decrease over this same time period. The reason for
this  disparity  is that  only  the  GCVTC  emissions
forecasts take into  account  specific modernization
plans for the Kennecott-Utah Copper  Corporation
which are predicted to lower future SO2 emissions in
the West by approximately 30 thousand tons per year
(tpy), as  well  as, a regional electric utility  cut  of
roughly 80 thousand tpy. Together, these anticipated
reductions account for the  bulk  of the difference
between the two studies future year estimates.

    Emissions figures for PM25 are the source of the
largest disparity between the prospective analysis and
the GCVTC study. In general, emissions estimates are
roughly 40 percent  lower in the former than in the
latter.  This  is due to a difference  in the inventories
used to develop the 1990 base year PM25 estimates.
While the more recent prospective analysis relied on
NPI data that was updated to incorporate  NET
estimates that  reflected revisions to PM25 emissions
factors for  fugitive dust, the GCVTC study was
conducted prior to the lowering of these factors. As
a result, the PM25 estimates in the GCVTC study are
considerably higher than those in the prospective
analysis. The percent change in PM25 emissions from
1990 to 2010, however, is similar in the two studies
(approximately 10 percent in prospective analysis and
approximately 13 percent in GCVTC study).
                                               A-12

-------
                                                          The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table A-4
Comparison


of Emissions: Prospective
1990
Post-CAA
NOX
SO2
PM2.5
3,303,536
1,245,439
1,701,869
NOTE: The figures in this table
Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New
GCVTC
3,058,221
1,094,928
2,412,177



Analysis and GCVTC Stud
2000
Post-CAA
2,938,833
1,326,546
1,759,434
represent the total annual emissions (tons
Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming.
2010
GCVTC Post-CAA
2,596,409 2,784,580
944,689 1,434,470
2,535,829 1,864,656
per year) for the Western States: Arizona

GCVTC
2,532,855
970,762
2,730,304
, California,
Prospective Analysis PM2S Emissions
Estimates and Observed Data

    The 1997  National Air Quality and Emissions
Trends Report provides a  summary  of PM25
concentration  speciation data.  This report shows
the relative contribution of the major PM emissions
source components (crustal material, carbonaceous
particles, nitrate, and sulfate) to ambient PM25
concentrations  in  urban  and  nonurban areas
throughout the U.S.   Comparison  of primary PM25
emissions estimates generated for this analysis with
the observed concentration data presented in the 1997
report indicates that the ratio in the  prospective study
of crustal material  to primary carbonaceous particles
is high.  At least part of this apparent overestimation
Figure A-6
1990 Primary PM2.5 Emissions by EPA Region (tons/year)
                                                                     Region 1
                                                                               Crustal - Fugitive Dust Souro

                                                                               Crustal - Industrial Sources

                                                                               Other Primary

                                                                               Elemental Carbon

                                                                               Organic Carbon
                                                                            o
                                                                            100,000  450,000   850,000
                                                A-13

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
of   crustal   material   and  underestimation  of
carbonaceous participates, however, is due to the fact
that much of the emitted crustal material quickly
settles and does not have a quantifiable impact on
ambient air quality. In this analysis, we apply a factor
of 0.2 to crustal emissions to estimate the fraction of
crustal PM25 that makes its way into the "mixed layer"
of   the   atmosphere   and  influences  pollutant
concentrations.  Figure A-6 displays  the breakout of
primary   PM25   into  its   adjusted  crustal   and
carbonaceous  (elemental carbon (EC) and organic
carbon (OQ) components. The figure divides crustal
material into two subcategories based on the source of
the material (fugitive dust or industrial sources) and
also shows the portion of primary PM25 that is neither
crustal nor carbonaceous. The  ratios, one for each
EPA Region, of adjusted crustal material to primary
carbonaceous particles presented in Figure A-6 are in
line with  the observed  PM25  concentration  data
presented  in the  1997 report.
Industrial Point Sources

    This section addresses industrial sector emitters ~
boilers and processes ~ that are large enough to be
included in the 1990 emissions data base as individual
point sources. In most cases, these are facilities that
emit more than  100 tons per year of at least one
criteria air pollutant. For industrial point source VOC
and NOX emitters, trend analysis using the Emission
Reduction and Cost Analysis Model (ERCAM) was
conducted to project emissions for the years 2000 and
2010 (Pechan, 1994a; 1994b). The same procedures
employed in the VOC and NOX projections were also
used in developing CO, SO2, and PM10 estimates.

Overview of Approach

    In  order  to  estimate the  combined effects  of
activity growth and CAA controls on industrial point
sources, the base year 1990 point source inventory was
projected to 2000 and 2010 using growth factors from
the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), and CAA
control assumptions.  In its guidance for projecting
emissions by combining growth and control effects,
EPA identifies the following two options:

    1.   Aggregating all base  year  emissions  and
        control information at the county level and
        performing all projections on that basis; or

    2.   Retaining source-specific information in the
        base  year  inventory   and  performing
        projections  on a  source-by-source  basis
        (EPA, 199 la).

The second of these two approaches was selected, and
future year emissions were projected by multiplying
source-specific   base   year   emissions  by   a
corresponding growth factor and control factor.  The
decision to follow this option was based on the need
to use source-level emissions estimates as the input
for the air quality modeling phase of the prospective
analysis.

    The  growth factors used in this analysis for
projecting industrial point source emissions are from
1995 BEA industry-level Gross State Product (GSP)
and population projections by State (BEA, 1995).
ERCAM was used to model VOC and NOX emissions
under each of the control scenarios.   The  basic
approach  for projecting emissions in ERCAM is  as
follows:
  EMISr = EMISgo * GFACY *
                            1 - (REr * CEY)
                              - (RE9
where:
    EMISy

    EMIS90
    GFACY

    REY

    CEY

    RE
Emissions in projection
yeary
1990 base year emissions
Growth factor for
projection year y
Future year rule
effectiveness (RE)
Future year control
efficiency
Base year (1990) RE
Base year (1990) control
efficiency
                                               A-14

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    In cases where the future year control level (REY
* CEY)  is less stringent than the base year control
level, 1990 base year control levels are retained (i.e.,
REY and CEY equal 1990 levels in the  emission
projection algorithm).

Base Year Emissions

    The  base year  1990  point source  emission
inventory for the prospective analysis is Version 3 of
the NPI, originally developed in 1994 as a component
of  the Office of Policy, Planning and  Evaluation
(OPPE)'s  "National  Particulate  Matter   Study"
(Pechan, 1994c; Pechan, 1995a).  The NPI  is a 1990
air  emissions  inventory  for  the  United States
(excluding Alaska and  Hawaii).   This data base
contains plant and process level emissions for each of
the criteria pollutants examined in this analysis.

    Industrial point source emissions in the NPI were
estimated using emission estimates from the 1985
National Acid  Precipitation  Assessment  Program
(NAPAP) Inventory projected to 1990 using BEA
industrial sector earnings.  Emission estimates  for
1985 were projected to 1990 based on the State-level
growth  in earnings  by industry (2-digit  Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC)  code).  Each record in
the point source inventory was matched with the BEA
earnings data based  on the State and the 2-digit SIC
code.

    The  industrial sector 1990 emission estimation
procedures  do   not  account  for  technological
improvements since 1985  that may  have  lowered
emissions per unit of production/output, nor do they
account for emission controls that were added during
this period.  As  a  result, the base  year emissions
estimates, if  biased,  may overstate industrial point
source emissions  for 1990.  In the Western States,
with the incorporation of the GCVTC estimates, the
1990 emissions baseline for this region of the country
may be less biased.   The reason for this is  that  the
GCVTC inventory   is  based  upon  State-supplied
emissions information covering one of the years from
1990 to 1992. These more recent State reports reflect
the  effects  of  technological improvements  and
emission controls of the latter half of the 1980's that
the NPI baseline inventory does not capture.

    The NAPAP Inventory does not contain PM10
and PM25 emissions estimates.  As a result, the annual
PM10 and PM25 emissions figures in the NPI were
calculated from 1985  total  suspended particulate
(TSP) emissions. These  1985 TSP estimates were
projected to 1990 using BEA data and emissions
estimates  from each point source in  the  NAPAP
Inventory (excluding steam electric utilities).  What
portion  of 1990 TSP emissions was PM10 and what
portion was PM2 5 was then determined. In order to
make this determination,  however, the 1990 TSP
estimates first had to be adjusted  to eliminate  the
effect of particulate controls,  because  in order to
estimate  particle size distribution  using  EPA's
Compilation  of  Emission  Factors   (EPA,   1995),
uncontrolled source data were required. Once this
adjustment was made, PM10 and PM2 5 emissions were
calculated by applying a Source Classification Code
(SCC)-specific particle size distribution factor to the
1990 "uncontrolled"  TSP emissions estimates. Then,
the effects of primary and secondary controls on the
two pollutants were estimated and base year PM10 and
PM25 emissions were calculated.

Growth Projections

    The  base  year  1990 point  source emission
inventory was   projected  to  2000 and 2010 to
determine the effects of Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA
controls on future year emission levels.  Point source
emissions growth is based on 1995 BEA industry GSP
and  population  projections by State (BEA, 1995).
EPA guidance for projecting emissions (EPA, 1991a)
lists  the following economic variables  (in order of
preference) for projecting emissions:

    •   Product output;
    •   Value added;
    •   Earnings; and
    •   Employment.

In the absence of product output projections, EPA
guidance recommends value added projections. Value
                                               A-15

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
added is the difference between the value of a firm's
output and the inputs it purchases from other firms.
BEA GSP projections represent a measure of value
added, and are a fuller measure of growth than BEA's
earnings projections because earnings represents only
one component of GSP.  GSP measures reflect  the
value added to revenue from selling a product minus
the amounts  paid for inputs from other firms.  By
incorporating inputs to  production, GSP  reflects
future changes in production processes, efficiency, and
technological  changes. A comparison of BEA's 1995
GSP projections and BEA's 1990 earnings projections
indicates that GSP growth factors are slightly higher
than the earnings data. This is more often true  for
capital-intensive industries (e.g., manufacturing) than
for  labor-intensive  industries    (e.g.,  services).
Components  of GSP include payments to capital.
This is an important distinction to make because it
implicitly reflects the effect of factor substitution in
production.  As discussed in EPA's projections
guidance, factor substitution should be included in
growth  projections,  making value  added  data
preferable to  earnings data for projecting emissions.

    For reasons mentioned above,  the  1995  BEA
industry  GSP and population projections  by State
(BEA,  1995) were selected as the best available growth
factors for projecting 1990 emissions to 2000 and
2010  for the prospective  analysis.   BEA's  GSP
estimates are broken down by industry sector (2-digit
SIC codes) and State.  For each record in the industrial
point source  component of the NPI,  a link was
established between the State code, the SIC code field,
and the BEA GSP growth factors.  Then projected
future  year emissions for each point source record
were calculated by multiplying the 1990 emissions by
the corresponding BEA growth factor.

    BEA GSP growth factors were used to project
industrial point source emissions for the prospective
analysis because BEA data provide growth by industry
on  a  State-level  in  a  form   that  provides  a
straightforward link  to the industrial point source
component of the NPI (the SIC code field).  GSP
growth factors also comply with EPA's guidance  for
projecting emissions, since they represent a measure
of value added. In the development of the BEA GSP
projections, BEA ensures consistency with national
projections of population from the Bureau of the
Census, of the labor force from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics  (BLS), of the unemployment rate from the
Congressional Budget Office, and of mining output
from the Department of  Energy  (DOE).   It  is
important to note, however, that BEA's projections
are based on the  assumption that  past  economic
relationships will continue and that no major policy
changes will occur.  The growth factors used in this
analysis therefore do not explicitly reflect potential
future   changes   in   economic  conditions   or
technologies except those that may be reflected in
historical industry trends.

Control Scenarios

    The  Pre-CAAA scenario  represents expected
point source emissions after the application of BEA
GSP growth  factors,  with  1990  levels  of control
efficiency  retained.    The  Post-CAAA  scenario
incorporates control efficiencies based on measures
mandated by  the CAAA.  The control assumptions
associated  with each  of  the  two  scenarios  are
described separately below.
    Pre-CAAA Scenario

    The   Pre-CAAA   scenario   assumes   the
continuation  of 1990  control  efficiencies  for all
emitters.  Point source emissions of VOC, NOX, CO,
SO2, PM10, PM25,  and NH3 under the Pre-CAAA
scenario were projected to 2000 and 2010 by applying
BEA GSP growth factors to the base year 1990 point
source emission inventory based on the State and SIC
code data fields.
    Post-CAAA Scenario

    The Post-CAAA scenario represents point source
emissions after the application of BEA GSP growth
factors, and the effects of controls implemented under
the CAAA.   CAAA provisions affecting industrial
point sources include:
                                               A-16

-------
                                             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  •  Title III 2-year and 4-year MACT standards
      (VOC only);


  •  VOC and NOX RACT requirements in ozone
      NAAs;

  •  New control technique guidelines (CTGs);
                                       •  A 0.15 Ibs/MMBtu NOX cap on fuel
                                          combustors of 250 MMBtu per hour
                                          or above across the OTAG 37-State
                                          region; and


                                       •  Ozone rate-of-progress (HOP) requirements.

                                   The control assumptions used to estimate emissions
                                   from industrial point sources under the Post-CAAA
                                   scenario differ by pollutant.   For  each of the
                                   pollutants, the corresponding controls assumed to
                                   effect emissions in 2000 and 2010 are briefly described
                                   in Table A-5.
Table A-5
Industrial Point Source Control Assumptions For The Post-CAAA Scenario
Pollutant
                        Point Source Control Measures
VOC        Point source control measures for VOC include RACT, new CTGs, and Title III MACT
            controls. Title III MACT controls are generally as stringent, or more stringent, than RACT
            controls and are thus  the dominant control option for many source categories.  An 80
            percent RE is assumed for all control measures.

NOX         Industrial point source NOX controls include NOX RACT, OTAG level 2 NOX controls, and a
            0.15 Ibs/MMBtu cap on fuel combustors of 250  MMBtu per hour and above across the
            OTAG 37-State region. Major stationary source NOX emitters in marginal and above NAAs
            and in the northeast Ozone Transport Region (OTR) are required to install RACT-level
            controls under the ozone nonattainment-related provisions of Title I. RACT control levels
            are specified by each State and are based on  an assumed rule effectiveness (RE) of 80
            percent.

CO         No new CO controls were modeled for the Post-CAAA scenario, although some CO NAAs
            may have adopted  controls for specific point sources within NAAs.

SO2         SO2 nonattainment  provisions of the CAAA do not specify any mandatory controls for SO2
            emitters, though an emission cap of 5.6 million  tons of SO2 per year was set by the CAAA
            for industrial sources.

PM10 and    Possible control  initiatives for particulates under the CAA would result from the Title  I
PM25        provisions related to PM10 nonattainment. Because the controls are specific to each area,
            the CAAA PM10 emissions for industrial point sources were assumed to be equivalent to the
            Pre-CAAA emissions.  Point source PM25 emissions were also assumed to be unaffected
            by CAAA provisions.
NH,
Point source NH3 emissions were assumed to be unaffected by CAAA provisions.
                                          A-17

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Emission Summary

    National point source emission projections for
2000 and 2010 for each of the pollutants are shown in
Table A-6.  VOC emissions from industrial point
sources in these two years are primarily affected by
new National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAPs) under Title III and new CTGs
for achieving  further VOC emission  reductions in
ozone NAAs.  Source categories with significant VOC
emission reductions in this sector  include chemical
and   allied   product  manufacturing,  petroleum
refineries, solvent utilization, and petroleum storage.

    NOX emission reductions from industrial  fuel
combustors result mainly from the implementation of
RACT for major stationary sources in ozone NAAs
and addition of further NOX controls for  large  fuel
combustors  (larger  than  250  MMBtu per  hour)
throughout  the 37  OTAG  States.   The OTAG
stationary source  NOX  strategy included in this
analysis assumes that large fuel combustors meet a
0.15 Ibs/MMBtu NOX emission limit. With these and
other standards, CAA NOX emission benefits in 2010
for this sector are projected to  be more than one
million tons.

    Industrial point source emission projections for
the other criteria pollutants (CO, SO2, PM10, PM25,
and NH3) show no appreciable effect of the CAAA on
future year emissions. Stationary source CO emitters
could be subjected to further control requirements as
part of individual area CO State Implementation Plans
(SIPs), but this is unlikely.  Similarly for PM10, there
may be industrial source PM10 emission reductions
observed through application of best available control
measures in some PM10 attainment plans, but these
potential reductions are not captured in this analysis.
                                               A-18

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table A-6
Industrial Point Source Emission
(thousand tons per year)


Pollutant/Source Category
VOC
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
NOX
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
TOTAL
CO
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
TOTAL

Summaries



1990

126.1
10.3
1,066.2
72.5
238.2
327.0
1,126.2
490.1
9.7
0.3
3,466.6

1,955.8
103.9
275.4
81.0
99.9
308.0
2.5
2.4
20.7
2,849.7

529.1
96.8
1,923.4
2,106.3
436.3
754.0
2.5
54.8
96.7
5,999.7


by Pollutant For 1990,

2000
Pre-
CAAA

135.9
12.3
1,101.4
85.8
243.1
372.5
1,256.7
540.9
9.9
0.4
3,758.9

2,181.8
122.9
281.5
103.0
104.1
350.9
2.9
2.6
23.5
3,173.3

586.8
118.4
1,957.2
2,418.1
475.1
947.1
2.8
51.5
106.8
6,663.9

2000
Post-

2000, and


2010
CAAA Pre-CAAA

134.9
12.3
878.9
83.1
160.2
365.3
1,036.0
405.7
9.9
0.4
3,086.7

1,213.5
77.4
263.0
98.9
104.1
277.6
2.9
2.6
20.4
2,060.4

586.8
118.4
1,957.2
2,418.1
475.1
947.1
2.8
51.5
106.8
6,663.9

153.7
14.4
1,266.6
90.3
269.5
418.9
1,394.1
617.0
11.1
0.6
4,236.2

2,464.5
141.1
322.2
111.3
111.1
394.6
3.2
3.0
26.9
3,577.9

656.7
140.1
2,233.0
2,486.1
545.9
1,134.1
3.2
58.7
118.7
7,376.6

2010*


2010
Post-CAAA

157.7
14.9
1,007.4
87.2
166.7
417.3
1,120.0
467.5
11.7
0.6
3,450.9

1,255.9
84.1
300.0
104.7
108.1
302.8
3.1
3.0
22.9
2,184.5

656.7
140.1
2,233.0
2,486.1
545.9
1,134.1
3.2
58.7
118.7
7,376.6
A-19

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010



Pollutant/Source Category
S02
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
TOTAL
PM10
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
PM2.5
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL


1990

2,482.2
202.4
440.1
664.7
434.8
393.6
0.8
4.6
21.0
4,644.2

221.1
16.6
62.5
137.9
28.9
374.3
2.1
64.4
8.0
10.7
926.4

162.0
8.2
42.7
96.3
19.5
224.3
1.8
26.5
6.7
1.6
589.5
2000
Pre-
CAAA

2,861.9
243.7
486.6
808.9
449.5
456.4
0.9
5.4
22.8
5,336.2

245.2
19.8
65.4
167.2
31.7
427.3
2.6
73.8
8.7
13.7
1,055.3

178.1
9.7
45.7
116.7
21.3
257.9
2.2
30.5
7.2
2.1
671.5
2000
Post-
CAAA

2,861.9
243.7
486.6
808.9
449.5
456.4
0.9
5.4
22.8
5,336.2

245.2
19.8
65.4
167.2
31.7
427.3
2.6
73.8
8.7
13.7
1,055.3

178.1
9.7
45.7
116.7
21.3
257.9
2.2
30.5
7.2
2.1
671.5

2010
Pre-CAAA

3,262.0
282.9
546.4
857.1
489.3
522.6
1.0
6.4
26.1
5,993.9

275.8
23.0
74.2
179.4
36.0
485.5
3.0
83.6
9.7
16.9
1,186.9

200.0
11.1
52.0
124.4
24.1
294.7
2.5
34.4
8.0
2.6
754.0

2010
Post-CAAA

3,262.0
282.9
546.4
857.1
489.3
522.6
1.0
6.4
26.1
5,993.9

275.8
23.0
74.2
179.4
36.0
485.5
3.0
83.6
9.7
16.9
1,186.9

200.0
11.1
52.0
124.4
24.1
294.7
2.5
34.4
8.0
2.6
754.0
A-20

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Pollutant/Source Category
NH3
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
TOTAL
1990

10.0
0.3
182.6
5.9
42.8
2.1
243.6
2000
Pre-
CAAA

10.3
0.3
202.6
6.8
48.7
2.1
270.8
2000
Post-
CAAA

10.3
0.3
202.6
6.8
48.7
2.1
270.8
2010 2010
Pre-CAAA Post-CAAA

11.3
0.3
231.6
7.0
55.1
2.1
307.5

11.3
0.3
231.6
7.0
55.1
2.1
307.5
     The totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Totals may not add due to rounding.
Utilities

    EPA used the IPM to estimate future year heat
input, SO2 and NOX emissions, fuel type, and optimal
control  techniques for each current and planned
electric  utility unit.5   The  IPM modeling  inputs,
outputs, and key assumptions are discussed in more
detail in EPA 1997b.  This section focuses  on the
steps used to supplement these projections by adding
emissions of VOC, CO, PM10, PM25, and NH3, as well
as  adding data elements  needed  for  air  quality
modeling (location and stack parameters).

Overview of Approach

    For the prospective analysis, EPA matched each
unit in the IPM file to the 1990 NPI (Pechan, 1994c;
Pechan, 1995a) based on the Office of the Regulatory
Information System  (ORIS) plant and boiler code.
For units  that were matched, stack parameters and
location coordinates were taken directly from the NPI.
VOC, CO, PM10, and PM25 emissions were calculated
using AP-42 emission rates (standard EPA emission
factors  that are  developed from  stack  tests and
engineering calculations)  and control efficiencies as
reported in the NPI.  NH3 emissions were calculated
for ammonia slippage where boilers were forecast to
install selective catalytic reduction (SCR) as the  control
technique  to reduce NOX emissions.
Base Year Emissions

    The base year emission inventory used in the air
quality  modeling  portion  of  the  Section   812
prospective analysis is Version 3 of the NPI.  The
utility portion of this inventory, which covers fossil-
fuel  fired  steam electric generating boilers, was
developed from DOE Form EIA-767 (the Steam-
Electric Plant Operation and Design Report) fuel use
data combined with AP-42  emission factors and
emission limits from EIA-767. The NPI also includes
gas turbines and internal combustion engines to the
extent that these were included in the 1985 NAPAP.

    The IPM uses a different modeling set as input
for emission projections.  This set is consistent with
the NPI in that boilers included in the NPI are also in
the IPM modeling set.  The IPM data set, however,
also includes combustion turbines (more than those
included in the NPI) and non-utility generators.  Some
of these units may be included in the NPI as part of
the industrial point source inventory or area source
fuel combustion (and would thus be  double-counted
in the projections) while others may be missing from
the NPI data  set.   It should  be  noted that in
projection year 2000, under the Pre-CAAA scenario,
these units account for just over 1 percent of total
utility NOX emissions and only 0.1 percent of total
utility  SO2  emissions.   Therefore,  the  potential
exclusion of the units from the 1990 base year data set
and the potential double-counting in the projection
year is expected to have minimal effect on air quality,
benefits, and cost modeling.
    5 The IPM was constructed and is maintained by ICF, an
EPA contractor.
                                               A-21

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Control Scenarios

    The Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA scenario NOX
and SO2 emissions were modeled using IPM (EPA,
1997b). Heat input by unit under each projection year
and scenario was  also derived from  IPM results.
Default emission factors were applied to the unit-
specific heat input to calculate VOC, CO, PM10, and
PM25 emissions.  For these pollutants, the Pre-CAAA
and Post-CAAA emission rates were assumed to be
the same. Any differences in emissions between these
scenarios are due to shifts in operation between units
or fuel changes (including ash content of the coals as
well as switching to natural gas) predicted by IPM.
Differences in NH3 emissions between the scenarios
is  a fraction of added SCR controls to reduce NOX
under the Post-CAAA scenario.

Emission Summary

    Table  A-7 is a summary of utility emissions by
unit and fuel type. Oil- and gas-fired units have been
grouped together, because information on the division
of fuel for  boilers burning oil and  gas  was  not
contained  in the unit-level file developed from IPM.
Utility SO2 and  NOX emissions are affected most by
the CAAA.   Differences between  Pre-CAAA  and
Post-CAAA NOX emissions result from a combination
of Title IV - Acid Rain regulations, and nonattainment
provisions that require NOX RACT controls for major
stationary  sources in ozone NAAs.  The anticipated
effect of the OTC MOU and a regional NOX trading
program on  stationary source NOX  emissions in the
eastern portion of the United States also influence the
Post-CAAA utility NOX emissions estimates  (OTC,
1994).  In 2010, the difference between Pre-CAAA
and Post-CAAA utility NOX is about 5 million tons.

    SO2 emission reductions attributable to the CAA
is  the  result of the  Title  IV - Acid  Rain control
program. Through this program, annual emissions of
SO2 are to be reduced by 10 million tons from 1980
levels  through  a market-based allowance  system.
Differences between Pre-CAAA and  Post-CAAA SO2
estimates  for  coal-fired  units  reflect  flue  gas
desulfurization installations and some switching to
lower sulfur coal  in  the  Post-CAAA case.  SO2
emissions from oil/gas units are actually lower in the
Pre-CAAA scenario because a higher percentage of
units would have been expected to burn coal with less
stringent air pollution emission limits. The 2010 Pre-
CAAA  estimates  show no  significant oil use  by
utilities.
                                               A-22

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table A-7
Utility Emission Summary*
(thousand tons per year)
Pollutant/Source Category
VOC




NOX



CO




SO2



PM10



PM,5



NH3




Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL

Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
Coal
Gas/Oil/Other
Internal Combustion
TOTAL
2000 2000
1990 Pre-CAAA Post-CAAA

27.1
7.8
1.9
36.8
6,689.5
679.1
57.1
7,425.7

232.6
81.9
14.7
329.2
15,221.9
611.9
30.7
15,897.5
268.4
10.6
4.1
283.1
99.2
5.9
3.7
108.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
* The totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States,

23.6
1.8
5.6
31.0
7,895.7
324.1
97.3
8,317.1

191.8
48.0
50.7
290.5
16,111.3
44.1
0.0
16,155.4
244.7
1.5
6.1
252.3
82.9
1.3
6.0
90.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
excluding Alaska

23.1
1.9
6.1
31.1
3,779.0
216.0
82.1
4,077.1

188.7
49.3
55.4
293.4
10,315.0
175.5
0.0
10,490.5
245.1
2.5
6.6
254.2
82.3
2.4
6.6
91.3
33.3
0.0
0.0
33.3
and Hawaii.
2010
Pre-CAAA

26.3
1.5
21.2
49.0
8,700.3
220.0
134.4
9,054.7

215.3
44.8
193.6
453.7
17,696.0
0.0
0.0
17,696.0
281.1
1.0
23.4
305.5
97.0
1.0
23.3
121.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

2010
Post-CAAA

24.7
1.7
23.5
49.9
3,610.0
72.6
83.7
3,766.3

202.5
45.9
214.8
463.2
9,776.6
84.2
0.0
9,860.8
249.0
1.6
26.0
276.6
83.7
1.6
25.8
111.1
221.9
0.0
0.0
221.9

A-23

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Nonroad Engines/Vehicles

    The nonroad engines/vehicles sector includes all
transportation sources that  are  not  counted  as
highway vehicles.  Thus, this sector includes marine
vessels, railroads,  aircraft, and  nonroad  internal
combustion engines and vehicles. Nonroad engines
are significant emitters of NOX, PM10, and  VOC.
Diesel engines account for most of the NOX and PM10
emissions, while  gasoline engines emit most  of the
VOC.   This  section  contains summaries  of 1990
emissions   from  major  source categories  in  the
nonroad engine/vehicle sector. The growth factors
and control efficiencies used to project emissions to
2000 and 2010 under the two control scenarios are
also described.

Overview of Approach

    Nonroad  VOC  and  NOX  emissions  were
projected using ERCAM; similar modeling techniques
were used for the remaining pollutants. The algorithm
for projecting nonroad emissions is:
     EMISY = EMIS90 * GFACr * [l  - CEY * PEY]
where:
    EMISY

    EMIS90
    GFAC

    CEY

    PEY
emissions in projection
year y
1990 emissions
growth factor for
projection year y
control efficiency for
projection year y
penetration rate for
projection year y
    The  control  efficiency  is a  function  of the
percentage reduction or decrease in  emission  rate
expected through  new  engine  standards and the
fraction of emissions covered through fleet turnover.
The penetration rate accounts for the fraction of
emissions from affected  engine types  (generally
resulting from horsepower (hp)  cutoffs) in a broad
engine category (e.g., construction).
    Growth factors applied are based on the  1995
BEA GSP projections by State and industry and
population projections. The 1990 base year emissions
are from Version 3 of the NPI.  Under the Pre-CAAA
scenario, no changes in engine standards are modeled
(future year  emission rates  are  assumed to  be
equivalent to 1990  rates).  Under the Post-CAAA
scenario, Federal  nonroad engine  standards are
incorporated.  All modeling is at the county and SCC
level to retain necessary details for cost and air quality
modeling.

Base Year Emissions

    The 1990 emission estimates for nonroad vehicles
are  from the 1990 NPI.  The  emissions in  the NPI
from sources in the nonroad engines/vehicles sector
are  based on one of the following sources:   (1) a
nonroad emission inventory compiled by EPA's OMS
(EPA, 1991b); or (2) the 1985 NAPAP Area Source
Emissions  Inventory.   EPA's OMS  inventories
provided the majority of criteria pollutant emissions
for the base year 1990 inventory, accounting for nearly
90 percent of VOC emissions  and nearly  60 percent
of NOX emissions.  The remaining emissions for the
nonroad  engines/vehicles sector are based on the
NAPAP emissions inventory.

Growth Projections

    The 1990 estimates from the NPI for the nonroad
engine/vehicle sector are projected to 2000 and 2010
to estimate the impact of CAAA controls on future
year emission levels.   For  each major nonroad
engine/vehicle  category  a  growth  surrogate  is
identified for estimating future emissions.  Growth
surrogates  for  nonroad engine/vehicle  categories
include  1995 BEA projections of population for
recreational  and   lawn  and  garden   equipment
categories,  and an  appropriate  GSP  by SIC  code
estimate  for all other categories.   SIC  codes are
assigned to area source categories according to  an
assignment made for other EPA projects, such as the
ozone and  PM  NAAQS  cost  analyses.   This
assignment of nonroad engine/vehicle categories to
BEA indicators is shown in Table A-8.
                                              A-24

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The 1995 BEA GSP and population projections
by  State and  industry were  selected  as  the best
available growth factors for projecting 1990 emissions
to 2000 and 2010 for the prospective analysis (BEA,
1995).  EPA's projection guidance recommends that
area source emissions  be projected using surrogate
growth  indicators  such  as BEA, or  using local
studies/surveys (EPA, 199la).   BEA  provided  a
consistent set of projections by SIC code that could be
easily applied to the 1990 nonroad engine/vehicle
sector across all geographic regions.

Control Scenarios

    Emissions  from  engines  used  in  nonroad
equipment are a significant source of NOX, VOC, and
PM  emissions.  In some  areas  of the country,
emissions from nonroad engines represent a third of
the total mobile source NOX and VOC emissions and
over two-thirds of the mobile source PM emissions.

    Pre-CAAA Scenario

    The Pre-CAAA scenario incorporates the growth
factors described above, and assumes that future year
emission rates from nonroad engines remain the same
as 1990 levels.
                                              A-25

-------
Table A-8
BEA Growth Forecasts by Major Source Category:
Nonroad Engines/Vehicles
Major Category
BEA Growth Category*
                                                                                                  Annual Growth (% per year):
1990-2000
1990-2010
Nonroad Internal Combustion Engines and Vehicles:
     Airport Service Equipment
     Construction Equipment
     Farm Equipment
     Industrial Equipment
     Lawn & Garden Equipment
     Light Commercial Equipment
     Logging Equipment
     Recreational Marine Vessels
     Recreational Vehicles
Aircraft:
     Military
     Commercial
     Civil
Railroads
Commercial Marine Vessels
Transportation by air (SIC 45)
Construction (SIC 15, 16, and 17)
Farm (SIC 01)
Total Manufacturing
Population
Total Manufacturing
Agricultural Services, Forestry, Fisheries (SIC 07, 08, 09)
Population
Population

Federal, military
Transportation by air (SIC 45)
Transportation by air (SIC 45)
Railroad Transportation (SIC 40):  Earnings
Water Transportation (SIC 44)	
    5.8%
    0.8%
    2.4%
    1.9%
    1.1%
    1.9%
    7.8%
    1.1%
    1.1%

    -1.2%
    5.8%
    5.8%
    -1.5%
    -0.5%
    5.5%
    1.0%
    2.4%
    1.9%
    1.0%
    1.9%
    7.4%
    1.0%
    1.0%

    -0.4%
    5.5%
    5.5%
    -0.9%
    -0.2%
*BEA growth category refers to GSP projections for each industry, unless otherwise specified.
                                                             A-26

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Post-CAAA Scenario

    The CAAA specifically directed EPA to study the
contribution  of  nonroad  engines  to  urban  air
pollution, and to regulate them, if warranted.  In 1991,
EPA released a study that documented higher than
expected emission levels across a broad spectrum of
nonroad engines and equipment (EPA, 1991b).  In
response, EPA initiated several regulatory programs
for nonroad engines. The impact of these programs
is incorporated in the Post-CAAA scenario.

Emission Summary

    A summary  of projected emissions  by engine
classification is shown in Table A-9.  Future year VOC
and NOX emissions are the pollutants most affected by
the CAAA, as most of the new engine standards focus
on controlling these ozone precursors.  CO, SO2, and
PM10 emissions under the Pre-CAAA scenario are
nearly equal  to  emissions  under  the Post-CAAA
scenario since CAAA controls only affect NOX and
VOC  emissions  from the nonroad  engine/vehicle
sector. Effects in 2000 are modest because the new
engine standards  do not  affect emissions until the
mid-to-late 1990s.  More dramatic differences are seen
in 2010.

    Gasoline-powered engines are the most significant
nonroad VOC emitter, so most of the VOC emissions
difference in this  sector is the result of small spark
ignition (SI) engine standards.  Lawnmowers, for
example, are affected by these new standards.

    NOX emission benefits shown in Table A-9 for
non-road engines result principally from compression
ignition (CI)  (diesel engine)  standards.   In 2010,
difference between the Post-CAAA and Pre-CAAA
nonroad diesel engine NOX emissions is almost 0.5
million tons.  These engines  are primarily used in
construction equipment.   Other off-highway NOX
sources with lower emissions levels under the Post-
CAAA scenario include railroads (diesel locomotives)
and  marine vessels.   In contrast, a  small NOX
disbenefit is associated with non-road gasoline engines
in the Post-CAAA scenario; this is because the small
SI engine  standard  for   hydrocarbons  (HCs) is
expected to increase NOX emissions.
                                              A-27

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table A-9
Nonroad National Emission Projections by Source Category*
(thousand tons per year)
Pollutant/Source Category
VOC






NOX





CO






SO2





PM10






Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL
Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL

Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL
Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL
Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL
1990

1,596.8
185.0
191.9
36.0
44.2
2,053.9
176.0
1,438.4
139.7
183.7
898.0
2,835.8

12,047.2
781.9
960.9
58.0
121.8
13,969.8
3.2
16.7
8.0
147.5
66.6
242.1
42.1
185.6
40.4
24.2
44.0
336.3
2000
Pre-CAAA

1,810.8
225.3
242.6
33.6
37.2
2,349.5
205.4
1,751.4
194.8
169.8
759.4
3,080.9

13,973.8
948.6
1,423.6
54.1
102.8
16,503.0
3.6
19.0
10.9
139.8
56.3
229.6
47.0
227.3
38.1
22.7
37.3
372.5
2000
Post-CAAA

1,549.3
225.3
242.6
33.6
37.2
2,088.0
220.5
1,603.0
194.8
169.8
759.4
2,947.5

13,417.5
948.6
1,423.7
54.1
102.8
15,946.6
3.6
19.0
10.9
139.8
56.3
229.6
47.0
227.3
38.1
22.7
37.3
372.5
2010
Pre-CAAA

2,004.0
261.6
300.3
34.4
35.5
2,635.8
237.0
2,032.5
249.2
173.2
725.9
3,417.8

15,735.4
1,097.3
1,855.9
55.5
98.2
18,842.3
4.1
22.4
13.8
142.3
53.8
236.5
51.6
262.6
41.3
23.3
35.7
414.4
2010
Post-CAAA

1,257.4
261.6
300.3
34.4
35.4
1,889.2
269.8
1,546.9
249.2
161.5
513.6
2,740.9

15,020.6
1,097.3
1,855.9
55.5
98.2
18,127.5
4.1
22.4
13.8
142.3
53.8
236.5
51.6
187.1
41.3
23.3
33.1
336.3
A-28

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010


Pollutant/Source Category

1990
2000
Pre-CAAA
2000
Post-CAAA
2010
Pre-CAAA
2010
Post-CAAA
PM2.5






NH3






Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL

Nonroad Gasoline
Nonroad Diesel
Aircraft
Marine Vessels
Railroads
TOTAL
35.0
170.8
28.5
17.8
40.5
292.6

0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
1.8
2.9
* The totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States,
39.2
209.1
26.9
16.6
34.3
326.1

0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
1.5
2.6
excluding Alaska
39.2
209.1
26.9
16.6
34.3
326.1

0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
1.5
2.6
and Hawaii.
42.9
241.6
29.1
17.0
32.8
363.5

0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
1.4
2.5

42.9
172.1
29.1
17.0
30.4
291.7

0.0
0.0
0.0
1.1
1.4
2.5

Motor Vehicles

    Motor vehicles  are a significant contributor of
VOC,  NOX, and CO emissions.  In  1990, motor
vehicles contributed 30 percent  of  total  VOC, 33
percent of total NOX, and 66 percent of total CO
emissions.  The CAA includes provisions  to reduce
motor vehicles emissions in both Title I and Title II.

Overview of Approach

    The general procedure for calculating historic and
projection year motor vehicle emissions is to multiply
activity, in the  form of VMT by pollutant specific
emission factor estimates.  ERCAM (Pechan, 1996)
was used to project motor vehicle emissions for VOC,
NOx, and CO.  Emission factors for these pollutants
were  generated using the  EPA's  motor  vehicle
emission factor model MOBILESa (EPA,  1993a).
PM10, PM25, and SO2 emission factors were  generated
using another EPA motor vehicle emission factor
model, PARTS (EPA, 1994). Emission factors for all
pollutants are modeled using common assumptions
about ambient temperatures and vehicle speeds at the
State level.  Control programs (I/M,  reformulated
gasoline) are specified at the county level. Temporally,
emissions are calculated by month and summed to
develop annual emission estimates.

Base Year Emissions

    Base year emissions are from Version 3 of the
NPI.  The NPI VMT, by county/SCC (i.e., vehicle
type/functional roadway class), are based on  data
from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS).
The HPMS area wide data base contains State-level
VMT estimates for rural and small urban areas, as well
as separate VMT estimates for each large urban area
within  the State. VMT  estimates for each of these
categories are  by functional roadway class.   Two
procedures were performed to convert this VMT data
into a county/SCC level format. First, each State's
rural, small urban, and large urban VMT by functional
roadway class were distributed  to the county level
based on population  data.  Second,  the resulting
county/functional roadway class VMT were allocated
to the vehicle type  level based on HPMS and other
FHWA data.   The  resulting  VMT estimates are
county-level estimates segregated by vehicle type and
roadway class.

    The 1990 emission estimates were calculated by
applying 1990 control-specific emission factors to the
                                               A-29

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
VMT estimates.  The  1990 emission  factors were
generated using  historical  temperatures,  gasoline
volatility Reid  vapor  pressure  (RVP)  data,  and
inspection  and  maintenance  (I/M)  information.
Emissions   estimates   are  calculated   at  the
county/vehicle type/roadway type level, allowing for
county differences in I/M programs.

Growth Projections

    Vehicle Miles Traveled

    The  general procedure used to project  motor
vehicle emissions was to grow 1990 activity (VMT) to
the future year (2000 or 2010) and then to apply future
year emission factors. Estimates of national growth in
VMT  from the  MOBILE4.1 Fuel  Consumption
Model (FCM) (EPA, 1991c; Wolcott and Kahlbaum,
1991) were used as the basis for VMT projections.
Primary  MOBILE4.1  FCM  inputs  were  vehicle
registrations, VMT, and fuel economy for each vehicle
class. MOBILE4.1 FCM outputs included estimates
of  fleet fuel  consumption,  VMT,  on-road  fuel
economy, and vehicle registrations.  All are national
values.   Historical vehicle stock information is
available  from  R.L.  Polk and  Department  of
Transportation (DOT). The MOBILE4.1 FCM relies
primarily on the R.L. Polk data to estimate historical
stocks of cars and light trucks in 1990, and uses DOT
and   American   Association   of   Automobile
Manufacturers statistics to estimate truck stocks by
weight class.

    Modeled Motor Vehicle Emission
    Rates

    The tunnel study portion of the South Coast Air
Quality Study (SCAQS) (Ingalls et al., 1989) showed
that there were wide discrepancies between measured
and  modeled  motor  vehicle   emissions   in an
experiment performed in 1987 at a tunnel near Los
Angeles. Running VOC emission factors were from
1.4 to 6.9 times the emission factors calculated from
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) computer
program output, measured CO emission rates were
from 1.1 to 3.6 times modeled emission factors, and
measured NOX emission rates were 0.6 to 1.4 times
the modeled values. Since that time there have been
many research studies  performed to  attempt to
identify the reasons for  the observed discrepancies
and  to modify the  two  models  developed  by
regulatory agencies (EPA's MOBILE emission factor
model  and   CARB's   emission  factors  model
(EMFAQ) to perform better in estimating real world
emission rates.

    It is difficult to estimate how present uncertainties
in estimating motor vehicle emissions might affect the
estimated difference between  Pre-CAAA and Post-
CAAA  emissions.    The  difference  between  the
scenarios will  widen if the  excess  emissions  are
successfully  reduced by Post-CAAA  measures.
However, if the excess emissions are irreducible, or not
influenced by  new Post-CAAA initiatives, then the
relative emissions difference between the cases would
be expected to  remain the same as  is estimated in this
analysis.

Control Scenarios

    This section describes the control assumptions
for the Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA scenarios. Table
A-10 summarizes the geographic applicability of all
controls modeled.

    Pre-CAAA Scenario

    The  Pre-CAAA  scenario   applies  estimated
increases in activity  levels with emission  factors
reflecting control programs  in place prior to  the
passage of the 1990 Amendments.  The motor vehicle
controls  applied under  this  scenario include  the
Federal  Vehicle Motor Control Program (FMVCP)
(tailpipe standards), Phase I gasoline volatility (RVP
limits), and current 1990  I/M programs.

    PM10  emission  factors  representing  gasoline
vehicles do not  vary between the Pre-CAAA  and
Post-CAAA control  scenarios.   Pre-CAAA PM10
emission factors for diesel vehicles were generated by
freezing emission  rates  at 1993 levels, since  the
PARTS model does  not calculate emission factors
without application of CAA tailpipe standards.  A
composite diesel emission factor by diesel vehicle type
was  then  calculated by  applying  by-model-year
emission rates  by yearly travel fractions.
                                               A-30

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    Post-CAAA Scenario

    The Post-CAAA control scenario incorporates the
likely effects of controls mandated under the CAAA.
Motor vehicle controls applied under this  scenario
include  CAA tailpipe  standards  and  evaporative
standards, Phase II RVP limits, reformulated gasoline,
oxygenated fuel, I/M (none, basic,  low enhanced,
OTR low enhanced, and high enhanced), and low
emission vehicles.  Of the above mentioned controls,
only I/M and reformulated gasoline affect particulate
and SO2 emission factors.  Each of the CAA controls
and their applicability are summarized in Table A-10.

Emission Summary

    Table A-ll summarizes  national emissions by
vehicle type.  Comparison of Pre- and Post-CAAA
scenarios  shows  motor  vehicle  VOC emissions
reductions of 28 percent in 2000 and 46 percent in
2010 as a larger fraction of the vehicle fleet meets low
emission vehicle (LEV) program emission standards.
CAA tailpipe standards, reformulated gasoline, and
I/M requirements also contribute to declines in motor
vehicle VOC emissions.

    For  motor  vehicle-emitted  NOX,  again  the
differences between Post-CAAA  and  Pre-CAAA
scenarios are most pronounced in 2010 (38 percent,
compared with a 14 percent difference in 2000) as the
49 State LEV program becomes more effective with
fleet turnover.

    The Post-CAAA scenario also shows that there
are expected to be significant CO benefits achieved
through the  Nonattainment  (Title  I)  and Motor
Vehicle Provisions (Title II) of the 1990 Amendments.
The most important new provisions and programs
expected to be providing these benefits,  in order of
estimated  importance,  include:   enhanced  vehicle
emission inspections, wintertime oxygenated  fuel use,
and LEV program adoption.

    SO2 motor vehicle emissions decrease under the
Post-CAAA scenario as a result of sulfur limits for
diesel fuel.  Section 211 of the CAAA limited the
sulfur content of motor vehicle diesel fuel to 0.05
percent (by weight) beginning October 1, 1993.
    Motor vehicle PM10 and PM25 emission changes
result from CAA tailpipe standards. Almost all of the
motor vehicle-emitted PM changes occur because of
PM exhaust emission standards for heavy-duty diesel
trucks pDDTs).
                                              A-31

-------
                                               The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Table A-10
Applicability of Mobile Source Control Programs
        Control Measure
                        Applicability
Pre-CAAA Scenario

FMVCP

Phase I RVP

I/M

Post-CAAA Scenario

Phase II RVP

CAA Tailpipe Standards

CAA Evaporative Controls

Heavy Duty NOX Standard

Federal Reformulated Gasoline

Oxygenated Fuel

Basic I/M

Low Enhanced  I/M

High Enhanced I/M

National LEV

California LEV
National

National (standard varies by region)

Programs in place in 1990



National (standard varies by region)

National

National

National

Nine areas required to adopt this program under the CAA plus areas

All CO NAAs

All moderate ozone NAAs, moderate CO NAAs, and areas with I/M in

All areas previously required to implement high enhanced I/M who are

Serious and above ozone NAAs, in metropolitan areas in the OTR with

Nationally, with the exception of California

California
                                             A-32

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table A-1 1
National Highway Vehicle Emissions by Vehicle Type*
(thousand tons)


voc









NOX









CO









SO2









Vehicle
Type

LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total

LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total

LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total

LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total
1990


4,207.2
954.0
803.5
466.9
11.6
2.8
313.9
50.5
6,810.5

3,406.1
775.2
557.8
333.1
35.9
7.4
2,318.4
11.6
7,445.6

40,073.4
8,458.6
6,533.4
5,895.0
29.1
5.7
1,300.1
185.6
62,480.9

143.0
37.6
20.5
10.8
12.7
2.8
340.1
0.3
567.7
2000
Pre-CAAA

3,823.6
1,089.0
711.4
291.1
1.4
1.0
367.5
42.5
6,327.6

3,633.6
1,045.5
646.6
333.2
4.0
2.5
2,135.1
14.1
7,814.6

36,759.0
10,566.9
6,867.5
2,921.9
3.8
2.3
1,827.2
220.8
59,169.6

151.6
50.1
25.6
11.7
1.1
0.8
390.3
0.4
631.6
2000
Post-CAAA

2,692.9
793.5
550.4
228.8
1.4
1.0
227.2
37.8
4,533.1

2,873.8
815.8
565.1
324.3
4.0
2.5
2,051.7
14.1
6,651.3

26,920.2
7,947.5
5,349.4
2,766.0
3.8
2.3
1,826.8
209.5
45,025.5

151.6
50.1
25.6
11.7
0.3
0.2
97.6
0.4
337.4
2010
Pre-CAAA

4,311.9
1,341.0
867.1
279.8
<0.1
0.4
469.6
49.9
7,319.7

4,161.6
1,326.1
821.6
392.6
<0.1
1.0
2,359.1
16.5
9,078.6

40,304.6
13,054.8
8,457.5
1,807.1
<0.1
1.0
2,397.1
259.3
66,281.6

178.0
64.0
32.6
14.1
<0.1
0.3
480.3
0.5
769.6
2010
Post-CAAA

2,263.6
760.6
583.0
142.2
<0.1
0.4
151.8
44.3
3,945.9

2,402.1
783.8
631.6
296.3
<0.1
1.0
1,443.0
16.5
5,574.4

23,711.9
7,986.4
6,102.3
1,639.3
<0.1
1.0
2,208.3
245.9
41,895.1

178.0
64.0
32.6
14.1
<0.1
0.1
120.1
0.5
409.2
A-33

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Vehicle
Type
PM10
LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total
PM2.5
LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total
NH3
LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
HDGV
LDDV
LDDT
HDDV
MC
Total
1990
2000 2000

Pre-CAAA Post-CAAA

63.1
15.2
16.9
10.6
8.8
1.7
238.2
0.4
354.7

38.1
9.8
11.1
7.0
7.8
1.5
215.7
0.2
291.0

165.6
23.6
8.6
0.4
<0.1
<0.1
0.2
<0.1
198.5

66.1
18.4
10.7
8.0
0.6
0.6
186.9
0.4
291.7

36.9
11.2
6.7
5.3
0.5
0.5
164.4
0.2
225.7

262.8
58.5
25.8
1.6
<0.1
<0.1
0.4
<0.1
349.2
The totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States,




66.1
18.4
10.7
8.0
0.6
0.4
152.9
0.4
257.6

36.9
11.2
6.7
5.3
0.5
0.3
134.4
0.2
195.6

262.8
58.5
25.8
1.6
<0.1
<0.1
0.4
<0.1
349.2
2010
Pre-CAAA

75.3
23.0
11.5
6.6
<0.1
0.2
179.8
0.5
297.0

43.4
13.8
7.0
4.3
<0.1
0.2
164.7
0.3
233.7

314.0
80.6
36.8
2.9
<0.1
<0.1
0.5
0.1
434.9
excluding Alaska and Hawaii.


2010
Post-CAAA

75.3
23.0
11.5
6.6
<0.1
0.1
88.4
0.5
205.4

43.4
13.8
7.0
4.3
<0.1
0.1
73.9
0.2
142.7

314.0
80.6
36.8
2.9
<0.1
<0.1
0.5
0.1
434.9
Totals may not add due to
rounding.
A-34

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Area  Sources

    This section discusses  the base year 1990 area
source inventory, and the development of the future
year emission estimates for area sources. Area sources
include  small stationary sources not included in the
point source data base (e.g., dry cleaners, graphic arts,
industrial fuel  combustion, gasoline marketing) and
solvent  use (e.g., consumer  solvents,  architectural
coatings). The growth factors and control efficiencies
used  to project the base year 1990  area source
inventory to 2000 and 2010 under the two control
scenarios are also described, and alternative growth
indicators for  area sources  are identified.  ERCAM
was  used to project area  source  VOC and NOX
emissions under the two control  scenarios.   The
approach used in ERCAM was  also used to project
controlled  area source CO, SO2, PM25, and PM10
emissions.

Overview of Approach

    The base  year 1990 area source inventory was
projected to 2000 and 2010 to estimate the combined
effects of growth and CAA controls on area sources.
In order to project  emissions,  a surrogate activity
indicator (e.g., population, gasoline consumption) was
identified  for  each  area source category.  In  its
guidance for projecting emissions for area sources,
EPA identifies preferred growth indicators for each
area source category  (EPA, 1991a).  Pechan chose a
growth indicator for each area source category based
on EPA's guidance, the availability of projection data
in  the  relevant  years   of  analysis,   and   the
appropriateness  of  the  measure  for  projecting
emissions.   Emissions  were  then projected  using
growth  factors calculated based on projections for
each activity indicator. The growth rates represent an
increase or decrease  in the basic activity that causes
emissions.

    Area source emissions for VOC and NOX under
each control scenario were projected using ERCAM;
similar modeling techniques were used for the other
criteria pollutants. The algorithm for projecting area
source emissions is:
   EMSr = EMIS90
GFACV
where:
                             1 - (CEY * REJ
                             1  - (CE90 * RE90)
    EMISY
    EMIS90
    GFACY

    CEY
    REY
    CE9
    REQ
   emissions in projection
   yeary
   1990 emissions
   growth factor for
   projection year y
   control efficiency in
   projection year y
   rule effectiveness (RE) for
   the control in projection
   yeary
   1990 control efficiency
   1990 RE
    In cases where the control level for the projection
year control strategy is less than the control level in
1990,1990 control levels are retained in the projection
year.  All computations and reporting are at the
county/SCC level for air quality and cost modeling.

    Under the  Pre-CAAA  scenario,  future  year
control levels are assumed to be equivalent to  1990
levels. The Post-CAAA scenario applies control levels
to model the  effects of the  Title I  nonattainment
provisions, Federal  rules, and, in the case of VOC,
Title III MACT standards.

Base Year Emissions

    The   base  year  1990  area  source  emission
inventory for the prospective analysis  is Version 3 of
the NPI  (Pechan,  1995a;  Pechan,   1995b).   This
inventory contains county/SCC level emissions for
area source categories. Most non-fugitive dust area
source emissions estimates in the NPI originate with
the 1985 NAPAP Area Source Emission Inventory.
Exceptions to  this are solvent emissions, prescribed
burning, forest wildfires, fugitive dust, and residential
wood combustion.

    The  general method for estimating 1990 area
source emissions using the  1985 NAPAP Inventory
was to apply growth  factors to the NAPAP Inventory
values. BEA historical earnings data, population, fuel
                                               A-35

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
use from State Energy Data System (SEDS) (DOE,
1991), and other category-specific indicators were used
to project the 1985 NAPAP to 1990.  SEDS data were
used as an indicator of emissions growth for the area
source fuel combustion categories and for the gasoline
marketing categories  (EPA,  1993b).   Particle  size
multipliers were  applied to estimate PM10 emissions
from TSP estimates (EPA, 1995).

    Solvent emissions were estimated from a national
solvent  material  balance  using solvent  data from
various marketing surveys (EPA, 1993b).  Emissions
are allocated to the county-level based on employment
and population data.
                 ; emission estimates were based on
a 1989 United  States Department  of Agriculture
(USDA) Forest Service Inventory of PM and air toxics
(USDA, 1989). This inventory of prescribed burning
contained State-level emissions, which were allocated
to  the  county  level  using the  State-to-county
distribution of  emissions  in  the   1985 NAPAP
Inventory.

    Wildfire emissions were  taken  from estimates
developed for the GCVTC for the 11 GCVTC States
(Western U.S.) (Radian, 1995).  The wildfire data in
the GCVTC Inventory represent a detailed survey of
forest fires in the study area. For non-GCVTC States,
emissions are based on the 1985 NAPAP Inventory
values.

    PM10 emissions for fugitive dust sources were taken
from  the  Trends  inventory  (EPA,   1997a)   for
agricultural tilling, agricultural burning,  construction
activity, paved  roads, unpaved  roads,  prescribed
burning, and wind erosion.  Emissions from beef
cattle feedlots were  developed  for the NPI.   In
general, the Trends Inventory emission  estimates are
available at the  State  level, with the exception of
construction activity emission estimates, which are at
the EPA-region level.  These were disaggregated to
the county level based on Census of Agriculture data,
land use, and construction earnings data.  Paved and
unpaved road emissions are estimated using the EPA's
OMS PARTS emission factor model combined with
paved  and unpaved road VMT estimates based on
FFIWA data.  PART 5 reentrained road dust emission
factors depend on the average weight, speed,  and
number of wheels of the vehicles traveling on paved
and unpaved roadways, the silt content of roadway
surface material, and precipitation data. The activity
factor for calculating reentrained road dust emissions
is VMT.

    Residential wood combustion emissions estimated for
EPA's NET effort were used in Version 3 of the NPI
(EPA,   1993c).    Residential  wood  combustion
emissions  include  those  from traditional masonry
fireplaces, freestanding fireplaces, wood stoves, and
furnaces.

    For the States of California and Oregon,  1990
criteria  pollutant  emissions  from  the  GCVTC
inventory  were  incorporated for all  area  source
categories. The data for these two States are based on
State-compiled inventories that are presumably based
on more recent and detailed data than the emissions
in the NAPAP Inventory.

Growth Projections

    The base year 1990 area source inventory  was
projected to 2000 and 2010 to determine the effects of
CAA controls on future emission  levels. Growth in
pollution  generating activity  to  future years  was
estimated  using the  BEA  industry GSP   and
population  projections  for  most  area   source
categories. Exceptions include activity indicators for
agricultural tilling  and burning and managed (or
prescribed) burning.  For example, the USDA has
developed baseline projections of farm acres planted
(USDA, 1998). These data, combined with historical
data back to 1990, for eight major crop types shows
an average annual growth of only 0.38 percent per
year from  1990 to 2007. The BEA GSP projections
for farm result in an annual average growth of 2.0
percent per  year.   Projections  of acres  planted
represent better predictors of future activity than GSP
for agricultural  tilling, so  they were used  in  this
projection.

    EPA's projection guidance states that area source
projections can be made using local studies or surveys,
                                                A-36

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
or through surrogate growth indicators such as BEA.
Because this is a national projection, BEA was chosen
as a consistent data set which could be used across all
regions. Emissions must be allocated to the grid cell
in order  to perform  air  quality modeling; these
projections  will  not reflect changes in the spatial
patterns of emissions between counties or grid cells,
since  State-level  growth  surrogates  are  used.
Essentially, BEA GSP projections incorporate inputs
to production, and therefore, reflect future changes in
technology,  processes,  and  efficiency.    Ideally,
projections  from States and Metropolitan Planning
Organizations would be a more reliable estimate of
growth in population, land use, and employment, but
these were not available in a consistent format for the
entire contiguous United States.

Control Scenarios

    The Pre-CAAA scenario for area source emissions
assumes that future year control levels are equal to
those in 1990 with the exception of applying the new
source performance standards (NSPS) for residential
woodstoves. The residential woodstove NSPS affects
emissions of both PM and VOC in all areas.  The
Post-CAAA scenario applies future year controls to
model  the  impact  of the 1990  Amendments on
projected emissions.

    Changes in  agricultural practices are  likely to
influence future fugitive dust emissions from activities
like agricultural tilling.  In recent years, agricultural
practices  such  as conservation tillage  have been
instituted  to provide protection against surface  soil
erosion, primarily from  water  and  runoff losses.
These practices have also affected wind erosion losses.
The primary attributes of conservation tillage practices
are:   (1) reducing the number of passes by farm
vehicles; and (2) maintaining a higher amount of crop
residue in the soil. With respect to particle emissions
from tilling operations, the reduced number of vehicle
passes  through  the field  is the  most important
parameter.  The  emission rate  (using current EPA
estimation methods) is primarily related  to the acres
tilled (and therefore, the  number  of vehicle  passes)
and  the soil silt content.  Assuming the  soil silt
content remains  the same, reducing the number of
vehicle passes produces a proportional reduction in
emissions.  The increased crop residue provided by
conservation tillage  acts to  help shelter the  soil
particles  from wind  erosion, which  reduces  soil
depletion and reduces vertical fluxes of particles to the
atmosphere.  The increased residue has little, if any,
effect on emissions.

    Projections of conservation tillage  practices are
that the amount of conservation tillage in 2000 will be
26 percent of total acres tilled. The 26 percent figure
is the level achieved in 1990.  The 2010 projection
assumes  that conservation tillage increases  to 50
percent  by  2010.    Because  the  trend toward
conservation tillage appears to result from the 1985
Farm  Bill   conservation   compliance   program,
economic      influences,      and      improved
efficiency,  the same  assumptions  are  used  for
estimating  Pre- and Post-CAAA PM10 and  PM25
emissions for this category.

    Under  the Post-CAAA scenario,  controls  are
implemented in PM NAAs.  The controls modeled
depend on the severity of PM nonattainment and the
level of emissions from source categories for which
controls are available. The Post-CAAA projection for
NOX  incorporates  controls  for  industrial  fuel
combustion  emissions  to  model  the effects of
lowering the RACT  source  size cutoff in ozone
NAAs.   Low NOX burners  were  selected  as  the
representative NOX control. CAA controls affecting
VOC include controls for Title I (RACT, new CTGs,
stage II vapor recovery, and Federal consumer solvent
controls), Title III MACT  standards, and onboard
vapor recovery systems.  The  same control level is
applied in 2000 and 2010. Future year control levels
for SO2 and CO area source emitters (generally fuel
combustion and fires) were assumed to be equivalent
to 1990 levels under both the Pre-CAAA and Post-
CAAA scenario.

Emission  Summary

    Table A-12 is a summary of emission projections
by year and scenario at the Tier 2 source category
level.
                                                A-37

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The  VOC  emission  differences between Post-
CAAA and Pre-CAAA scenarios shown in Table A-12
for 2000 and 2010 are largely expected to result from
Federal   measures   and   ozone   NAA-specific
requirements to reduce ozone precursor emissions.
Area source categories with the  biggest differences
between Post-CAAA and Pre-CAAA VOC emissions
include commercial and consumer solvent use, surface
coating  (paints), small  graphic  arts  shops,  and
hazardous waste treatment,  storage,  and  disposal
facilities (TSDFs).  Note  that while many hazardous
waste TSDFs are large enough emitters to be classified
as point sources, they are represented in the NPI as
area sources.   Service station VOC emissions are
reduced in 2000 primarily by Stage II vapor recovery
systems installed in NAAs, with further reductions in
refueling emissions  expected  by 2010 as onboard
vapor recovery systems are installed in new cars and
light trucks.

    Only modest NOX emission benefits are expected
from CAA mandates for area sources, as most CAA
initiatives  focus on major stationary sources. Some
NOX reducing measures, however, do affect the area
source category; some controls are required in serious,
severe, and extreme ozone NAAs emitting 25 tons per
year, or less.  In addition, some sources emitting 25 to
100 tons of NOX per year are represented in the area
source emissions file.  Area source PM10 emitters with
differences between the Post-CAAA and Pre-CAAA
scenarios are fugitive dust sources.
                                               A-38

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

TableA-12
Area Source Emission Summary
(thousand tons)

Pollutant/Source Category
VOC
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Chemical & Allied Product Mfg
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Solvent Utilization
Storage & Transport
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Natural Sources
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
NOX
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
CO
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
SO2
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL

by Pollutant For


1990

17.8
686.0
449.2
450.2
84.4
4,701.0
1,220.3
2,154.6
13.8
568.6
10,345.9

1,269.7
611.2
19.4
4.3
60.0
224.1
2,188.8

192.6
3,759.1
3.9
2.0
1,401.9
6,246.0
11,605.5

626.9
390.6
1.4
1.7
14.8
6.2
1,041.5

1990,2000,

2000
Pre-CAAA

22.4
623.6
517.0
454.8
94.8
5,459.2
1,537.8
2,596.5
13.8
621.6
11,941.7

1,615.6
702.7
15.8
5.2
67.3
228.1
2,634.8

244.3
4,674.4
3.2
2.7
1,542.9
6,477.6
12,945.0

803.6
463.8
1.2
2.2
17.1
6.3
1,294.0

and 2010*

2000
Post-CAAA

22.4
623.6
366.3
198.5
93.1
4,290.7
1,328.8
471.3
13.8
584.9
7,993.5

1,600.2
702.7
15.8
5.2
67.3
228.1
2,619.4

244.3
4,674.4
3.2
2.7
1,542.9
6,477.6
12,945.0

803.6
463.8
1.2
2.2
17.1
6.3
1,294.0



2010
Pre-CAAA

26.6
518.2
578.5
494.5
108.0
6,146.6
1,744.6
3,030.2
13.8
656.8
13,317.7

1,917.8
797.7
15.0
6.0
74.5
230.7
3,041.7

289.5
5,485.9
3.0
3.1
1,672.8
6,625.6
14,080.0

948.4
541.5
1.1
2.5
19.6
6.3
1,519.4



2010
Post-CAAA

26.6
518.2
408.5
207.7
106.2
4,780.6
1,298.1
524.2
13.8
656.8
8,540.6

1,900.1
797.7
15.0
6.0
74.5
230.7
3,023.9

289.5
5,485.9
3.0
3.1
1,672.8
6,625.6
14,080.0

948.4
541.5
1.1
2.5
19.6
6.3
1,519.4
A-39

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010


Pollutant/Source Category
PM10
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Natural Sources
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
PM,5
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Metals Processing
Petroleum & Related Industries
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Natural Sources
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
NH3
Fuel Comb. Industrial
Fuel Comb. Other
Other Industrial Processes
Waste Disposal & Recycling
Miscellaneous
TOTAL

1990

29.1
510.7
<0.1
1.6
34.6
218.2
2,092.4
23,501.7
26,388.4

14.8
495.8
<0.1
1.6
22.6
190.7
313.9
4,769.0
5,808.0

7.3
7.7
35.5
81.8
3,593.8
3,726.1
2000
Pre-CAAA

37.1
470.1
<0.1
1.3
37.9
240.7
2,092.4
23,915.2
26,794.7

18.8
453.0
<0.1
1.3
25.1
210.1
313.9
5,016.9
6,038.7

9.1
8.8
42.5
100.7
4,650.6
4,811.6
2000
Post-CAAA

37.1
469.6
<0.1
1.3
37.9
240.7
2,092.4
23,262.0
26,141.0

18.8
452.2
<0.1
1.3
25.1
210.1
313.9
4,911.3
5,932.7

9.1
8.8
42.5
100.7
4,650.6
4,811.6
2010
Pre-CAAA

43.8
398.8
<0.1
1.2
44.2
261.6
2,092.4
23,947.9
26,790.0

22.2
379.3
<0.1
1.2
29.3
228.1
313.9
5,296.1
6,270.2

10.7
10.0
49.7
119.2
5,542.2
5,731.8
2010
Post-CAAA

43.8
398.3
<0.1
1.2
44.2
261.6
2,092.4
23,189.6
26,031.3

22.2
378.3
<0.1
1.2
29.3
228.1
313.9
5,173.0
6,146.0

10.7
10.0
49.7
119.2
5,542.2
5,731.8
The totals reflect emissions for the 48 contiguous States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii.  Totals may not add due to rounding.
                                                A-40

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Reasonable Further Progress
Requirements

    The Post-CAAA scenario incorporates the effect
that Title I ozone controls will have on the emissions
of VOC and NOX, both ozone precursors. The ozone
nonattainment provisions in this section of the 1990
CAAA state that areas not in compliance with the
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
must reduce precursor emissions. NAAs classified as
moderate, serious, severe, or extreme all are directed
to meet the required rate of progress (ROP), and by
1996, cut annual VOC emissions by 15 percent from
1990 levels. In addition, serious, severe, and extreme
ozone  NAAs must  continue reducing  precursor
emissions after the 1996 ROP deadline. Areas falling
into  these  three categories  are required to make
reasonable further progress (RFP) towards attainment.
To satisfy this regulation NAAs must cut VOC levels
by 3 percent  annually until they  comply with the
ozone NAAQS.6

    For areas to comply with ROP requirements VOC
reductions are mandated.  For those NAAs that must
make additional cuts and satisfy RFP regulations it is
possible  for NOX reductions  to be substituted for
VOC cuts.  This trading of one ozone precursor for
another is acceptable as long as: 1) a NAA has not
been given  a NOX waiver, and  2) the substitution of
NOX for VOC does not result in a greater reduction of
NOx than is necessary for an area to comply with the
ozone NAAQS.

    The ROP and RFP requirements are designed to
establish a minimum  standard for reducing ozone
precursor emissions.  In many cases, nonattainment
areas  satisfy  these   two  regulations   simply  by
complying with other ozone provisions of the  CAAA.
Reduction  of VOC and NO,, below 1990 baseline
levels, made in order  to  meet other  standards, are
    6 The prospective analysis does not model for attainment.
For the purposes of this analysis NAAs are assumed to make
reasonable further progress until their respective attainment
deadlines, as outlined in the CAAA, are reached.
credited towards  ROP/RFP requirements.   These
credited reductions, although captured by the Post-
CAAA scenario, are not a direct result of ROP/RFP
standards.  To accurately capture the influence of
ROP/RFP requirements in the Post-CAAA scenario
it was necessary to predict which NAAs would have
to make emissions cuts  solely for the purpose of
satisfying   these   progress  requirements,   which
precursor(s) would be cut, what the size of the cuts
would be, and which sources would be forced to make
these cuts.

    For the purpose of the prospective analysis it was
assumed that NAAs working to satisfy ROP and RFP
requirements would, whenever possible,  first take
credit for all available NOX reductions and then for all
available VOC reductions; any remaining shortfall,
corresponding to cuts that NAAs would have to make
specifically to meet ROP or RFP requirements, would
be  made  up  through  additional  VOC  emission
reductions.  The  size of the total shortfall  for all
NAAs, thus, is a measure of the impact of these Title
I progress requirements on the emission  of ozone
precursors.  This  shortfall is captured by  the Post-
CAAA scenario.

    To estimate the VOC shortfall, a separate daily
VOC target and daily NOX target was calculated for
the years 2000  and 2010 for every NAA subject to
Title I  progress requirements.  These  target figures
represent  the  daily maximum  allowable emissions
levels that NAAs cannot exceed if they are to comply
with ROP/RFP standards. The NOX target was set
according to how much NOX credit it was assumed
will be counted towards ROP/RFP requirements, and
the VOC target was set based on the assumption that
the remainder of the emissions cuts needed to satisfy
ROP/RFP   requirements   will   come   through
reductions in VOC. The difference between the VOC
target and the expected level of daily VOC emissions
in  the  absence   of  ROP/RFP   requirements,
represented by ozone season daily (OSD) emissions
estimates, equals the shortfall.

    Table A-13 shows,  for  each  NAA subject to
ROP/RFP requirements, both the OSD and target
VOC and NO,, emissions levels for 2000. Table A-14
                                               A-41

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
contains the same information for projection  year
2010. In addition, these tables indicate whether or not
an area has a NOX waiver (these areas cannot be given
NOX credit towards  RFP),  and reveal  how RFP
reductions were divided between  VOC and NOX in
order to calculate the target values for both  ozone
precursors.   For example, looking at Table A-13
shows that  for Philadelphia in the year 2000, NOX
reductions of 18 percent from 1990 base year levels
are credited towards satisfying RFP provisions. After
accounting for  this credit, the maximum daily VOC
emissions that is allowable for Philadelphia, if this area
is to comply with progress requirements, is 1,376.55
tons. Since  this VOC target value is greater than the
predicted level  of daily emissions (VOC  OSD)  of
1,090.49 tons, there is no shortfall. For Philadelphia
in the year 2010 (Table A-14), however, an additional
9 percent reduction from 1990 VOC emission levels
is  necessary in order to satisfy RFP  requirements.
Once again there is no shortfall.

    After calculating the shortfall for each NAA, EPA
estimated how  these  additional VOC reductions
would be achieved. The Agency compiled a list of the
available area and point source controls and assumed
that each NAA would adopt the most cost-effective
measure, followed by the second most cost-effective
option, and so on until the area satisfied its ROP/RFP
requirements. Table A-15 displays the control option
identified by EPA and lists them in the approximate
order the Agency believed they would be selected by
NAAs attempting to eliminate shortfall emissions. In
general, it is assumed that nonroad controls would be
the last  to be  selected, along with  AIM coatings.
Furthermore, since most areas in the analysis already
have reformulated gasoline and I/M programs in the
baseline, these were  not  considered as potential
discretionary measures.  It  should  be noted  that
episodic  bans  are  not  creditable  towards ROP
shortfalls.   These  measures were  chosen  to be
illustrative of what  individual areas might select to
meet ROP shortfalls, however, individual areas  may
select measures that differ from those modeled here.
Some of the measures may be politically infeasible for
some areas, however,  the  cost thresholds used to
estimate  the costs of these measures  are consistent
with those used in the ozone NAAQS analysis.

    Shortfalls are the  greatest and most difficult to
eliminate in severe ozone NAAs with NOX waivers.
These areas have to meet significant ozone precursor
reduction  requirements  solely  by  cutting VOC
emissions.  In Chicago and Milwaukee-Racine, both
wavier areas, the VOC shortfall  is so large  that it
cannot be  eliminated  even if all  of the  identified
controls  are implemented. As a result, for these two
NAAs it is  assumed that unidentified controls are
adopted to reduce the remaining shortfall. In all other
areas, however, the required reduction can be achieved
with the  identified controls.
                                                A-42

-------
TableA-13
2000 Rate of Progress Analysis
Att.
Class.
Ser.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
Ser.
Ser.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ser.
Mod.
Ser.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ext.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ser.
Ser.
Mod.
Att.
Date
1999
1996
2005
1999
1999
1999
2007
1996
1996
1996
1999
1996
1999
2007
1996
1996
1996
2010
1996
1996
2007
1996
1996
1996
2007
2005
1996
1996
1996
1999
1999
1996
Ozone Nonattainment Area
Atlanta
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Baton Rouge
Beaumont-Port Arthur
Boston-Lawrence-Worcester-E.MA
Chicago-Gary-Lake County
Cincinnati-Hamilton
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain
Dallas-Fort Worth
El Paso
Grand Rapids
Greater Connecticut
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria
Kewaunee Co Wi
Knox & Lincoln Cos ME
Lewiston-Auburn ME
Los Angeles-South Coast
Louisville
Manitowoc Co WI
Milwaukee-Racine
Monterey Bay
Muskegon
Nashville
NewYork-N New Jersey-Long Is
Philadelphia-Wilmingtn-Trenton
Phoenix
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Portland ME
Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester
Providence
Readinq PA
2000 OSD (tons per day)1
NO, VOC Target Selection2
420.93
46.11
335.42
449.70
245.20
560.20
1,056.70
378.70
369.12
528.83
113.35
129.61
211.67
1,094.58
3.23
9.26
23.56
1,010.32
264.00
13.69
272.22
78.60
34.25
167.12
1,280.26
678.53
404.47
534.53
53.72
37.55
92.51
48.66
518.94
37.97
318.33
203.77
340.66
822.65
1,240.89
305.34
521.14
694.53
85.38
182.72
316.27
1,426.65
4.86
9.95
34.08
972.91
219.66
19.72
327.09
64.16
46.67
231.71
1,994.96
1,090.49
377.43
407.05
70.05
53.54
173.78
60.53
1%NOX/8%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
18%NOX
NOX waiver
NOX waiver
9% NOX
NOX waiver
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
0%NOX/9%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
9%NOX
NOX waiver
ROP-15VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
1%NCyi7%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
NOX waiver
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
18%NOX
18%NOX
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
9%NOX
5%NOX/4%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
NOX
Target
426.28
0.00
381.53
0.00
0.00
602.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
224.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,019.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,553.41
690.79
0.00
0.00
0.00
44.26
91.77
0.00
VOC
Target
476.35
45.71
376.47
415.65
450.66
918.01
1,202.25
341.18
573.07
673.97
69.02
175.66
370.11
2,268.31
4.56
10.37
35.98
939.08
215.97
17.20
293.24
79.63
44.32
205.60
2,407.97
1,376.55
347.91
399.80
73.33
58.70
180.51
61.14
Shortfall
42.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.64
0.00
0.00
20.56
16.36
7.06
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.00
0.00
33.83
3.69
2.52
33.85
0.00
2.35
26.11
0.00
0.00
29.52
7.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
A-43

-------
Att.
Class.
Mod.
Sev.
Mod.
Ser.
Ser.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
NOTES:


Att.
Date
1996
2005
1996
1999
1999
1996
1996
2007
1999
1996
2005
1999



2000 OSD (tons per day)1
Ozone Nonattainment Area NOy VOC
Richmond-Petersburg 141.62 179.97
Sacramento Metro 164.60 158.01
Salt Lake City 178.25 182.75
San Diego 228.55 192.90
San Joaquin Valley 499.25 470.50
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp 63.77 82.75
Sheyboygan 38.02 24.49
Southeast Desert Modified 355.88 227.71
Springfield/Pittsfield-W. MA 112.38 155.51
St. Louis 476.98 465.64
Ventura Co CA 80.45 65.69
Washington DC 449.80 402.76
1OSD = ozone season daily
2The target selection column indicates the percentage reduction of
in VOC is then needed to satisfy Title I progress requirements.
Target Selection2
ROP-15%VOC
0%NOX/18%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
0%NOX/9%VOC
5%NOX/4%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
3%NOX/15%VOC
0%NOX/9%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
13%NOX/5%VOC
9%NOX

NOX
Target
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
505.63
0.00
0.00
358.76
0.00
0.00
79.55
499.12

NOX NAA's are credited towards RFP and


VOC

Target Shortfall
201.70
155.08
150.80
189.71
532.41
83.10
22.44
219.32
152.42
549.14
70.52
477.03

what percentage

0.00
2.93
31.95
3.19
0.00
0.00
2.05
8.39
3.09
0.00
0.00
0.00

reduction

A-44

-------
TableA-14
2010 Rate of Progress Analysis
Att.
Class.
Ser.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
Ser.
Ser.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ser.
Mod.
Ser.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ext.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Sev.
Att.
Date
1999
1996
2005
1999
1999
1999
2007
1996
1996
1996
1999
1996
1999
2007
1996
1996
1996
2010
1996
1996
2007
1996
1996
1996
2007
2005
Ozone Nonattainment Area
Atlanta
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Baton Rouge
Beaumont-Port Arthur
Boston-Lawrence-Worcester-E. MA
Chicago-Gary-Lake County
Cincinnati-Hamilton
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain
Dallas-Fort Worth
El Paso
Grand Rapids
Greater Connecticut
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria
Kewaunee Co Wi
Knox & Lincoln Cos ME
Lewiston-Auburn ME
Los Angeles-South Coast
Louisville
Manitowoc Co WI
Milwaukee-Racine
Monterey Bay
Muskegon
Nashville
New York-N New Jersey-Long Is
Philadelphia-Wilminqtn-Trenton
2010 OSD (tons per day)1
NO, VOC Target Selection2
336.10
39.46
278.64
407.49
232.32
478.53
990.61
288.20
306.32
472.66
113.85
92.07
192.62
1,002.13
2.62
8.51
22.20
950.39
273.40
12.10
246.74
71.93
26.99
143.58
1,148.95
631.39
492.40
33.21
293.56
206.65
377.63
775.66
1,236.73
283.74
485.90
687.15
84.33
183.11
292.53
1,530.07
4.77
8.98
32.03
847.66
216.86
19.37
321.89
61.76
46.86
230.00
1,842.53
1,070.05
9%NOX
ROP-15%VOC
27%NOX
NOX waiver
NOX waiver
9%NOX
NOX waiver
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
0%NOX/9%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
9%NOX
NOX waiver
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
5%NOX/31%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
NOX waiver
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
36%NOX
18%NOV/9%VOC
NOX
Target
391.84
0.00
311.86
0.00
0.00
602.06
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
224.49
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
964.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,166.20
632.97
VOC
Target
541.99
45.71
376.47
415.65
450.66
918.01
840.15
341.18
573.07
673.97
69.02
175.66
370.11
1,606.75
4.56
10.37
35.98
670.95
215.97
17.20
204.72
79.63
44.32
205.60
2,407.97
1,194.41
Shortfall
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
396.58
0.00
0.00
13.18
15.31
7.45
0.00
0.00
0.21
0.00
0.00
176.71
0.89
2.17
117.17
0.00
2.54
24.40
0.00
0.00
A-45

-------
Att.
Class.
Mod.
Mod.
Mod.
Ser.
Ser.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Mod.
Ser.
Ser.
Mod.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
Mod.
Sev.
Ser.
Notes:
Att.
Date
1996
1996
1996
1999
1999
1996
1996
2005
1996
1999
1999
1996
1996
2007
1999
1996
2005
1999


Ozone Nonattainment Area
Phoenix
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Portland ME
Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester
Providence
Reading PA
Richmond-Petersburg
Sacramento Metro
Salt Lake City
San Diego
San Joaquin Valley
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp
Sheyboygan
Southeast Desert Modified
Springfield/Pittsfield-W. MA
St. Louis
Ventura Co CA
Washington DC
1OSD = ozone season daily
2010
NO,
395.64
368.47
51.54
33.08
75.73
46.61
137.12
152.59
179.22
213.59
466.55
59.33
34.84
329.75
97.63
381.48
75.89
393.57

2The target selection column indicates the percentage reduction
OSD (tons per day)1
VOC
347.52
358.67
66.88
52.49
166.61
55.33
179.35
135.99
189.83
174.04
448.37
81.53
24.69
213.87
147.45
439.47
62.33
355.35

Target Selection2
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
9%NOX
9%NOX
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
1%NOX/26%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
5%NOX/4%VOC
9%NOX
ROP-15%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
9%NOX/27%VOC
7%NOX/2%VOC
ROP-15%VOC
13%NOX/14%VO
9%NOX

of NOX NAA's are credited towards
NOX
Target
0.00
0.00
0.00
44.26
87.91
0.00
0.00
152.62
0.00
213.42
484.34
0.00
0.00
332.55
97.87
0.00
76.34
499.12

RFP and what
VOC
Target
347.91
399.80
73.33
58.70
193.15
61.14
201.70
120.24
150.80
202.24
566.96
83.10
22.44
172.34
166.51
549.14
63.11
477.03

percentage

Shortfall
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
15.75
39.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.25
41.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

reduction in
VOC is then needed to satisfy Title 1 progress requirements.
A-46

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableA-15
Discretionary Control Measures Modeled For ROP/RFP
    Source Category
                  Measure
Reduction
Area Source
Adhesives - industrial
Metal product surface
coating
Cutback asphalt
Wood product surface
coating
Wood furniture surface
coating
Degreasing
Open burning
Automobile refinishing

Bulk Terminals
POTWs
Bakeries
Petroleum dry cleaning
Perchloroethylene dry
cleaning
Livestock
Miscellaneous surface
coating
Aerosols

Incineration
Synthetic fiber manufacture
Misc. industrial processes
Consumer solvents
AIM coatings
Lawn & garden
Recreational vehicles
Industrial equipment
Recreational marine
Point Source
Open burning
Industrial surface coating
Metal product surface
coating
Wood product surface
coating
Point sources
Reformulation
VOC content limits & improved transfer efficiency

Switch to emulsified asphalts (100% RE)
Reformulation

Reformulation

Solvent Limits
Seasonal ban
CARS Best Available Retrofit Control Technology
(BARCT) limits
Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR)
Covers/Adsorption
Afterburner
Recovery dryers
Recovery dryers

Recovery system
Reformulation

South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Standards - Reformulation
Seasonal ban
Adsorber
Process change/incineration
Additional reformulation
Additional reformulation
Episodic Ban
Episodic Ban
Episodic Ban
Episodic Ban

Seasonal Ban
Add-on Control Levels
Reformulation

Reformulation

Rule effectiveness improvements (80% RE to
90% RE)	
63%
30% (50% in 2010 for difficult
areas)
100%
43%

43%

63% (80% in difficult areas)
80%
47%

90% (80% RE)
50%
33%
44%
70% (80%RE)

50%
30%

50% (60% in 2010)

80%
78% (80%RE)
50%
40% (50% in 2010)
40% (50% in 2010)
50%
50%
50%
50%

80%
90%
88%

85%
'"Episodic" and "seasonal ban" controls are not creditable toward the ROP shortfall.
                                               A-47

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Mercury Emission Estimates

    EPA, as part of this analysis, also estimates the
effect of CAAA provisions on airborne mercury (Hg)
emissions for  five  separate Hg emissions sources:
medical waste  incinerators (MWI), municipal waste
combustors (MWCs), electric utility plants, hazardous
waste combustors, and chlor-alkali plants.7 While the
Integrated Planning Model (IPM) was used to generate
Pre- and Post-CAAA electric utility Hg emissions
estimates, data from previously conducted analyses
were relied on to estimate Hg emissions from the
other sources.  The following section provides a
description of the methods and data sources used to
develop 1990 base-year Hg emissions  and 2000 and
2010 mercury emission projections for the Pre- and
Post-CAAA scenarios.

Medical Waste Incinerators (MWI)

    During  the  Maximum  Achievable  Control
Technology (MACT) development process for MWI,
1990 emission  estimates for hazardous air pollutants
(HAPs), including mercury (Hg), were developed by
back-casting 1995 emission estimates (EPA, 1996b).
The back-casting was performed by adding to the
1995 database MWIs that had shut down during the
1990-1995 time period.  These MWI were shut down
as a result of economic considerations prompted by
the  adoption  of strict  regulations  in six  states
(California,  New Mexico,  New York,  Oregon,
Washington, and Wisconsin). The number of MWIs
in the remaining states were assumed to be the same
in 1990 as in 1995.

    Based on  the  back-casting analysis described
above, EPA estimated Hg emissions of 16 tons per
year (tpy) in 1995 and 50 tpy in 1990 (Cocca, 1997).
Therefore, 50 tpy is selected as the base year estimate
for this analysis. To estimate the Pre-CAAA scenario
forecasts, it is  assumed that no  other states would
have adopted MWI regulations  between 1995 and
2010.  The  annual growth rates estimated by the
Bureau  of Economic Analysis  (BEA)  for  health
services are 2.3 percent from 1990 to 2000 and also
2.3 percent from 1990 to 2010 (Pechan, 1998).  The
Pre-CAAA forecasts were estimated by multiplying 16
tpy in 1995 by a 1.12 growth factor for 2000 and a
1.41 growth factor for 2010. This yielded 17.9 tpy for
2000 and 22.6 tpy for 2010 (see Table A-16).

    EPA estimated a 93  to 95 percent reduction of
Hg nationally  for existing units in the  Emission
Guidelines (which incorporate the MACT standards
for MWI; EPA, 1996c). A 45 to 74 percent reduction
was estimated to occur within 5 years of New Source
Performance Standard (NSPS) promulgation for new
sources (these sources were estimated to produce 0.2
tpy without the standard by 2002). The combined
effects of the NSPS/EG are approximately a 93
percent reduction (from 1995) in the years 2000 and
2010. This emission reduction estimate was used to
calculate  the Post-CAAA emissions for MWI (see
Table A-16). No other CAAA regulatory efforts are
known that  would further impact emissions  from
MWI.

Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs)

    Methods and sources of information used to
estimate  Hg emissions for MWC are given in a
supporting document for the NSPS/EG for MWC
promulgated in 1995 (EPA, 1996c). EPA estimated
that  there was 54 tpy emitted by MWC  in  1990.
Between 1990 and 1995, several factors contributed to
a decline in Hg emissions  from MWC: addition of air
pollution controls on existing facilities; retirement of
some units; a decrease in the Hg content of municipal
waste being burned.  EPA estimated that there were
29 tpy of Hg emitted by MWC in 1995 (EPA, 1996c).
For the purposes  of this analysis, it is assumed that
these reductions occurred due to influences unrelated
to the CAAA. It is further assumed that no additional
reductions would have occurred between 1995 and
2000  (or 2010)  without  promulgation of the
NSPS/EG.
    Together, these sources account for 75 to 80 percent of national
anthropogenic airborne Hg emissions.
                                              A-48

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    EPA  further  estimated  that  following  full
implementation of the NSPS/EG in 2000, national
Hg emissions would be reduced to 4.4 tpy. However,
the NSPS/EG was amended in 1997. As part of the
amendments, MWC units with capacities less than 250
tons/day and cement kilns burning municipal waste
were exempted from the NSPS/EG.  Due to this
exemption, EPA estimated that  87 percent of the
national MWC capacity was now covered by the
NSPS/EG (small units were to be covered in a later
rule-making; EPA  1997c).   Therefore, to  estimate
Post-CAAA 2000 emissions for MWC, the original 4.4
tpy estimate was divided by 0.87  to account for the
exempted units.  After adjusting for growth, the 5.5
tpy shown in Table A-16 was estimated for 2000.

    Between 1995 and 2000, EPA (1997d) estimated
that municipal solid waste combustion would increase
by 7.5 percent.  Therefore, the Pre-CAAA 2000 Hg
emissions were estimated to be 31.2  tpy (29 tpy x
1.075).  Between 2000 and 2010, growth in municipal
waste combustion is estimated to be an additional 8.3
percent (EPA, 1996f). This growth factor was applied
to both Pre- and Post-CAAA 2000 emission estimates
to yield the year 2010 estimates.

Electric Utility Generation

    In   a  report  to  Congress which  details
anthropogenic mercury emissions, the EPA estimated
that total 1990 mercury emissions  from utility boilers
was 51.3 tpy (EPA, 1996g). The Integrated Planning
Model (IPM) was used to estimate emissions  resulting
from electric power generation in 2000 and 2010 using
different control scenarios to reflect the Pre and Post-
CAAA scenarios.  The results generated by the IPM
are presented  in Table  A-16  (EPA,  1996g).  The
scenarios modeled  did not include any assumptions
about the  effects  of any MACT standard  to  be
promulgated by EPA in the future. Any differences in
emissions between the control scenarios are due to
shifts in operation between units  or  fuel  changes
predicted by IPM (including ash content of the coals
as well as switching to natural gas).  The modeled
emission estimates are based on information available
at the time, and if the same analysis were performed
today, with currently available inputs, the results could
be different.

Hazardous Waste Combustion

    Pechan-Avanti received preliminary draft data
from Industrial Economics on  the benefits of the
MACT  Standard  for hazardous waste combustors
(Yates,  1999).  No information was  available  on
growth for this source category, although the analyses
conducted to date indicate that  there might be a slight
contraction (e.g., five percent) of the category between
1990 and 2000 (or 2010; Yates, 1999).  Therefore, it
was assumed that there would not be any growth from
the 1990 baseline.  Also, it was assumed that emission
reductions would not occur until after 2000, since the
standard will not be fully-implemented until 2002.

Chlor-alkali Plants

    EPA documents estimate mercury emissions from
mercury-cell chlor-alkali plants to be 9.8 tpy (EPA,
1998b; EPA, 1998c)  in 1990, and  7.1 tpy in  1994
(EPA, 1996h; EPA, 1996i).  The number of facilities
which use the mercury-cell process has been declining
since reaching a peak of 35 in 1970.  By 1995, there
were 14 facilities, one of which has converted to a
membrane process  (no mercury emissions), and
another of which has ceased  operation, leaving 12
facilities in 1999.  In the past, closures or process
changes have been due to economics  rather than
regulations.  There are no existing CAAA programs
which influence mercury emissions from this source.
A MACT standard is currently in the development
process, and will not be promulgated for a year or
more (Rosano, 1999;Dungan, 1999).

    The MACT standard, when issued, will focus on
both point source and fugitive emissions. There are
generally three point  sources  at mercury-cell chlor-
alkali plants which emit mercury: hydrogen vents, end-
box vents, and mercury recovery vents.  Point source
controls being considered for the MACT standard are
a  combination  of a cooling device and  either a
molecular sieve, or a carbon adsorption system. The
level of control  is yet  to  be determined,  pending
                                               A-49

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
further investigation into the typical concentrations of
mercury found at the vents. The MACT standard for
fugitive mercury emissions from the cellhouse has not
been identified at this point, and investigations and
meetings are planned for the near future  in order to
quantify typical fugitive emissions (Rosario, 1999).

    Assuming that no additional plants will close or
convert between the time of this writing and the end
of 2000, and that mercury emissions from the  12
remaining sources have remained constant since 1994,
and will continue to remain constant, 2000 emissions
for both the  Pre  and  Post-CAAA  scenario  are
estimated to be 6.0 tpy.  This is based on the 7.1 tpy
reported for 1994, minus the 1994 emissions for the
two facilities which no longer have the potential to
emit mercury  (Georgia-Pacific in Bellingham, WA
which  ceased operations in 1999 and is reported to
have emitted 0.65 tpy in 1994, and LCP Chemicals in
Reigelwood, NC which  converted in 1999 and is
reported to have emitted 0.55 tpy).

    Future mercury emissions   from mercury-cell
chlor-alkali plants are assumed to continue to decline,
following the trend of plant closing and conversions.
Assuming that the decline in the number of mercury-
cell facilities has been linear since  1970, and will
remain linear in the future, a linear regression was
used to  estimate the number of facilities in  2010.
Assuming that there will be 12 facilities in 2000, the
linear regression (r2 = 0.98) indicates a decline  of
approximately 0.75 facilities  per  year, which,  when
extrapolated to future years, results in an estimate that
there will be approximately four mercury-cell facilities
still in  operation in 2010.   Assuming that emissions
will decline at a rate proportional  to that of the
number of facilities, emissions are estimated to decline
from 6.0  tpy in 2000 to 2.0 tpy in 2010.  This estimate
was used as the Pre-CAAA scenario estimate for 2010
(see Table A-16).

    In order to account for the possible effect of an
un-promulgated MACT standard on Hg-cell chlor-
alkali plants operating in 2010, the limited information
available was reviewed. This information is principally
made up  of a brief summary of test data submitted by
the operating facilities. At some point in the future
after more testing has been performed, the MACT
standard and estimates of the resulting reductions will
be made publicly available (Rosario, 1999).

    Currently,  there  are  facilities  which  control
mercury emissions, some  of which control the
emissions to near or below what the MACT limit may
eventually be.   Emissions from these  sources are
unlikely to  be  reduced as a  result of the MACT
standard being promulgated.   However, emissions
from the plants required to upgrade or add control
systems as  a result of the MACT  standard being
promulgated, will be reduced in future years.  Based
on the limited data available, and assuming that the
test data  available are typical of  what would  be
reported by the facilities for which no valid test data
are available, the overall reduction is estimated to be
approximately 35 percent.  This estimate is  reflected
in the  Post-CAAA emission estimate  for 2010  in
Table A-16. The difference between 2010 emissions
with and without the  CAAA will be greater if the
number of mercury-cell chlor-alkali plants remains
steady at present levels rather than declining at a linear
rate, as is assumed here.
                                                A-50

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
 TableA-16
 Airborne Mercury Emission Estimates
2000 Emissions (tons)
1990
Source Category
Medical Waste Incin.
Municipal Waste Comb.
Electric Utility Generation
Hazardous Waste Comb.
Chlor-Alkali Plants
Total CAAA Benefits (Reductions)
Emissions
(tons)
50
54
51.3
6.6
9.8

Pre-
CAAA
17.9
31.2
63.0
6.6
6.0

Post-
CAAA
1.3
5.5
61.1
6.6
6.0


Diff.
16.6
25.7
1.9
0
0
44.2
2010 Emissions (tons)
Pre-
CAAA
22.6
33.8
68.5
6.6
2.0

Post-
CAAA
1.6
6.0
65.4
3.0
1.3


Diff.
21.0
27.8
3.1
3.6
0.7
56.2
Uncertainties in the Emission
Estimates

    This discussion is  organized according to the
three major sources of uncertainty in the emissions
inventory and emission projections:  the base year
emission estimates, economic growth forecasts, and
future year control assumptions.

Base Year Emission Estimates

    Of  the pollutants  covered in this analysis, the
most certain  emission estimates are those for SO2.
SO2 is  generated  during combustion of any sulfur-
containing fuel and is emitted by industrial processes
that consume  sulfur-containing  raw materials.
Because sulfur emissions are directly related to the fuel
sulfur content, as long  as fuel usage and fuel sulfur
content are measured,  SO2 emissions, prior to the
imposition of controls, can  be  precisely estimated
within a narrow range. Electric utilities emit about 70
percent of the SO2 in  the United  States.  Under
existing utility industry regulations, fuel consumption
and sulfur content of fuels are regularly reported to
DOE.  Recent comparisons of Continuous Emission
Monitoring (CEM) data  for SO2 with estimates based
on  SO2 emission factors and fuel consumption for a
sample  of plants  showed that the  two techniques
produced emission estimates within an average of 8
percent at a State level. The difference is due, in part,
to higher fuel consumption numbers reported  by
CEM systems, as a  result of  the  missing data
substitution requirements of the  acid rain program
(Schott, 1996).

    As part of the GCVTC emission inventory (for 11
Western States), uncertainty estimates were developed
for key source sectors, representing over 70 percent of
the emissions  (Balentine and Dickson, 1995).  SO2
sources examined included copper smelters and motor
vehicles. The uncertainty estimate calculated for SO2
emissions  from copper  smelting is  ± 50 percent.
Diesel and gasoline vehicle emissions have uncertainty
estimates  of  a factor of  +_ 1.5.   Most of this
uncertainty is  due to the  variability in  the  sulfur
content of the fuels.

    After  SO2,  the  next   most certain  emission
estimates are  probably the NOX values.  Like SO2,
NOX is a product of fuel combustion. However, there
are two  NOX  sources  in fossil-fuel combustion
(Seinfeld,  1986).   The  first is  the oxidation  of
atmospheric   molecular  nitrogen   at   the  high
temperatures  of combustion.  NOX formed by this
route is referred to as thermal NOX.  The second
source  is  the oxidation   of  nitrogen-containing
compounds in the fuel. NOX formed by this path is
called fuel NOX.  Since NOX formation is somewhat
more complicated than SO2, emission estimates are
more variable, and uncertain, as well.

    A comparison of NOX emissions based on CEM
data and NOY emissions based on AP-42 emission
                                              A-51

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
factors for a sample of utilities in Louisiana resulted in
a difference of 22 percent between the two methods.
The difference  is attributable to improved emission
factors resulting from the use of GEM data, rather
than one-time stack tests or AP-42 emission factors
(Schott, 1996).

    The level of uncertainty in primary PM10 emission
estimates varies widely by source category. The largest
component of the 1990 PM10 emission estimates is
fugitive  dust  sources,  which  include  paved  and
unpaved roads,  construction  activity, agricultural
tilling, and  windblown dust.   The  GCVTC study
estimated the uncertainty for unpaved road emissions
to be a factor of ± 4.0. The estimated uncertainty for
PM25 emissions from paved road dust is a factor of +_
1.8.

    PM10 emission estimates for large point sources
such as utility boilers would be expected to be less
uncertain than  the fugitive dust source estimates,
because these stacks  are  typically controlled using
baghouses or electrostatic precipitators, with frequent
stack tests to ensure compliance with regulations.

    VOC emissions estimates are uncertain because
organics are emitted  both as  a product of  fuel
combustion and through evaporation.  Evaporative
emissions are difficult to  quantify because of  the
associated  measurement problems.  The GCVTC
study estimated the VOC emissions  uncertainty  for
motor vehicles to be a factor of +_ 1.5.

    Estimates of emissions from solvents and other
evaporative VOC sources  are probably even more
uncertain than the motor vehicle VOC emission
estimates.   Emission  estimates  for such sources
typically  assume that all of the organic content of
solvent ultimately  evaporates.    However,  usage
patterns determine what time of year these solvents
are  released to  the atmosphere, and emissions that
occur outside the ozone season may not influence
ozone levels. Solvent emission estimates used in this
study are  based on a national material  balance.
Solvent emission estimates made by State and local air
pollution control agencies for SIPs typically use  per
capita emission factors to estimate solvent emissions.
This will produce different emission estimates than
used in this study.

Growth Forecasts

    The  2000 and 2010 emission estimates in this
analysis are influenced by the projected changes  in
pollution-generating activity.  Inherent uncertainties
and data inadequacies/limitations exist in forecasting
growth for any future period. As a result,  it was
necessary in this analysis to use indicators of growth
that may not directly correlate with changes  in the
factors that influence emissions.   In  the previous
chapters  of this report, alternative growth forecasts
were presented for major sectors, and the implications
of these alternative forecasts were noted.

    The best indicator of pollution-generating activity
is fuel use or some other measure  of input/output
that most directly relates to emissions. The key BEA
indicator used in this analysis, GSP, is closely linked
with the pollution-generating activity associated with
many  manufacturing  industry processes (iron and
steel, petroleum refining, etc.).   However, a good
portion of industrial sector emissions are from boilers
and furnaces, whose activity is related to production,
but not as closely as product output. Activities such
as fuel switching may produce  different emission
patterns  than those reflected in the results of this
study.  The modeling methods applied in this study
would only capture such effects for electric utilities,
but not for the industrial sector.

    While it  is expected that there will be energy
efficiency improvements in the 1990 to 2010 forecast
horizon,  potential  energy efficiency improvements
have not been  incorporated  in the growth factors.
The  U.S. Department of Energy currently estimates
that energy intensity — the amount of energy used for
each dollar of output in the economy - will decline by
1 percent per year through the time horizon of this
study.  If these  potential energy efficiency improve-
ments had been incorporated in the 2000 and 2010
emission projections,  then both the Pre-CAAA and
Post-CAAA emission estimates would be lower than
those presented in this report.
                                                A-52

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    In general, emissions  from the point, area, and
nonroad engine/vehicle sectors are projected to 2000
and 2010 in this analysis based on BEA GSP by State
and industry,  and population  projections by State.
Source categories were matched with surrogate activity
indicators that represent proxies for emission growth.
The uncertainty of the growth forecasts used in this
analysis is attributable to two factors:  the uncertainty
of the projections data used, and the use  of surrogate
activity levels to estimate future emission levels.

    Throughout this analysis,  efforts were  made to
identify potential sources of growth surrogates and to
evaluate the impacts of alternative growth factors on
emission projections.   The  impact  of alternative
growth factors on the emission projection results of
this study vary by source category and pollutant.  For
example, point  source emissions  from chemical
manufacturing would increase at an average annual
rate from 0.9 (BEA GSP) to  2.6  (E-GAS/WEFA)
percent per year between 1990 and 2010 depending on
the activity factor used as  a surrogate for emissions
growth.  In the  nonroad  vehicle  sector, emissions
from  aircraft  are projected to grow from 2 to 5
percent per year for the  1990-2010 time period,
depending  on whether GSP or landing and takeoff
operations  (LTO) data are used  as the surrogate
growth indicator.  Growth projections for the railroad
industry can range from 0.3 percent to 4.4 percent
depending  on whether  the growth variable is ton-
miles,  fuel  use, GSP, or earnings.  In this analysis,
BEA earnings data were used to represent growth in
emissions for this industry because it was possible to
differentiate growth rates at  the State level,  and
because the data were available for the relevant years
of this analysis.  In future years, industry analysts
predict lower prices  per  ton-mile in response to
increased competition for  rail traffic.  To the extent
that future  predictions of lower rail transport prices
occur as railroad transport increases, miles traveled
may be a more accurate activity level surrogate for
emissions than earnings.  The outlook for the railroad
industry is uncertain, and emissions may be over- or
understated  for   the  2000   and   2010  scenarios
depending on future industry conditions.
    Each of the available variables for projecting
emissions has  advantages and disadvantages with
respect to this  analysis. The Agency chose growth
surrogates for this analysis based on EPA guidance;
the availability of data for  1990,  2000, and 2010;
geographic detail of projections data; coverage relative
to the detail of the base year inventory; and the
appropriateness of using the variable as a measure of
emissions growth.  For  this analysis, BEA provided a
consistent data set that could be applied across source
categories and across States.

Future Year Control Assumptions

    The uncertainties  associated with  future year
control assumptions can be grouped in three types:
(1) will the  control programs be  adopted; (2) will
control programs be as effective as estimated in this
analysis; and (3) will  technological shifts  produce
enough changes in emission patterns to affect future
year results?

    On the  first and second issues, there have been
eight years of progress in implementing the CAAA
provisions, and emission trends estimates have shown
that significant emission reductions have occurred in
this period  (EPA, 1997a).  Relative to expectations
when the CAA was passed, SO2 emission reductions
have  occurred  at a  faster  rate  than  originally
anticipated,  while some  of the  VOC and  NOX
emissions have been less than originally anticipated, as
many vehicle emission inspection programs have been
delayed. By 2000, though, any short run perturbations
may have a negligible effect on  overall emission
benefits.    Future  implementation  depends  on
decisions that EPA makes about Federal rules, such as
commercial/consumer solvent rules  and  MACT
standards.

    Also on the second issue, concerns about the
ability of regulations to achieve expected reductions as
implemented have resulted in some new programs and
techniques  for  assuring  that  new programs are
effective. Rule effectiveness discounting is applied to
stationary source controls  (other than those for SO2)
in this  analysis  to account  for control equipment
malfunctions and  downtime, unrecognized control
                                                A-53

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
responsibility, and gross noncompliance.  In addition,
much more continuous emission monitoring is now
required for major SO2 and NOX sources to ensure
that emission limits are met, so many point source
emission reductions should be verifiable.  Verifying
area source  emission  reductions  is much more
difficult. Experiments using remote sensing, tracers,
and other  real-world  measurement tools are being
performed to better assess the effectiveness of motor
vehicle, nonroad engine, and solvent emission control
initiatives.

    On  the  third issue,  any major technological
improvements to create lower-polluting systems by
2010 could influence the  emission forecasts,  and
would be expected to produce more emission benefits
than have  been estimated  in this  study.  In-depth
analyses of two sectors, petroleum refining and motor
vehicles, as part of  the  Section  812  prospective
analysis found  no  major technology changes  that
would  significantly alter emission estimates in these
two important sectors to be likely before 2010.  For
the motor vehicle industry, research has been focused
on  battery-powered  electric  vehicles   since  the
California  LEV  program  requirement  for  zero
emission vehicles (ZEVs) was announced. However,
these electric vehicles will be unlikely to capture more
than 10 percent of LDV sales by 2010.
significant programs associated with the CAAA that
impact VOC emissions from the solvent cleaning
source category are being implemented through local
regulations as part of ozone attainment plans. Chief
among these is the revised  SCAQMD Rule  1171
(SCAQMD, 1996).   In  the  revision  of  this rule,
SCAQMD requires the use of low-VOC  solvents (e.g.,
aqueous) for all regulated sources  (e.g., those who are
not regulated under Rule 1122, which has equipment
instead of solvent requirements). SCAQMD is still
working on issues surrounding applicability of Rules
1171  and  1122,  but has  initially estimated VOC
emission reductions  of 46 percent associated with the
revisions to Rule  1171 (SCAQMD, 1996).
    The refinery sector study identified the significant
post-1990 technological trends in this industry to be
(1) continued investment in downstream processing of
petroleum; (2)  increasing refinery capacity utilization;
(3) continued improvement in refining process control
and catalyst use; and (4) steady capital investment in
stationary source controls.  None of these trends is
expected to significantly change refinery emission
rates in 2010  apart from the further investment in
stationary source controls (to meet MACT standards,
for instance) and these are accounted for in the post-
CAAA scenario emission estimates.

    Air  pollution   control  regulations  will  be
technology  forcing in that  many VOC containing
solvents will be re-formulated to low-VOC solvents or
replaced with water-based substitutes.   The  most
                                                A-54

-------
                                                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Argonne, 1995. Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, "Development of Emission Control and New
       Technology Options for the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Region, Volume I, Technology Costs,
       Performance, and Applicability," Denver, CO, prepared by Argonne National Laboratory, October,
       1995.

Balentine and Dickson,  1995. Balentine, Howard W., and Ronald J. Dickson, "Development of Uncertainty
       Estimates for the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission Emissions Inventory,"  in The
               Emission Inventory: Programs & Progress, proceedings of a Specialty Conference sponsored
       by the Air & Waste Management Association, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 11-13,1995.

BEA, 1995. Bureau of Economic Analysis, "Regional State Projections of Economic Activity and Population
       to 2045," U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, July 1995.

Cocca, 1997: P. Cocca, U.S. EPA Office of Water, e-mail to S. Roe, Pechan-Avanti Group, April 21,1997.

DOE, 1991. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, "State Energy Data Report —
       Consumption Estimates 1960-1989," DOE/EIA-0214(89), Washington, DC, May 1991.

DOT, 1992. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, "Highway Statistics 1991,"
       Washington, DC, FHWA-PL-92-025,1992.

Dungan, 1999: A. Dungan, The Chlorine Institute, personal communication with E. Albright, The Pechan-Avanti
       Group, August  11 and 12,1999.

EPA, 1991a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Procedures for Preparing Emissions Projections," Office
       of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, EPA-450/4-91-019, July 1991.

EPA, 1991b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Nonroad Engine and Vehicle Emission Study," Office
       of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, November 1991.

EPA, 1991c.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "MOBILE4 Fuel Consumption Model," draft output
       provided by the Office of Mobile Sources, Ann Arbor, MI, August 12,1991.

EPA, 1993a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources, "Users Guide to MOBILESa,"
       March 1993.

EPA, 1993b.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regional Interim Emission Inventories (1987-1991),
       Volume I:  Development Methodologies," EPA-454/R-93-021a, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1993.

EPA, 1993c. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Air Pollution Trends, 1900-1992," EPA-454/R-
       93-032, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, October 1993.
                                              A-55

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
EPA, 1994. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources, "Draft User's Guide to PARTS:
        A Program for Calculating Particle Emissions  From Motor Vehicles," EPA-AA-AQAB-94-2, Ann
        Arbor, MI, July 1994.

EPA, 1995. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume
        I:  Stationary Point and Area Sources," Fifth Edition  (AP-42), Office of Air Quality Planning and
        Standards, January 1995.

EPA, 1996a.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report,
        1995," Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA-454/R-96-005, October 1996.

EPA, 1997a.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Air Pollutant Emission Trends, 1900-1996,"
        EPA-454/R-97-011, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,  Research Triangle Park, NC,
        December 1997.

EPA, 1997b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Air Emissions Estimates from Electric Power Generation
        for the CAAA Section 812 Prospective Study," Office of Air and Radiation, February 1997.

EPA, 1998a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report,1997,"
        EPA-454/R-98-016, Office of Air Quality Planning and  Standards, Research Triangle Park NC,
        December 1998.

EPA, 1996b: National Dioxin Emissions from Medical Waste Incinerators, U.S. EPA, Emission Standards Division,
        Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Docket #A-91-61, Item IV-A-007, June 1996.

EPA, 1996c: National Mercury Emissions Estimates for Municipal Waste Combustors, U.S. EPA, Emission Standards
        Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, October 1996.

EPA, 1996c: FACT SHEET, Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators — (formerly known as medical waste
        incinerators orMWI), PromulgatedSubpart Ce Emission Guidelines, U.S. EPA, downloaded from the EPA TTN
        web site, August 1997.

EPA, 1996d: FACT SHEET, New Hospital!Medical!Infectious Waste Incinerators — (formerly known as medical waste
        incinerators orMWI), Promulgated Subpart EC Nen> Source Performance Standards, U.S. EPA, downloaded from
        the EPA TTN web site, August 1997.

EPA, 1996e: FACT SHEET, Amended Air Emission Regulations for Municipal Waste Combustion (MWC) Units, U.S.
        EPA, August 15, 1997.

EPA, 1996f: Characterisation of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1996 Update, U.S. EPA, Office of Solid
        Waste and Emergency Response, EPA 530-R-97-015, May 1997.

EPA, 1996g: Air Emissions Estimates from Electric Power Generation for the CAAA Section 812 Prospective Study, U.S.
        EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, February  1997.
                                                A-56

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
EPA, 1996h: Mercury Study Report to Congress, Volume II: An Inventory of Anthropogenic Mercury Emissions in the United
        States, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards and Office of Research and Development,
        EPA-452/R-97-004, December 1997.

EPA, 1996i: Locating and Estimating Air Emissions from Sources of Mercury and Mercury Compounds, U.S. EPA, Office
        of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA-454/R-97-012, December 1997.

EPA, 1998b:  1990 Emissions Inventory of Forty Section 112(k) Pollutants, Supporting Data for EPA's Proposed Section
        112(k) Regulatory Strategy,  U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, January 1998.

EPA,  1998c:   Emissions  Inventory  of Section 112(c)(6)  Pollutants: Polycyclic  Organic Matter (POM),  2,3,7,8-
        Tetrachlorodiben^p-p-doixin (TCDD)/ 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodiben^pfuran (TCDF), Poly chlorinated Eiphenyl Compounds
        (PCBs), Hexachloroben^ene, Mercury,  and Alkylated Eead, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning &
        Standards, April 1998.

Ingalls et al., 1989. Ingalls, Melvin N., Lawrence R. Smith, and Raymond E. Kirksey, "Measurement of On-Road
        Vehicle Emission Factors in the South Coast Air Basin: Volume I - Regulated Emissions," Southwest
        Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, June 1989.

OTC, 1994. Ozone Transport Commission, "Memorandum of Understanding Among the States of the OTC
        on Development of a Regional Strategy Concerning the Control of Stationary Source NOX Emissions,"
        September 27, 1994.

Pechan, 1994a.  E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "The Emission Reduction and Cost Analysis Model for NOX
        (ERCAM-NOx) - Final Report," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ozone/CO
        Programs Branch, May 1994.

Pechan, 1994b.  E.H.  Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Enhancements to the Emission Reduction and Cost Analysis
        Model for VOC (ERCAM-VOQ - Draft Final,"  prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
        Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Ambient Standards Branch, March 31, 1994.

Pechan, 1994c. E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Emissions Inventory for the National Particulate Matter Study
        - Draft Final," prepared  for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy Planning and
        Evaluation/Office of Policy Analysis, July 1994.

Pechan, 1995a. E.H.  Pechan & Associates, Inc.,  "Regional Particulate Strategies - Draft Report," prepared for
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation. September 29,1995.

Pechan, 1995b.  E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.,  Letter to William Kuykendal, U.S. Environmental Protection
        Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Updates to Fugitive Emission Components of
        the National Particulate Inventory," January 29,1996.

Pechan, 1996. E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc.,  "The Emission Reduction and  Cost Analysis Model for NOX
        (ERCAM-NOx) Revised Documentation," prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ozone
        Policy and Strategies Group, September 1996.
                                                A-57

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Pechan, 1998: Emission Projections for the Clean Air Act Section 812 Prospective Analysis, prepared by E.H. Pechan &
        Associates, Inc., prepared for Industrial Economics, Inc., June 1998.

Rosario, 1999:1. Rosario, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, personal communications
        with E. Albright, The Pechan-Avanti Group, on August 9, 11, and 13,1999.

Radian, 1995.  Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, "An Emissions Inventory for Assessing Regional
        Haze on the Colorado Plateau," Denver, CO, prepared by Radian Corporation, Sacramento, CA, January
        23, 1995.

SCAQMD, 1996. South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Draft Staff Report for Proposed Amendment
        to Rule 1171 - Solvent Cleaning Operations," June 14,1996.

Schott, 1996.  Schottjim, "Lots of Data, How Do We Use It?  Strengths and Inaccuracies of Utility Acid Rain
        Electronic Data Reports," Entergy Corporation, paper presented at Air and Waste Management
        Association Conference - The Emission Inventory:  Key to Planning, Permits, Compliance, and
        Reporting, New Orleans, LA, September 1996.

Science & Policy, 1995. Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission, "Options for Improving  Western
        Vistas Volume One, I. Overview and  II. Origins, Organization, Process, and Technical Approach,"
        Denver, CO, prepared by Science & Policy Associates, Inc., November    4,1995.

Seinfeld, 1986. Seinfeld, John H., Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics of Air Pollution, John Wiley & Sons, 1986.

USD A, 1989.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, "An Inventory of Participate Matter and Air Toxic
        Emissions from Prescribed Fires in the United States for 1989," Seattle WA, 1989.

USD A, 1998.  U.S. Department of Agriculture, "USD A - Agricultural Baseline Projections to 2007," World
        Agricultural Outlook Board, Office of the Chief Economist, Staff Report No. WOAB-98-1, 1998.

Wolcott and Kahlbaum, 1991. Wolcott, Mark A., and D.F. Kahlbaum, "The MOBILE4 Fuel Consumption
        Model," EPA-AA-TEB-EF-91-X, April 1991.

Yates,  1999: A. Yates, Industrial Economics, Inc., personal communication with S. Roe, The  Pechan-Avanti
        Group, August 13,1999.
                                               A-58

-------
 Direct  Costs
Introduction

    In this appendix, we  present the estimation of
direct compliance costs associated with the Clean Air
Act Amendment programs under Title I through V
that control the following criteria pollutants:
       Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
       Oxides of Nitrogen (NO,,)
       Carbon monoxide (CO)
       Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
       P articulate   matter   with    an
       aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns
       or less (PM10)
       Particulate   matter   with    an
       aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns
       or less (PM25)
The first section of the appendix provides a general
overview of our methodology for estimating direct
compliance costs and the models used in the analysis.1
The following section presents costs first by emission
sources and  then by CAAA title.  Cost by emission
source reviews  the  specific costing approach  (i.e.,
source-specific  cost  equations or operating  cost
estimates), sources of data, and  emission control
scenarios applied to five regulated  sectors and ozone
nonattainment areas.  Costs are also  presented by
CAAA  title, where  the cost components (i.e., the
emission sources and provision)  are  identified for
Titles I through V.  In the following section, we
discusses several additional issues  related to  fully
accounting for the broader economic consequences of
reallocating resources to the production and use of
pollution abatement equipment (i.e., estimating social
costs versus  direct compliance costs).  We conclude
with  a  discussion  of analytic  limitations  and
characterizations of the potential impact of several key
uncertainties of cost estimates.
Summary of Methods

    We use two modeling approaches to calculate cost
estimates under Post-CAAA control scenarios in the
projection  years,  2000 and  2010. The  control
assumptions (i.e.  emissions scenarios) used as inputs
in the  models are consistent with the assumptions
used in the analysis of both emissions projections and
benefits. The cost data used as parameters in these
models includes results and information from EPA
regulatory impact assessments  (RIAs),  background
information  documents (BIDs), regulatory support
documents, and Federal Register notices.

ERCAM Model

    We use ERCAM to estimate the costs associated
with regulating  particulate matter  (PM),  volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), and non-utility oxides of
nitrogen  (NO^.2  The model is essentially a cost-
accounting  tool  that  provides   a  structure for
modifying and updating changes in inputs  while
maintaining consistency with the emission and cost
analyses.    Cost  scenarios and  assumptions are
developed for source  categories  (e.g.,  point, area,
nonroad, and motor vehicle sources) and in response
to specific  provisions  and emission targets.   The
model  estimates costs  based on inputs such as cost
per ton, source-specific cost equations, incremental
production, and operating cost estimates.  For this
analysis,  we  collected data  and  inputs   from
information   presented   in   regulatory  impact
assessments   (RIAs),    background   information
documents  (BIDs), regulatory support documents,
and Federal Register notices.
    1 This appendix is a condensed version of more detailed
reports completed under EPA's direction.  For more details see
Pechan, 1998.
    2 This model was developed by E. H. Pechan & Associates,
Inc. to facilitate EPA's analysis of emissions control.
                                               B-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
IPM Model

    We rely on a utility planning model, Integrated
Planning Model (IPM), to estimate the costs of NOX
and SO2 controls for electric utilities.  IPM is a linear
program/optimization model that can estimate costs
and   emissions  based  on  key  constraints  and
parameters.  One of the significant advantages to this
model is that it provides the analysis with flexibility in
the level of detail for characterizing constraints and
economic assumptions.  In this analysis, the model
estimates  compliance costs based on assessing the
optimal mix of pollution control strategies subject to
a series of specified constraints.  Key inputs to the
model include targeted emissions  reductions  (on a
seasonal and annual basis), characteristics of control
technology,  and   economic   parameters.     The
characteristics  of  control  technology  examines
operational costs and constraints associated with the
performance of existing and new utility generating
units.  Examples of inputs for existing units include
plant capacity,  fuel usage  rates, fixed and variable
O&M costs.  For new utility generating units, inputs
are generally associated with unit characteristics such
as  capacity  and  costs  of  capital.   Economic
assumptions include the projected  electric industry
growth, changes in seasonal and regional demand, and
forecasts of fuel prices.

Additional Methods

    We estimate  non-utility SO2 emission control
costs for  point sources by applying  source-specific
cost   equations   for  flue  gas    desulfurization
(FGD)/scrubber  technology to  affected sources in
2000 and 2010. While we do not explicitly model CO
attainment costs, we include in the analysis the costs
of programs designed to reduce CO emissions, such
as oxygenated fuels and a cold temperature CO motor
vehicle emission standard.
(O&M) costs.3 They do not represent actual cash flow
in a given year, but rather are an estimate of average
annual burden over the period during which firms will
incur costs (i.e., equipment life).  In annualizing costs,
we convert total capital investment, plus O&M and
other re-occurring costs, to a uniform series of per-
year expenditures  over a given time period.  The
discounted sum of these annual expenditures is equal
to the net present value of total costs incurred over
the time period of this analysis.4


CAAA  Costs

    We estimate costs of implementing the Clean Air
Act Amendments  under two Post-CAAA scenarios,
2000 and  2010.  The estimates, therefore, represent
differences in costs between pre- and post-scenarios
in each of the two years.  The  cost estimates for
implementing Tides I through V of the Clean Air Act
Amendments are $19 billion under the Post-CAAA
2000 scenario and $27 billion under the Post-CAAA
2010 scenario. All costs are in 1990 dollars.  This
appendix presents the costs first by source and then
by title.

    This section summarizes our costing methods and
results for the following CAAA regulated sectors:
        Industrial point sources
        Electric utilities
        Nonroad engines and vehicles
        Motor vehicles
        Area sources
        Ozone nonattainment areas
Compliance with the CAAA provisions for motor
vehicles  is the  single largest cost component:  $9
billion for the Post-CAAA 2000 scenario, and $12
billion for Post-CAAA 2010. The costs of compliance
Annualization of Costs

    The costs  presented in this  analysis  are  total
annualized costs (TAQ in 2000 and 2010.  Annualized
costs include both capital costs,  such as  costs  of
control equipment, and operation and maintenance
    3 For a few VOC source categories, we estimate that capital
investment will not be necessary; for these sources, compliance
costs reflect O&M costs only.

    4 We re-calculate the control cost estimates from regulatory
documents that use a seven or ten percent discount rate so that the
costs will be  consistent with  the five percent  discount rate
assumption used in this analysis.  We also calculate cost using three
percent and seven percent discount rates, as sensitivity tests: for
detail see the discussion of uncertainty later in this appendix.
                                                 B-2

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
for industrial point sources, utilities, and area sources
are somewhat smaller; they range from $3 to $5 billion
dollars each. Table B-l summarizes the cost estimates
by year and emissions source.
  Table B-1
  Summary of Cost Estimates by Emissions Source
                                                       Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
Sector/Pollutant
Total Non-utility Point
Non-utility Point/VOC
Non-utility Point/NOx
Non-utility Point/Non-
VOC MACT1
Utilitv/SO, and NOV
Non-Road Engines/Vehicles
Motor Vehicles
Total Area Sources
Area/VOC
Area/NOx
Area/PM
Progress Requirements
Permits2
TOTAL
Post-CAAA 2000
$ 2,900
900
1,700
310
$3,100
$100
$9,100
$ 2,900
920
16
1,900
$1,200
$300
$ 19,400
Post-CAAA 2010
$ 3,400
960
2,100
320
$ 4,600
$400
$ 12,300
$ 3,300
1,000
18
2,200
$ 2,500
$300
$ 26,800
Notes:
        Costs reflect estimates of annualized costs from final rules. Source categories are not modeled in ERCAM-VOC
        because the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) are associated with non-VOC HAP
        emission reductions, and are therefore not included in the Post-CAAA 2000 and 2010 inventories.
        These costs include costs only for State-implemented permitting programs. We exclude the costs of Federally-
        implemented programs since all Title V permit programs will be State-run in 2005.	
Industrial Point Sources

    Industrial point  sources are non-utility sources
that are large enough to be included in the 1990
emissions database as individual sources of emissions.
To determine the level  of  air pollution controls
necessary for reducing emissions under the 2000 and
2010 Post-CAAA scenarios, we apply the following
CAAA controls to point source emission inventory:

    •   Title III  2-year and 4-year MACT
        standards for VOCs
    •   Title I CTGs for controlling VOCs
    •   Title  I  VOC  and  NOX RACT
        requirements in ozone NAAs
    •   A 0.15 Ibs/MMBtu NOX cap on fuel
        combustors of 250 MMBtu per hour
        or above  in  the OTAG 37-State
        region
    •   Ozone
          NAA
requirements
rate-of-progress
    To  estimate  the quantity and  type  of VOC
controls, we apply point source Title I RACT and
                                                 B-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
CTGs requirements in areas according to  ozone
nonattainment  classification.  The Clean  Air Act
requires VOC controls in moderate and above ozone
nonattainment  areas (NAA)  and throughout the
ozone transport region  (OTR). Existing controls are
taken into consideration  in our  determination of
which CAA-mandated controls are necessary to limit
projected emissions.   We use a  threshold of ten
percent efficiency for this determination. We calculate
costs for new control  if the existing control is less
efficient than the model control  by more  than ten
percent (i.e. emissions changes of less than ten percent
are assumed to  be de minimus and are not included in
the cost estimate).

    To  estimate the  quantity and type  of NOX
controls, we apply these controls to the point source
inventory  on  a  year-round  basis.  The  ozone
nonattainment provisions of Title I require installation
of RACT-level  controls for major stationary sources
of NOX located  in marginal and above NAAs and the
northeast OTR. We determine affected source sizes
according to ozone nonattainment classifications. The
analysis applies the 0.15 Ibs/MMBtu NOX limit to
industrial boilers at or above 250 MMBtu per hour in
the Ozone Transport Assessment Group  (OTAG)
region to approximate  the effects of NOX initiatives
under consideration.   We also account for Title I
requirements that include  the application of Level 2
controls in the OTAG region.

    Cost Approach

    We use ERCAM-VOC and ERCAM-NOX models
for generating cost estimates.  Model inputs include
costs per ton and incremental cost estimates derived
from RIAs and from control measure information
provided  by EPA,  States, industry,  and  other
agencies.5 Using the projected 2000 and 2010 emission
inventories, we also estimate costs by applying cost
equations  to  the  following  individual  source
categories:

    •  Adipic  and nitric acid manufacturing
        plants
        Cement manufacturing
        Gas turbines
        Glass manufacturing
        Industrial boilers
        Internal combustion engines
        Iron and steel mills
        Medical waste incinerators (MWTs)
        Municipal   waste    combustors
        (MWCs)
    •   Process heaters
    For some source categories,  capital and O&M
cost estimates are available in the literature for two or
more source sizes typical to that category.  For these
cases, we apply size-specific cost equations. Operating
characteristics  and  source  size,  both  of  which
influence the ease of retrofit, reduction performance,
and control costs, are major factors in determining
costs  of   controls.    Although   site   specific
characteristics can affect the overall cost, this type of
information is not available in the emission inventory.
Therefore we model costs based on a "typical" set of
controls.

    For source categories with insufficient data, we
estimate annual costs for controls using average  cost
per ton values from the ACTs, instead of size specific
cost equations.  These  values do not account for
economies  of scale or variations  in capacity factor,
which generally impact the cost per ton of pollutant
reduced.

    Recovery Factor

    ERCAM-VOC and ERCAM-NOX cost equations
use  a five  percent discount rate and  a  15-year
equipment life, or  a capital recovery factor (CRF) of
0.096. To  calculate the capital recovery factor for
converting capital charges to equivalent annual costs,
we use the  following formula:

          CRF = [i * (1  +t)"]/[(1 + if - 1]

where i   =    pre-tax marginal annual rate of
return (discount rate), and
       n  =    equipment economic life (in years).
    5 The Agency bases cost effectiveness values for rules that
have not yet been proposed on engineering judgement and
technology transfer from other categories.
                                                 B-4

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
To obtain  annual costs,  we use  the  following
algorithm:

           CRC = CKF * Capital Costs,

    where CRC = capital recovery cost (or annualized
capital cost).

    Cost Results

    Table B-2  summarizes estimated point source
VOC control  costs.    we  estimate costs to  be
approximately $901 million in 2000; of that total, $421
million will be Title I  VOC controls  costs and $480
million will result from the Title III MACT Standards.
In 2010, the total annual cost of point source VOC
controls is approximately $962 million: $440 million in
Title I controls and $521 million in Title III controls.

    Table B-3  summarizes  the  point  source  NOX
control costs under the 2000 and 2010 Post-CAAA
scenarios. OTAG region costs under the 2000 Post-
CAAA scenario total $1.6 billion, increasing to $2.1
billion by 2010.  Point source NOX control costs in the
rest of the nation are $21 million under the 2000 Post-
CAAA scenario and $22 million under the 2010 Post-
CAAA scenario.  Nationwide, ICI boilers bear the
majority of point source NOX control  costs, which
account for seventy-nine percent of the  total costs in
2010.
 Table B-2
 Point Source VOC Cost Summary

 Source Category
           Annual Costs (million 1990 dollars)1
          Post-CAAA 2000
Post-CAAA 2010
  National Rules
     Marine vessel loading: petroleum liquids                            $20                  $30
     TSDFs                                                   Less than 0.1          Less than 0.1
  New CTGs (moderate)
     Printing - lithographic                                               (0.7)                 (0.7)
     SOCMI distillation                                                  0.1                   0.1
     SOCMI reactor                                                    1.9                   2.2
  Non-CTG and  Group III CTG RACT (moderate and above)
     Automobile surface coating                                        210                  220
     Bakeries                                                         0.9                   1.1
     Beverage can surface coating                                       47                    47
     Carbon black manufacture                                          1.2                   1.3
     Charcoal manufacturing                                             0.0                   0.0
     Cold cleaning                                                    17                    18
     Fabric printing                                                    22                    23
     Flatwood surface coating                                           20                    21
     Leather products                                                  1                     1.1
     Metal surface coating                                              51                    57
     Organic acids manufacture                                          1.7                   2.0
     Paint and varnish manufacture                                       2.5                   2.8
     Paper surface coating                                              5.5                   5.5
     Plastic parts surface coating                                         5.1                   5.3
     Rubber tire manufacture                                            1.4                   1.4
     SOCMI processes - pharmaceutical                                   3.7                   4.1
     Whiskey fermentation - aging                                        0.2                   0.2
                                                B-5

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                                                      Annual Costs (million 1990 dollars)1
Source Category
CTG RACT (marginal and above)
Cellulose acetate manufacture
Dry cleaning - Stoddard solvents
In-line degreasing
Open top degreasing
Printing - letterpress
Terephthalic acid manufacture
Vegetable oil manufacture
Total Title I Costs
NESHAP
Benzene NESHAP
2-Year MACT (national):
Dry Cleaning - PCE
SOCMI HON:
Chemical manufacture
SOCMI - process vents
SOCMI fugitives
SOCMI processes
VOL storage
4-Year MACT (national)
Aerospace industry
Coke Oven Batteries
Gasoline distribution - Stage I
Halogenated solvent cleaning
Marine vessel loading: petroleum liquids2
Petroleum refineries: other sources not distinctly listed
Polymers and Resins Group I
Polymers and Resins Group II
Polymers and Resins Group IV
Printing and Publishing
Shipbuilding and ship repair
Wood furniture surface coating
Total Title III Costs
Total Point Source VOC Control Costs (Title I and Title III)
Post-CAAA 2000

1.5
0.1
(0.3)
(1.0)
0.5
2.3
Less than 0.1
$420
$0.2

2.2

12.0
2.1
(3.9)
22
1.5

3.5
21
12
(8.5)
17
40
110
4.3
5.3
200
0.4
37
$480
$900
Post-CAAA 2010

1.6
0.1
(0.3)
(1.2)
0.5
2.5
Less than 0.1
$440
$0.2

2.7

13.0
2.4
(4.5)
26
1.7

4.7
21
13
(9.1)
20
45
130
5.0
6.7
210
0.5
38
$520
$960
Notes:
1    Control costs reflect growth projections and CAAA control assumptions relative to a 1990 baseline.
2    The costs for the joint MACT/RACT rule for marine vessel loading are allocated between Title I and Title III based on the 58
    percent/42 percent distribution in the addendum to the final rule (EPA, 1995b).
                                                      B-6

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Table B-3
Point Source NOX Summary
                                                              Annual Costs (million 1990 dollars)
Source Category
RACT (outside of OTAG Region)
Adipicand Nitric Acid Manufacturing
Cement Manufacturing
Gas Turbines
Glass Manufacturing
ICI Boilers
Internal Combustion Engines
Iron & Steel Mills
Waste Combustors
Process Heaters
Subtotal (RACT outside of OTAG Region)
RACT/OTAG Level 2 (OTAG Region)
Adipicand Nitric Acid Manufacturing
Cement Manufacturing
Gas Turbines
Glass Manufacturing
ICI Boilers
Internal Combustion Engines
Iron & Steel Mills
Waste Combustors
Process Heaters
Subtotal (RACT+OTAG Level 2+0.15 Cap)1
Total Point Source NOX Control Costs
Post-CAAA 2000

$<0.1
1.7
0.7
3.1
14
0.8
<0.1
0.1
0.8
$21

$31
97
18
38
1,200
190
2.5
10
21
$1,600
$1,700
Post-CAAA 2010

$<0.1
1.7
0.7
3.2
15
0.8
<0.1
0.1
0.8
$22

$35
110
28
41
1,700
190
2.4
12
23
$2,100
$2,100
Notes:
1    The 0.15 Ibs/MMBtu cap on fuel combustors of 250 MMBtu per hour and above is only applied under the 2010 Post-CAAA
    scenario.
*    Totals may not add due to rounding.
                                                B-7

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Utility Sources

    The electric power  industry  is  comprised  of
entities that generate and sell electricity under two
types of conditions: (i) under firm contracts to electric
utilities; (ii)  directly to consumers as electric utilities.
These   entities  include  businesses,  governmental
agencies,  and  cooperative organizations.   In this
analysis,  we  include   only  independent  power
producers and cogeneration units in the contiguous
United States  that report  to  the  North American
Electricity Reliability Council (NERC).6  We exclude
a  large  number  of electric  utilities  that  simply
distribute power since those facilities  are unlikely to
directly face CAAA regulations.

    Scenarios

    Our assumptions of electricity demand are based
on NERC's 1994 generation forecast with a slight
downward adjustment to reflect expected changes in
demand due to the Administration's Climate Change
Action Plan. In general, we expect that the industry
will respond to CAAA regulations by adjusting the
mix of fuel types for future generation capacity (i.e.,
increasing electricity generation by combined  cycles
and decreasing use of combustion turbines),  rather
than   significantly   altering   production   levels.
Consequently, modeled differences in total generation
capacity for Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios are also
relatively small and demand for electricity under both
scenarios is essentially the same.7

    The predominant emitters of air pollutants by the
electric power industry  are  generation units  that use
fossil fuels.  This includes coal-fired steam, oil/gas-
fired steam, oil/gas combustion turbine, and natural
gas combined cycle units.  Under the  Pre-CAAA
     We do not include trust territories, Alaska, and Hawaii in this
analysis.  Trust territories are not directly covered by the CAA.
With respect to Alaska and Hawaii, these States generate  such
small amounts of power that excluding them does should not  have
a significant effect on the results of this analysis.

    7Demand is 3.0 trillion kilowatt hours (kWh) in 2000 and 3.6
trillion kWh in 2010.
regulatory scenario, we fix standards at prevailing 1990
levels.  We assume that existing controls of carbon
monoxide and particulate matter remain constant in
both Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios.   The  Post-
CAAA regulatory scenario reflect standards that target
these generation units and their emissions of SOX and
NOX.8

    In the Pre-CAAA scenario  developed for  utility
SOX emissions, we assume existing units satisfied State
Implementation  Plan  (SIP)  requirements  which
specify unit-specific permits for individual boilers or
plants. Typically, these permits restrict sulfur-content
levels of coal or fuel oil that are burned.  In  addition,
new coal-fired units must continue to meet the New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) set in 1978.  In
the Post-CAAA scenario, units subject to compliance
with Title IV Acid Rain Allowance Trading program
are existing units that burn fossil fuels and are over 25
megawatts (MW) and all new units that burn  fossil
fuels (regardless of size). Lastly, compliance with the
trading program is phased in by 2000.

    Under the Pre-CAAA scenario, we do not model
NOX controls on existing sources. New sources must
meet either  existing  New Source Performance
Standards   (NSPS)   or  Best  Available   Control
Technology  (BACT)  standards, whichever  is lower.
In the Post-CAAA scenario, existing sources of NOX
emissions  are  regulated: (i)  under  Title I, where
existing units comply with RACT requirements in
ozone transport regions (OTR) and non-attainment
areas (NAA), and (ii) under Tide IV, where coal-fired
units must meet with phased requirements by 2000.9
New sources must meet the most stringent standard
among the following, NSPS requirements of Title I,
    8Under both regulatory scenarios, we do not account for the
costs of regulating air toxics.  The Amendments mandate the
Agency to evaluate the human health impact of utilities' air toxics
emissions. In the case where harmful effects are determined, the
Agency is required to promulgate regulation of their emissions.
The Agency, however, has not reached any conclusions on air
toxic emissions from power plants.

    The  OTR  consists  of New England,  New York,
Pennsylvania,  New Jersey,  Delaware, Maryland, District of
Columbia, and sections of northern Virginia.
                                                  B-8

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
BACT  requirements  of  Tide  I,  or  Title  IV
requirements.    We  summarize  the  Post-CAAA
scenarios for the control of these two pollutants are
summarized in Table B-4.
  Table B-4
  Differences in the Control of Utility NOX and SOX for the
  Pre-CAAA and the Post-CAAA Regulatory Scenarios
   Pollutant
              Pre-CAAA
                Post-CAAA
 SOV
Existing units: Comply with State
Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements
prevailing in 1990 to ensure compliance
with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standard.
Existing units: Comply with the Acid Rain
Allowance Program under Title IV of the CAAA
1990 with phased-in requirements.  Phase I
covers the largest 110 coal-fired power plants in
1995. All other units above 25 megawatts are
covered in Phase II beginning in 2000.
                New units: Comply with New Source
                Performance Standards (NSPS) set in
                1978 and BACT fixed at 1990 levels
                applied through the New Source Review
                (NSR) process.
                                        New units: Comply with the NSPS set in 1978,
                                        BACT/LAER (Lowest Achievable Emission
                                        Requirements), and the Acid Rain Allowance
                                        Trading Program under Title IV of the CAAA
                                        1990.
  NOV
Existing Units: No federal standards,
except NSPS for new units built after
passage of the law.
Existing units: Meet Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) in 1995 in the OTR and all
non-attainment areas per Title I. States can file
waivers from  RACT requirements.  Coal-fired
units comply with Title IV NOX requirements that
are phased in overtime, or RACT, whichever is
more stringent. Group 1/Phase  I coal-fired units
comply in 1996. Group 1/Phase II and Group 2
coal-fired units comply in 2000.  Collective action
by the 37 eastern States  in the Ozone Transport
Assessment Group (OTAG) will lead to additional
requirements (known  as "Level 2 controls") under
Title I for reducing NOX emissions during the
summer months (May - September).
                New units: Units using fossil fuels comply
                with the NSPS for each generation
                technology and fuel. Application of BACT
                in the NSR process at levels existing in
                1990.
                                        New units: Comply with Title I NSPS and
                                        BACT/LAER and Title IV standards for coal-fired
                                        units, whichever is more stringent.  Units subject
                                        to OTAG Level 2 controls for reducing NOX during
                                        summer months.
                                                B-9

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Compliance Actions

    In order to  comply with  the  Title IV SOX
Allowance Trading program under the Post-CAAA
scenario, the electric  power industry must  install
continuous  emissions  monitoring  systems.    In
addition  to  the  monitoring  system,  they may  be
required to adopt at least one of the following four
types of action:

    •  Improve  the  performance   of  existing
       scrubber units and scrubbers that facilities
       will  build on new units under the NSPS of
       the Pre-CAAA Scenario
    •  Add scrubbers on existing units
    •  Switch to lower sulfur coals
    •  Switch over from coal-fired to gas-fired units

    We assume in the Section 812 cost analysis that
the electric power industry faces four NOX regulatory
programs. These programs require the industry to:

    •  Place RACT controls on existing generation
       units in States without EPA waivers
    •  Build new generation units to meet BACT
       requirements
    •  Comply with Title IV NOX rules for new and
       existing coal-fired units
    •  Comply with NOX Cap-and-Trade program
       for reducing emissions during the summer
       months in the eastern United States

    Cost Approach

    We configured the IPM to forecast the operation
of the electric power industry from 2000 to 2010. The
baseline case, used in EPA's Clean Air Power Initiative
(CAPI), includes  the set of CAAA controls that the
Agency promulgated or  States established through
their permit decisions by the middle  of 1996. The
baseline case also includes RACT and BACT decisions
under the New Source Review program, Phase I and
Phase  II of the  Title IV SOX Allowance Trading
Program, and Phase I NOX control requirements
applied to all tangentially-fired and wall-fired boilers
that use coal.
    In simplest terms, we sets up the  Pre-CAAA
scenario for the electric power industry by removing
the CAAA controls from the CAPI base  case and
running the IPM model to forecast emission levels
and  costs  of  producing electric power.   We fix
standards under the Pre-CAAA 2000 and Pre-CAAA
2010 scenarios at 1990 levels. To establish  the Post-
CAAA scenario, we add further NOX controls to the
CAPI base case, which focuses on the emissions and
costs  of producing electric power under the CAAA
Title IV SOX Allowance Trading program. The Post-
CAAA scenario reflects a NOX cap-and-trade program
that  EPA presented  at  OTAG  meetings  and was
considered, at the time the utility analysis was initiated
(1995-1996), to be a plausible outcome of the OTAG
process.  The NOX control program incorporated in
the Post-CAAA scenario may not reflect  the NOX
controls that are actually implemented in a regional
ozone transport rule.

    Cost Results

    Cost results are presented in Table  B-5 below.
Based on the Section 812 cost analysis for the electric
power industry, we estimate that the annual national
costs of the CAAA will be roughly $3.1 billion in 2000
and $4.6 billion in 2010.
   Table B-5
   Electric Power Industry Costs from Post-
   CAAA Controls for SOX and NOX

                     Annual Control Costs
                     (millions 1990 dollars)
Pollutant
sox
NOX
Total
Post-CAAA
2000
$1,900
$1,200
$3,100
Post-CAAA
2010
$1,600
$2,900
$4,600
                                              B-10

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Non-Road Engines/Vehicles

    Nonroad  sources  are  mobile  (non-highway)
emission sources.  They include the following: lawn
and  garden  equipment,  construction  equipment,
agricultural equipment, industrial equipment, aircraft
and  airport  service  vehicles,  logging  equipment,
recreational vehicles, locomotives, and marine vessels.
We use ERCAM to estimate future emissions from
non-road engines/vehicles. This model  incorporates
Federal regulatory programs for controlling  NOX,
PM10, VOC, and CO emissions from nonroad engines
and equipment under the Post-CAAA scenario.

    Cost Approach

    To develop cost estimates  for nonroad control
measures, we apply cost-effectiveness  values  from
several  sources  (e.g.,  draft  or  final rules  and the
Section 812 emission projections analysis  (Pechan,
1997a)). The analysis includes costs for control inputs
applied to the following nonroad source categories:
small  SI  (gasoline)  engines,  CI  (diesel)  engines,
locomotives, and marine vessels.

    We calculate TACs in each implementation year to
calculate the net present value (NPV) of both costs
and  benefits  over the estimated period  of fleet
turnover.10 Because we base the benefits analysis on
projected emission reductions  in 2000 and 2010,
rather than the  discounted  stream of benefits, the
inputs to this cost analysis represent the annualized
cost per  ton of  reduction, not  the NPV  cost-
effectiveness. The exception is the input used for the
Federal locomotives rule;   because TAG in each
implementation  year are not available, we use the
average annualized cost per ton across  the entire
implementation period in both 2000 and 2010.

    Cost Results

    Table B-6 summarizes the cost estimates for each
nonroad engine/vehicle  control measure modeled in
this  analysis  for 2000  and  2010.   Total nonroad
engine/vehicle costs, under Post-CAAA  scenarios,
are $104 million  and nearly $400 million in 2000 and
2010, respectively. Estimated SI engine costs are $56
million under the 2000 Post-CAAA scenario and $104
million  under   the 2010   Post-CAAA  scenario.
Reducing VOC  emissions  from lawn and garden
equipment contributes to the majority of SI engine
costs.  CI engine control costs are $22 million in the
2000 Post-CAAA scenario, and $32 million in 2010.
NOX  emission   reductions   from  construction
equipment account for  a significant proportion of
total  CI engine control costs.  Locomotive and
commercial  marine vessel benefits  are not realized
until after 2000; costs under the 2000 Post-CAAA
scenario are therefore zero.11
    10  We were  unable to apply the per engine costs  of
modifying equipment/vehicles to meet EPA standards because
engine populations were not available for all areas.
    11 NOX standards for locomotive and commercial marine
vessels do not take effect until 2000.  For the purpose of this
analysis, costs are small enough in 2000 that they are omitted.
                                                B-11

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
      Table B-6
      Cost Estimates for Nonroad Engine/Vehicle CAAA Programs
                                                             Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
Engine/Vehicle Category
SI Engines:
Construction Equipment
Industrial Equipment
Lawn and Garden Equipment
Farm Equipment
Commercial Equipment
Logging Equipment
Cl Engines:
Construction Equipment
Industrial Equipment
Farm Equipment
Logging Equipment
Airport Service Equipment
Other
Locomotives
Marine Vessels:
Recreational
Commercial
Total Nonroad Engine/Vehicle Control Costs
Post-CAAA 2000

$1.7
0.5
41
0.2
12
0.9

$12
3.6
2.9
0.1
2.8
0.2
$01

$27
O1
$104
Post-CAAA 2010

$3.1
1.2
74
0.4
23
2.1

$ 17
5.2
4.4
0.2
4.6
0.2
$35

$230
1
$400
      Note:
          Costs in 2000 are zero because program emissions reductions are not realized until after 2000. See text and
          Pechan (1998 and 1997a) for further explanation.
Motor Vehicles

    Motor vehicle emissions account for almost thirty
percent of 1990 anthropogenic VOC emissions and
thirty-two percent of NOX emissions. To determine
the costs  of controlling VOC and NOX, we first
project motor vehicle emissions with ERCAM-VOC
and ERCAM-NOX (Pechan, 1998).  Then we use the
emissions projections to estimate future year motor
vehicle program costs for each of the modeled control
assumptions.12
    Cost Approach

    We convert   all motor vehicle-related  control
costs into one of three forms: cost per new vehicle,
cost per registered vehicle, or cost per mile traveled.
We calculate separate costs for each vehicle type (i.e.,
LDGV, light-duty gasoline truck (LDGT) 1, LDGT2).
Motor vehicle  calculations required projections of
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle registrations, or
vehicle  sales estimates.  We applied  the  following
equations:

Cost per new vehicle — projected vehicle sales * production
cost ($1 new vehicle)
                                                      Cost per registered vehicle = projected vehicle registrations *
    12 See the emission projection report for a discussion of the     QQ$I pgf vehicle \
emission projection methodology and the control assumptions
(Pechan, 1998).
                                                 B-12

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Cost per mile traveled = projected vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) * cost per mile ($/mile)

    Sources of Data

    The 1990 NPI Inventory provides the 1990
VMT data, which we project in the same manner as
it our emissions (Pechan, 1998).13  National
registrations from the MOBILE4 FCM are the
source of vehicle registration data for 1990 (EPA,
199 Id). The source of motorcycle registrations is
Highway Statistics (FHWA, 1991).  National sales data
is based on projected sales compiled by Data
Resources Incorporated (DRI). This information
was also used by EPA in the onboard vapor
recovery RIA (DRI, 1993; EPA,  1993d).14

    Cost Categories

    The CAAA motor vehicle  provisions generate
costs in the following categories: emissions
standards, fuel requirements, emissions inspections,
and low emission vehicle programs. The following
section describes the methodology we use  calculate
costs for each category of provisions.15

Emission Standards:

    •   Tier   1   Certification   Standards   and
        Evaporative Controls.   We calculate costs
        for  tailpipe  standards   and   evaporative
        controls with per-vehicle production costs
        applied to projected sales.

    •   Heavy-Duty     Vehicle     2g/bhp-hr
        Equivalent NOX Standard.  We calculate
        the cost of complying with the 2004 model
        year  emission standards  by estimating the
        baseline  package  of   emission   control
        technology for meeting  1998 model  year
        standards  (EPA,  1997f).  We use the 1994
        model year sales of different size classes of
        diesel trucks to  establish  sales  fractions,
        assumed to represent future sales as well.  We
        multiply these sales fractions by the year 2009
        per vehicle cost increases for light, medium,
        and HDVs to compute a sales-weighted per
        vehicle cost increase.

    •   Onboard Vapor Recovery.  To estimate the
        costs of onboard vapor recovery,  we  use
        expected increases in vehicle price (also
        referred to as retail price  equivalent)  and
        average lifetime operating cost (net present
        value) (EPA,  1993f).

    •   Cold Temperature CO Standard. The cost
        of the cold temperature CO standard to the
        consumer  includes   the   cost  to   the
        manufacturer, the manufacturer's and dealer's
        overhead and profits,  and  the increase  or
        decrease in maintenance and fuel costs.  We
        do not include fuel economy improvements
        in  the analysis.  We base cost estimates on
        retail price increases of $19 per LDV, $32 per
        LDT1, and $48.50 per LDT2 (Pechan, 1998).

    •   Onboard  Diagnostic (OBD) Systems.
        With OBD now appearing on all 1996 model
        year cars and light-trucks, Federal OBD costs
        are approximately $65 to $100 per vehicle.16
Fuels:
    13 EPA uses MOBILE4 FCM national projections, scaled to
metropolitan  statistical  areas (MSAs) according to population
projections, to project VMT and vehicle registrations.

    14 EPA assumes that motorcycle sales from Highway Statistics
(FHWA, 1991)  increase at the same rate as light-duty gasoline
vehicle (LDGV) sales.

    15 For more details on these standards see Appendix A.
    •   Gasoline Volatility Limits.  In order  to
        calculate the costs  of  lowering the Reid
        vapor pressure (RVP)  from 10.5 to 9.0  in
        Class C areas, we apply the cost estimate  of
    16 We apply the per vehicle cost estimate of $65. However,
there is evidence that OBD costs are more likely in the range of
$65 to $100 per vehicle (EPA, 1993d).
                                                B-13

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
        0.225 cents per gallon in the five  month
        ozone season (Wysor, 1988).

    •   Federal Reformulated Gasoline. We base
        reformulated gasoline costs on an incremental
        refiner's cost increase and a monetized fuel
        economy disbenefit. An estimate of 3.9 cents
        per gallon for Phase I and 5.1 cents per gallon
        for Phase II was used (EPA, 1993g). Phase II
        reformulated gasoline  modifications occur
        only in the summer. As a result, we consider
        Phase II costs to only five months out of the
        year.  The Phase I benefits will occur year-
        round and are primarily due to the oxygenate
        (affecting the aromatic  content)  and the
        reduction of fuel benzene content.

    •   California Reformulated Gasoline. We use
        the  estimates  from  the  California  Air
        Resources Board (GARB) to determine the
        increase in per gallon fuel  costs to consumers
        (GARB 1990; GARB, 1991).

    •   Oxygenated Fuels.  We base oxygenated
        fuel costs on an incremental cost of 3.8 cents
        per gallon (EPA, 1993g).

    •   California Reformulated Diesel. We base
        reformulated diesel costs on an incremental
        per gallon increase of six cents (Green, 1994).

    •   Diesel Fuel Sulfur Limits.  We use  an
        average value of 2.1 cents per gallon as  an
        estimate of the incremental cost of reducing
        the sulfur content of conventional diesel fuel
        (EPA, 1990).   The cost estimate do not
        include a fuel economy penalty for low sulfur
        diesel fuel because we estimate that energy
        content is  essentially the same as that  of
        conventional fuel (less than 1% lower).

Emissions Inspection Programs:

    •   Basic I/M.  We use the RIA on enhanced
        I/M for deriving this program's basic costs.
        Total per vehicle costs include the inspection
        fee, average repair cost, and the fuel economy
        benefit.  The average per  vehicle cost is
        approximately $5.70. We apply this estimate
        to LDGVs, LDGTls, and LDGT2s in areas
        where basic I/M is required.  Basic I/M costs
        are  evenly apportioned among VOC, NO^
        and CO. No additional costs  are attributed
        to areas that face I/M program requirements,
        but already have  a program in place (EPA,
        1992c).

    •   Low  Enhanced I/M.    Costs  for low
        enhanced I/M and OTR low enhanced I/M
        are  not well defined.  Therefore, we equate
        low enhanced I/M costs  equivalent to those
        of basic I/M.  The  average cost per vehicle
        for this program is approximately $5.70. This
        per vehicle cost applies to  all registered
        LDGV, LDGT1, and LDGT2  (EPA, 1992c).

    •   Enhanced I/M.  Estimates  of enhanced
        I/M costs  are subject to change as  States
        make decisions about their program designs.
        I/M program costs may  be  higher or lower
        according to  each State's selected program
        designs such  as centralized testing and caps
        on  the costs  of required  repairs.17   The
        estimated per-vehicle cost is $15.70. We base
        this figure  on a  test fee ($18),  an  average
        repair  cost  ($14.20 per  vehicle),  and  an
        average fuel  economy benefit ($16.50 per
        vehicle) (EPA, 1992c).18  We estimate annual
        costs by applying the per vehicle costs to an
        area's projected vehicle registrations.
    17To date, only four States have implemented Enhanced I/M
programs. Preliminary cost estimates indicate that opportunity
costs to vehicle owners in the form of travel and wait time do not
play as significant role as originally anticipated.  (Harrington and
McConnell, 1999.)

    18Test fee and the relationship between test sites and States
vary. In some cases the test fee represents a payment to the state
or local government. In other cases,  the fee covers the direct
costs of the testing program. It is not clear, however, how the
test fee could be apportioned between the two possibilities. To
the extent the fee represents a transfer payment, we may be
overestimating the direct cost and social cost of the program.
                                                 B-14

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Low Emission Vehicles:

    •   California   Low   Emission   Vehicle
        Program. We base costs for the California
        LEV on the incremental production cost of
        vehicles meeting each of the LEV standards
        (Pechan,  1998).  The overall  incremental
        production cost for a vehicle type reflects the
        projected fraction of sales of each type of
        LEV for each projection year.

    •   National Low Emission Vehicle Program.
        We calculate costs for the National LEV
        program  by  multiplying  the  incremental
        production cost of vehicles meeting each of
        the LEV standards by the estimated new
        vehicle sales volumes (Pechan, 1998).

Additional Programs:

    •   Clean  Fuel  Fleet  Program  (CFFP).
        CAAA mandated implementation of CFFP
        beginning in  1998  for  ozone   NAAs
        designated serious and above.  We estimate
        that the model year 1998 fleet demand for
        clean-fuel vehicles under the CFFP will be
        approximately  47,000 LDVs  and  12,000
        HDVs  (Oge, 1997).  However, we do  not
        include these costs in the analysis.19
vehicle provisions are listed in 1990 dollars by vehicle
type. Phase II RVP and Phase II Federal reformulated
gasoline  limits  generate  costs only  in the  ozone
season, while oxygenated fuel provisions result in CO
season (winter time) costs.  All other fuel programs
listed in Table B-7 generate year round costs.
    •   Transportation  Conformity.   Under  the
        transportation    conformity   rule,    the
        Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs)
        must perform  regional transportation and
        emissions  modeling  and  document  the
        regional air quality impacts of transportation
        plans  and  programs.  We  expect  these
        requirements will generate the primary costs
        of this rule.

    Table B-7 summarizes the motor  vehicle unit
costs used in this analysis.  Costs of individual motor
    19 EPA cannot requke manufacturers to produce CFVs and
areas covered by the CAAA can opt out of the program.
                                               B-15

-------
Table B-7
Motor Vehicle Unit Costs by Provision

Provision
Emission Standards:
Tier 1 Tailpipe Standards: VOC
Tier 1 Tailpipe Standards: NOX
Cold Temperature CO Standard
Evaporative Controls (New Evaporative Emissions
Test Procedure)
On-Board Vapor Recovery System
On-Board Diagnostics
Heavy Duty Engine Standard (2 gram equivalent)
Low Emission Vehicles:
TLEV
LEV
ULEV
ZEV
Fuels:
Phase II RVP Limits
Federal Reformulated Gasoline: Phase I
Phase II
Oxygenated Fuels
Low-Sulfur Diesel Fuel Requirements (0.05% sulfur)
California Phase II Reformulated Gasoline
California Reformulated Diesel
Inspection/Maintenance Programs:
Basic
Low Enhanced
High Enhanced
Notes:

Year
Dollars

1990
1990
1989
1993

1992
1993
1995

1996




1990
1993
1993
1993
1990
1991


1992
1992
1992

1 LDGV = light duty gasoline vehicle; LDGT = light duty gasoline truck;
LDDV = light duty diesel vehicle; LDDT = light duty
diesel truck


Cost Unit

Sales
Sales
Sales
Sales

Sales
Sales
Sales






Cents/gallon
Cents/gallon
Cents/gallon
Cents/gallon
Cents/gallon
Cents/gallon


Registrations
Registrations
Registrations

MC = motorcycle;



LDGV

36.8
115.0
15-23
1.0

4.54
65.0


53.0
95.0
145.0
5,000.0

0.2
3.9
1.2
3.8

12.3


5.7
5.7
15.7



LDGT1

33.7
80.6
15-48
8.0

4.48
65.0


53.0
95.0
145.0
5,000.0

0.2
3.9
1.2
3.8

12.3


5.7
5.7
15.7


Cost Estimate by Vehicle Type:1
LDGT2 MC HDGV HDDV LDDV LDDT

11.7
45.3 16.0 78.0
42-55
8.0 (13.0)

4.48
65.0
140.0






0.2 0.2 0.2
3.9 3.9 3.9
1.2 1.2 1.2
3.8 3.8 3.8
2.1 2.1 2.1
12.3 12.3 12.3
6.0 6.0 6.0

5.7
5.7
15.7

HDGV = heavy duty gasoline vehicle; HDDV = heavy duty diesel vehicle;



B-16

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Cost Results

    Table B-8 summarizes the motor vehicle costs for
2000 and 2010. The total cost post-CAA is $9 billion
in 2000 and $12 billion in 2010.
    Table B-8
    Cost Estimates of Motor Vehicle Program
                                                               Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
Program
Title I
California LEV
National LEV
Basic I/M
Low/OTR Enhanced I/M
High Enhanced I/M
Title II
Onboard Vapor Recovery*
Stage II Vapor Recovery*
Phase II RVP
Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life - VOC
Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life - NOX
Evaporative/Running Losses
Onboard Diagnostics
Cold Temperature CO Standard
Federal Reformulated Gasoline
California Reformulated Gasoline
Oxygenated Fuels
2 gram NOX Heavy Duty Standard
Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel
California Reformulated Diesel**
Total Motor Vehicle Control Costs
Post-CAAA 2000

$320
180
57
82
1,100

$63
71
280
504
1,500
42
880
380
720
2,000
160
0
570
170
$ 9,070
Post-CAAA 2010

$ 1,100
1,060
69
99
1,400

$69
86
340
550
1,700
46
960
410
860
2,400
204
69
740
230
$ 12,300
    Notes:
    *    The benefits of onboard vapor recovery and stage II vapor recovery are accounted for under area sources. The cost
        for onboard vapor recovery systems is estimated assuming phase-in for light duty gasoline vehicles and light duty
        trucks. Heavy duty trucks are not affected.
    **   The analysis does not account for the benefits (emission reductions).
                                                  B-17

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Area Sources

    Area sources comprise small stationary sources
not  listed  in the point source database  (e.g., dry
cleaners, graphic  arts,  industrial  fuel  combustion,
gasoline marketing) and solvent use (e.g., consumer
solvents, architectural coatings).  Area sources of
NOX emissions include industrial fuel combustion
units in the industrial, commercial/institutional, and
residential  sectors.  The following are VOC sources:
pharmaceutical manufacturing, wood furniture surface
coating, aerospace  manufacturing (surface coating),
ship  building  and  ship  repair (surface  coating),
halogenated   solvent   cleaning,  dry  cleaning  -
perchloroethylene  (PCE), and petroleum refinery
fugitives.  Area sources of PM10 are paved  roads,
unpaved   roads,   construction,   cattle   feedlots,
agricultural tilling, and agricultural burning.
    Cost Results

    Table  B-9  summarizes  area source  control
measure costs for NOX and PM under the 2000 and
2010 Post-CAAA scenarios. The costs associated with
applying NOX point source fuel combustion controls
to smaller sources are approximately  $16 million in
2000  and $18 million in 2010.   Control measures
applied to reduce PM emissions from area sources are
estimated to cost $1.9 billion under the 2000 Post-
CAAA scenario and $2.2 billion under the 2010 Post-
CAAA scenarios.  Controlling fugitive dust emissions
from construction activity generates the majority of
PM control costs.
    Cost Approach

    To assess the costs of reducing emissions  from
area  sources,  we  use  annualized  costs per ton
reduced.20 We estimate total annual costs under each
of the Post-CAAA scenarios by applying annualized
costs per ton from a variety of regulatory documents
to corresponding emission reductions. The annual
cost formula is:

Annual Cost = AnnuaR^ed Cost Per Ton * Emission
Reduction.21

ERCAM-NOX   and   ERCAM-VOC  incorporate
separate cost equations for each area source category.
    20 Source-specific data are not available for area and nonroad
sources.

    21 In the present analysis, we annualize total capital costs with
a five percent discount rate. In some cases, we re-calculate the
annualized cost per ton reported in the source material if that
estimate was based on a discount rate other than five percent.
                                                 B-18

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Table B-9
   Cost Summary of Area Source NOX and PM Controls
                                                       Annual Costs (million 1990 dollars)
                 Source Category
 Post-CAAA 2000
Post-CAAA2010
Area Source NOX Controls
Industrial Fuel Combustion - Coal
Industrial Fuel Combustion - Oil
Industrial Fuel Combustion - Natural Gas
Total Area Source NOX
Area Source PM Controls
Agricultural Burning
Agricultural Tilling
Beef Cattle Feedlots
Construction
Paved Roads
Unpaved Roads
Total Area Source PM

$6.6
0.8
8.5
$16

$37
4.1
1.4
1,500
350
1.1
$1,900

$7.5
0.8
9.9
$18

$39
3.6
1.7
1,800
440
0.8
$ 2,200
Reasonable Further Progress
Requirements

    Title I of the CAAA includes provisions that
require ozone nonattainment areas to make steady
progress toward compliance with NAAQS.  NAAs
classified as moderate, serious, severe, or extreme
must  demonstrate that they are working to  lower
ambient ozone concentrations at a reasonable rate of
progress (ROP) and, by 1996, reduce annual VOC
emission by fifteen percent from 1990 levels.   In
addition  to  satisfying ROP  requirements,  areas
classified as having an ozone nonattainment problem
that is  serious or worse  must  continue to  cut
emissions and make reasonable further progress (RFP)
toward attainment.  To meet RFP standards, after
1996, NAAs have to reduce precursor emissions by
three  percent per year until they  each reach their
respective   compliance deadlines.    While  ROP
requirements mandate VOC cuts to  comply with RFP
standards  it is often possible to substitute NOX for
VOC.  (Refer to Appendix A for more discussion of
ROP/RFP requirements.)
    Title I progress requirements establish minimum
emissions  reduction standards for ozone NAAs. In
many  cases,  the  areas  subject  to  ROP/RFP
regulations satisfy  these requirements  simply by
complying with other existing emissions standards.
VOC and NOX reductions  made  to meet other
regulations  are   credited  towards   ROP/RFP
requirements.  For the purposes of the prospective
analysis, we assume that where possible, credit is given
for all available NOX cuts and that any remaining
emission reduction needed to satisfy Title I progress
requirements come from VOC.  In the  majority of
cases, credited  VOC cuts account for this remaining
reduction. For NAAs that are not able to fulfill the
remainder  of  their  ROP/RFP  obligations  with
credited  VOC emissions reductions,  there  is a
shortfall.  This shortfall represents  the  quantity of
VOC that  ozone NAAs must reduce through control
efforts beyond those mandated by other clean air
provisions.

    Tables B-10 and B-ll  show, for the years 2000
and 2010  respectively, which NAAs are assumed to
                                              B-19

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
satisfy,  and  not  satisfy,  their  Title  I  progress
requirement.   Failure to meet the  requirement  is
indicated by a shortfall.  The shortfall is measured by
the amount ozone  season daily (OSD) level exceeds
the maximum allowable daily VOC emission.  The
OSD level of VOC  emission represents the predicted
daily  emission  in  the  absence  of  RFP/ROP
requirements, and VOC target presents the maximum
allowable daily VOC emissions.
                                               B-20

-------
                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table B-10
2000 Rate of Progress Analysis
Ozone Nonattainment Area
VOC  OSD1     VOC  Target2      Shortfall
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Baton Rouge
Beaumont-Port Arthur
Chicago-Gary-Lake County
Cincinnati-Hamilton
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain
Dallas-Fort Worth
El Paso
Grand Rapids
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria
Lewiston-Auburn ME
Los Angeles-South Coast
Louisville
Milwaukee-Racine
Muskegon
Nashville
NewYork-N New Jersey-Long Is
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton
Phoenix
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Portland ME
Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester
Providence
Reading PA
Richmond-Petersburg
Sacramento Metro
St. Louis
Monterey Bay
Salt Lake City
San Diego
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp
Sheyboygan
Washington DC
Knox & Lincoln Cos ME
Kewaunee Co Wi
Manitowoc Co WI
San Joaquin Valley
Ventura Co CA
Southeast Desert Modified
Boston-Lawrence-Worcester-E. MA
Springfield/Pittsfield-W. MA
Greater Connecticut
37.97
318.33
203.77
340.66
1,240.89
305.34
521.14
694.53
85.38
182.72
1,426.65
34.08
972.91
219.66
327.09
46.67
231.71
1,994.96
1,090.49
377.43
407.05
70.05
53.54
173.78
60.53
179.97
158.01
465.64
64.16
182.75
192.90
82.75
24.49
402.76
9.95
4.86
19.72
470.50
65.69
227.71
822.65
155.51
316.27
45.71
376.47
415.65
450.66
1,202.25
341.18
573.07
673.97
69.02
175.66
2,268.31
35.98
939.08
215.97
293.24
44.32
205.60
2,407.97
1,376.55
347.91
399.80
73.33
58.70
180.51
61.14
201.70
155.08
549.14
79.63
150.80
189.71
83.10
22.44
477.03
10.37
4.56
17.20
532.41
70.52
219.32
918.01
152.42
370.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
38.64
0.00
0.00
20.56
16.36
7.06
0.00
0.00
33.83
3.69
33.85
2.35
26.11
0.00
0.00
29.52
7.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.93
0.00
0.00
31.95
3.19
0.00
2.05
0.00
0.00
0.30
2.52
0.00
0.00
8.39
0.00
3.09
0.00
Notes:
    The VOC OSD (ozone season daily) values are the estimated daily emissions in the absence of
    ROP/RFP requirements.  These estimates do, however, incorporate the effect of the VOC
    reductions that are credited towards Title I progress requirements.
    The VOC target represents the maximum allowable daily VOC emission for NAAs to comply with
    ROP/RFP requirements.  The VOC target is calculated based upon the assumption that all available
    NOx cuts are credited towards ROP/RFP requirements and that all necessary remaining reductions
    come from VOC.
                                          B-21

-------
                                                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table B-11
2010 Rate of Progress Analysis

Ozone Nonattainment Area
VOC  OSD1
  VOC
Target2   Shortfall
Atlanta
Atlantic City
Baltimore
Baton Rouge
Beaumont-Port Arthur
Chicago-Gary-Lake County
Cincinnati-Hamilton
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain
Dallas-Fort Worth
El Paso
Grand Rapids
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria
Lewiston-Auburn ME
Los Angeles-South Coast
Louisville
Milwaukee-Racine
Muskegon
Nashville
NewYork-N New Jersey-Long Is
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton
Phoenix
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
Portland ME
Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester
Providence
Reading PA
Richmond-Petersburg
Sacramento Metro
St. Louis
Monterey Bay
Salt Lake City
San Diego
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lomp
Sheyboygan
Washington DC
Knox & Lincoln Cos ME
Kewaunee Co Wi
Manitowoc Co WI
San Joaquin Valley
Ventura Co CA
Southeast Desert Modified
Boston-Lawrence-Worcester-E. MA
Springfield/Pittsfield-W. MA
Greater Connecticut
492.40
33.21
293.56
206.65
377.63
1,236.73
283.74
485.90
687.15
84.33
183.11
1,530.07
32.03
847.66
216.86
321.89
46.86
230.00
1,842.53
1,070.05
347.52
358.67
66.88
52.49
166.61
55.33
179.35
135.99
439.47
61.76
189.83
174.04
81.53
24.69
355.35
8.98
4.77
19.37
448.37
62.33
213.87
775.66
147.45
292.53
541.99
45.71
376.47
415.65
450.66
840.15
341.18
573.07
673.97
69.02
175.66
1,606.75
35.98
670.95
215.97
204.72
44.32
205.60
2,407.97
1,194.41
347.91
399.80
73.33
58.70
193.15
61.14
201.70
120.24
549.14
79.63
150.80
202.24
83.10
22.44
477.03
10.37
4.56
17.20
566.96
63.11
172.34
918.01
166.51
370.11
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
396.58
0.00
0.00
13.18
15.31
7.45
0.00
0.00
176.71
0.89
117.17
2.54
24.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
15.75
0.00
0.00
39.03
0.00
0.00
2.25
0.00
0.00
0.21
2.17
0.00
0.00
41.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
Notes:
    The VOC OSD (ozone season daily) values are the estimated daily emissions in the absence of
    ROP/RFP requirements.  These estimates do, however, incorporate the effect of the VOC reductions
    that are credited towards Title I progress requirements.
    The VOC target represents the maximum allowable daily VOC emission for NAAs to comply with
    ROP/RFP requirements.  The VOC target is calculated based upon the assumption that all available
    NOx cuts are credited towards ROP/RFP requirements and that all necessary remaining reductions
    come from VOC.
                                             B-22

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Cost Results

    We base the RFP cost estimate on the assumption
that ozone nonattainment areas  (NAAs) will  take
credit  for NOX  reductions  for  meeting progress
requirements. Additional area-specific analysis would
be necessary to determine the extent to which areas
find NOX reductions beneficial in meeting attainment
and progress requirement targets. Trading of NOX for
VOC  to  meet  RFP requirements  may result  in
distributions of VOC and NOX emission reductions
that differ from those used in this analysis.  In part as
a  response  to  these  uncertainties, we adopt a
conservative strategy for estimating the costs of RFP
reductions, using the relatively high cost per ton
reduced value of $10,000 for all required reductions.
We calculate these annual figures by multiplying the
aggregate daily shortfall  by 365, and then multiplying
this number by the  estimated cost of each ton  of
reduction, $10,000.  Based on this calculation,  the
annual estimated cost of Title I progress requirements
is  $1,150  million in Post-CAAA 2000 and $2,460
million in  Post-CAAA 2010.

    Since  the time we conducted our  initial  cost
analysis, control measures for  several nonattainment
areas (NAA) have been identified that suggest controls
may be much less.  For example, the dollar  per ton
estimate associated with control measures selected in
Chicago is $3,500. We incorporate this information in
our sensitivity analysis.  In the sensitivity test analysis,
we calculate overall costs by applying the cost per ton
of reduction associated with each identified control.
Where the required reduction cannot be achieved
through  implementation  of  all  of the  identified
controls, we assume unidentified controls will be used
to eliminate the remaining shortfall.  We apply the
$10,000  per  ton   reduced  estimate   for  these
unidentified controls  (see Appendix B  for more
details). Results of the sensitivity analysis  suggest that
our conservative approach of applying $10,000 per
ton reduced to all VOC shortfalls may overstate cost
by as much as several billion dollars in 2010.

Costs by Title

    Examining CAAA costs by title, in addition  to
reviewing them by source, is useful for understanding
the cost components. Table B-12 summarizes the cost
estimates generated in this analysis by year and Title.
As shown  in the table, the cost estimate under the
Post-CAAA 2000 scenario  is $19 billion, increasing to
nearly  $27 billion  under  the  Post-CAAA  2010
scenario. All costs are in 1990 dollars.
                                                B-23

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  TableB-12
  Summary of Cost Estimates by CAAA Title
                                                              Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
Title
Title I -








Title II


Title III



Title IV

Title V
TOTAL
Sector/Pollutant
Provisions for Attainment and
Non-utility Point/VOC
Non-utility Point/NOx
Utility/SO2 and NOX
Area/VOC
Area/NOx
Area/PM
Motor Vehicle
Progress Requirements
- Provisions Relating to Mobile
Motor Vehicle
Nonroad
- Hazardous Air Pollutants
Point/VOC
Area/VOC
Non-VOC MACT1
- Acid Deposition Control
Utility/SO2 and NOX
- Permits

Post-CAAA 2000
Maintenance of NAAQS
$420
1,700
790
920
16
1,900
1,800
1,200
Sources
$7,300
104

$480
130
170

$2,300
$3002
$ 19,400
Post-CAAA 2010

$440
2,200
2,500
1,040
18
2,200
3,700
2,500

$ 8,700
400

$520
150
170

$ 2,040
$3002
$ 26,800
  Notes:
  1    Costs reflect estimate of annualized costs from final rules. We do not use ERCAM-VOC to model source categories,
      because the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) are associated with non-VOC HAP
      emission reductions. Consequently, they are not included in the Post-CAAA 2000 and 2010 inventories.
  2    Includes costs only for State-implemented permitting programs, excluding the costs of Federally-implemented programs,
      since all Title V permit  programs will be State-run in 2005.
    Joint Rules

    Assigning costs to a CAAA Title is difficult in the
case of "joint rules" issued under more than one Title.
For example, the  marine vessel rule  incorporates
controls to reduce VOC emissions through reasonably
available control technology (RACT) standards and
hazardous air pollutant (HAP)  emissions through
maximum achievable  control  technology  (MACT)
standards. In general, we assign the costs for joint
rules to the CAAA title based on the implementation
dates and the year by which emission reductions are
expected  to  occur.  In some cases, we assign joint
rules  costs to the more stringent rule  (in terms  of
sources covered or reduction required).  Examples of
source categories with overlapping Title I and Title III
control measures include the following:  aerospace,
surface coating, petroleum refineries,  shipbuilding,
synthetic  organic  chemical manufacturing industry
(SOCMI)  categories, printing, and wood furniture. In
cost accounting, we generally allocate the costs for
these source categories to Title III, rather than Title I.

    Title I

    Title   I,   Provisions   for   Attainment   and
Maintenance  of  National  Ambient  Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), includes national VOC rules and
any  controls that NAAs will  likely  apply to  meet
Federal standards for ozone and PM.  For Title I,
                                                 B-24

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
determining which rules are CAAA-related and which
are associated with other legislation is  sometimes
difficult. For example, EPA actually promulgated the
hazardous waste  transport,  storage, and disposal
facilities  (TSDF)  rule  under  the  authority of the
Resource Conservation and  Recovery Act (RCRA).
We attribute, however, the costs and associated VOC
emission  reductions  of the  Phase I and Phase II
RCRA  rule to Title I, because the rule is consistent
with  CAAA programs that  promote attaining and
maintaining the NAAQS.

    The costs associated with Title I consist of point
and area source costs for VOC, NOX, and PM control
measures. Total Title I costs are $8.6 billion in 2000
and $14.5 billion in 2010.22 The following two tables
summarize  the cost  analysis results for provisions
promulgated under Title I of the CAAA. Table B-13
presents  costs specifically  associated  with Title I
national point and area VOC rules. Table B-14 costs
by  national Title  I  provisions  regulating sectors
ranging from motor vehicles  to utilities. To preserve
consistency with   the  assumptions made  in  the
emission projections analysis, we simulate attainment
of the ozone and PM NAAQS as they were prior to
the 1997 revisions.
    22 Note that provisions included in other CAAA Tides, as well
as die decisions diat individual States make about how best to meet
progress requirements and attainment targets, affect Tide I costs.
                                                  B-25

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableB-13
Title I National Rules, Point and Area Source VOC Control Costs
                                                Annual Costs by Sector (million 1990 dollars)
                                               Post-CAAA 2000
                                   Post-CAAA2010
Title I National Rules
Point
Area
Total
Point
Area
Total
Consumer Products
AIM Coatings
Automobile Refinish Coatings
Hazardous Waste TSDFs
Municipal Landfills
Marine Vessel Loading
TOTAL
$0.0
0.0
0.0
<0.1
0.0
24
$24
$81
24
6
300
160
0
$570
$81
24
6
300
160
24
$590
$0.0
0.0
0.0
<0.1
0.0
28
$28
$88
27
7
350
170
0
$650
$88
27
7
350
170
28
$680
Notes:
    because the NESHAPs are associated with non-VOC HAP emission reductions.
    The Off-site Waste Treatment NESHAP was not modeled in this analysis. We assume that the Title I modeling of the
    RCRA Phase I and Phase 2 rules for hazardous waste TSDFs will capture any future MACT reductions and costs.
    EPA estimated that the Medical Waste Incineration guideline would cost between $59 million per year to $120 million per
    year, depending on the extent to which affected facilities switch to less expensive methods of treatment and disposal.  The
    cost above represents the midpoint of this range.
TableB-14
Summary of Costs for Title I
                                                                Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
                           Provision
                 Post-CAAA 2000
                            Post-CAAA 2010
Area Specific:
California LEV
National LEV
Basic I/M
Low/OTR Enhanced I/M
High Enhanced I/M
RACT:
VOC RACT
Non-utility NOX RACT
Utility NOV RACT/Best Available Control

$320
180
57
82
1,100

620
37
140

$ 1,100
1,060
69
99
1,400

660
40
530
               Technology (BACT)
     New CTG
     OTR:
         Utility Cap-and-Trade Program
         NOX Stationary (Non-utility)
     PM NAA Controls
Progress Requirements	
TOTAL
                        130

                        640
                      1,600
                      1,900
                    $ 1,200

                    $ 8,050
                                   150

                                  1,200
                                  2,100
                                  2,200
                                $2,500

                               $ 13,900
                                                B-26

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Title II

    Title II provisions include Federal motor vehicle
and  nonroad  engine/vehicle rules, in addition  to
regulations requiring fuel reformulations. Table B-15
summarizes the results  of our  cost  analysis  for
provisions promulgated under Title II of the CAAA.
    Table B-15
    Summary of Title II Motor Vehicle and Nonroad
    Engine/Vehicle Program Costs
                                                 	Annual Cost (million 1990 dollars)
        Provision                                      Post-CAAA 2000        Post-CAAA2010
Motor Vehicles/Fuels:
Motor Vehicle Emission Standards:
Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life - VOC
Tailpipe/Extended Useful Life - NOX
2 gram NOX Heavy Duty Standard1
Onboard Vapor Recovery
Cold Temperature CO Standard
Onboard Diagnostics
Evaporative/Running Losses
Fuels:
Phase II RVP
Federal Reformulated Gasoline
California Reformulated Gasoline
Oxygenated Fuels
California Reformulated Diesel
Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel
Stage II Vapor Recovery
Motor Vehicle Total
Nonroad Engines/Vehicles:
Phase I Cl engine standards
Phase I and II SI engine standards
Federal locomotive standards1
Federal commercial marine vessel standards1
Federal recreational marine vessel standards
Nonroad Engine Vehicle Total
Total Title II Costs


$504
1,500
0
63
370
880
42

280
720
2,000
170
170
570
71
$ 7,300

$22
56
0
0
27
$104
$ 7,400


$550
1,700
69
69
410
960
46

330
860
2,400
204
230
740
86
$ 8,700

$32
104
35
1
230
$400
$9,100
    Notes:
        Columns may not sum to totals due to rounding.
    1    Costs under the 2000 Post-CAAA scenario are zero because emission reductions are not realized until after 2000.
                                               B-27

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
TableB-16
Title III, MACT Standards, Point and Area Source VOC Control Costs
                                                           Annual Costs by Sector
                                                            (in million 1990 dollars)
Source Category
Post-CAAA 2000
Post-CAAA2010
Benzene NESHAP
2-Year MACT:
Dry Cleaning-Perchloroethylene
SOCMI HON
4-Year MACT:
Aerospace Industry (surface coating)
Chromium Electroplating1
Coke Ovens
Commercial Sterilizers1
Gasoline Distribution-Stage I
Halogenated Solvent Degreasing
Industrial Process Cooling Towers1
Magnetic Tape1
Marine Vessels
Medical Waste Incineration1'3
Municipal Waste Combustors1
Off-Site Waste Treatment2
Petroleum Refineries-Other
Sources Not Distinctly Listed
Printing/Publishing
Polymers & Resins Group I
Polymers & Resins Group II
Polymers & Resins Group IV
Secondary Lead Smelters1
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Wood Furniture (surface coating)
TOTAL
Notes:
' Onoto rafla/H1 eietimoteie r\f anni lohveirJ /^r*ctc frr»m final nil
$0.2

28
26

4
17
21
7
12
(37)
14
0.8
17
89
43
-
160

200
110
4.3
5.3
2.0
8.5
49
$780

QC _Qr»i irr*a r^atannriao or a nrvr mnrlal
$0.2

31
29

5.3
17
21
7
13
(42)
14
0.8
20
89
43
-
180

207
128
5.0
6.7
2.0
11
50
$840

orl in CG>rAM_\/nr ha,~=ii=a
    the NESHAPs are associated with non-VOC HAP emission reductions.
    The Off-site Waste Treatment NESHAP was not modeled in this analysis. We assume that the Title I modeling of the
    RCRA Phase I and Phase 2 rules for hazardous waste TSDFs will capture any future MACT reductions and costs.
    EPA estimated that the Medical Waste Incineration guideline would cost between $59 million per year to $120 million per
    year, depending on the extent to which affected facilities switch to less expensive methods of treatment and disposal.  The
    cost above represents the midpoint of this range.
                                                 B-28

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Title III

    Tide III of the CAAA requires the promulgation
of MACT regulations to control HAP emissions from
specific  source  categories. Total  Title  III  costs
represent the TACs for individual two- and four-year
MACT standards.  Not all Title III regulations are
modeled  by  ERCAM-VOC   because  Title  III
regulations  target HAP  emissions  which are  not
included in the Section 812 base year inventory.  To
provide a complete cost accounting, we use the annual
cost  estimates  from  the  final  rules  for  MACT
standards that are expected to reduce non-VOC HAP
emissions. The cost  for these MACT  categories is
$173  million.  The cost estimates for Title III are
summarized in  Table B-16.  Costs do  not  differ
significantly under the Post-CAAA 2000 and the Post-
CAAA 2010 scenarios because we do not derive the
costs from ERCAM-VOC using future year emission
estimates.23

    Title IV

    Title IV of the CAAA is the Acid Deposition
Control Program.  Title IV controls include SO2  and
NOX controls at electric utilities and are summarized
in Table B-17, below.  The model for SO2 controls
incorporates  EPA's  program  for  SO2  allowance
trading.  The annual national costs of Title IV of the
CAAA are $2.3 billion in  2000 and $2.0 billion in
2010.  The decline in annual costs from 2000 to 2010
results primarily from the increase in use of Western
coal, the cost of which we project will decrease over
time.    Cost reductions  also  occur following  the
increased use  of gas-fired  combined-cycle units to
generate electricity without SOX emissions.   As
employed technology becomes  more  efficient, we
expect that generation costs will decrease.
 Table B-17
 Annual Costs of Title IV
               Annual Costs (million 1990 dollars)
              Post-CAAA 2000    Post-CAAA 2010
    Title
   Title IV
$2,300
$2,000
 Note:  These estimates reflect the base case used in the
 Clean Air Power Initiative. See EPA, "Analyzing Electric
 Power Generation Under the CAA" (1996) for detail on
 scenario development. For more information on its
 application to the cost analysis, see EPA, 1997a.
    Title V
    23We do not estimate the costs associated with seven- and ten-
year standards due to the lack of adequate data regarding the
implementation of these standards.
    Title V of the CAAA establishes requirements for
a new operating permits program.  Using costs from
final regulations rather than models, we estimate that
Title V will cost $300 million. Consequently, we base
this  on the  estimated  cost  of  State-developed
programs,  excluding Federally-implemented  State
programs.  The States are expected to implement all
Title V permit programs by 2005. We estimate each
source's permit fees and administrative costs in the
first five-year implementation period, including the
explicit cost to the permitted sources (industry), State
and local permitting agencies, and EPA.  The $300
million  cost estimate may be an overestimate, since
many States already have operating permit systems
with  fee provisions  in  place,  and  we do not
incorporate existing state programs  into the baseline
in the RIA documents (EPA, 1992a and EPA, 1995).
Social Costs

    In an ideal setting, a cost-benefit analysis would
not only identify but also quantify and monetize an
exhaustive list of associated social  costs due  to  a
regulatory option. This would include assessing how
regulatory action targeting a specific industry or set of
facilities can  alter the  level  of production  and
consumption  in the  directly affected market and
related markets. For example, regulation of emissions
from the electric utility industry that results in higher
electricity rates  would have both  supply-side and
demand-side responses.  In secondary markets, the
increased electricity rates affect production costs for
various industries and initiate behavioral changes  (e.g.,
using  alternative fuels  as a substitute  to  electric
                                                B-29

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
power).  With each affected market, there  are also
associated  externalities  that should be included in
estimating  social costs.   Returning to the utilities
example,   the externalities  associated with electric
power generation versus nuclear power generation can
be very different.  The mix  of externalities  could
change as  consumers substitute  nuclear power for
electric power. It is frequently difficult to accurately
characterize one or all of these dimensions of market
responses and estimate the resulting social costs.

    There are three  generally practiced approaches to
estimating regulatory costs: (i) direct compliance cost,
(ii)  partial  equilibrium  modeling,  and (iii) general
equilibrium modeling.  The direct compliance cost
approach is the most straightforward of the  three.
Direct compliance  cost  estimates are  calculated
differently  than economic welfare  impact estimates
that result  from partial or general equilibrium.  This
technique  develops ex ante estimates of increased
production costs, and may in some cases (such as in
the case of  the IPM  model for utilities in our analysis)
measure supply-side response to a regulatory action by
modeling changes in  supply price and quantity.  In
general, the technique  does not  account for how
demand  and  consumption levels may change  in
response to  higher production costs and prices.
Instead, this approach measures how an industry's or
firm's marginal cost  curve shifts due to the additional
production costs associated with pollution abatement
controls.

    The direct compliance approach, however, is a
reasonable  estimate of incremental expenditures.  In
certain instances, this method may be a conservative
approximation of  primary  social  costs because  it
overstates  direct costs  by not reflecting efficiency
enhancing  demand-side responses.  There  are two
major difference between direct and social costs that
influence the results.  First, direct cost methods may
overstate   the  actual  compliance costs  that  are
associated  with  demand  and  consumption  level
changes in  response to higher production costs. By
not accounting for market responses, total direct costs
reflect the incremental  costs per unit of output
multiplied  by  the  higher,  pre-regulation  quantity
produced.  Second, a direct cost  approach assumes
firms  incur the full  costs  of pollution abatement
activities. The marginal cost curves of firms, however,
do not necessarily increase by the full amount of the
pollution abatement technology.   For example, firms
can adopt cost-saving activities that help to offset the
new costs.24 (Morgenstern et al., 1998).

    Capturing  consumer and producer behavioral
responses to regulatory action requires either partial or
general  equilibrium  modeling.     These   more
complicated  approaches  estimate  social  costs  by
accounting   for a  wider range  of consequences
associated with altered resource allocation due to the
use  of pollution abatement  equipment.  A partial
equilibrium  analysis  requires modeling both supply
and demand functions in affected markets. Therefore,
measures of social cost reflect behavioral responses by
both producers and consumers  in  one  or more
markets.  The variation between results from a direct
cost approach and a partial equilibrium approach will
generally depend on the extent price and quantity
demanded change.  Moreover, the estimates  of a
partial equilibrium model can overstate or understate
total, economy-wide social costs depending on the
type of existing market distortions and the  extent to
which there are spillover effects from the targeted
sector to other economic sectors.

    The  partial equilibrium approach is  particularly
appropriate  when  social costs  are predominantly
incurred in a limited set of directly affected markets,
and  has minimal effects  on other sectors.  In cases
where the regulatory action is  known to have  an
impact on  a  broad range  of sectors in  the  U.S.
economy, the general equilibrium model can  be a
more appropriate approach to estimating social costs.
Like  the partial  equilibrium  model, the general
equilibrium model estimates social costs by accounting
for  direct  compliance  costs  and  producer  and
consumer dynamics. The general equilibrium model
can  capture large and small  first-order effects that
occur in multiple sectors  of the economy.

    It is  difficult  to determine the  relationship
between general equilibrium estimates and direct cost
estimates.    Relative  to the  general equilibrium
estimates, direct cost estimates are likely to  overstate
costs in  the primary markets because they do not
reflect consumer and producer responses.  General
equilibrium estimates, however, have a broader basis
from which to estimate  social costs and reflect net
social welfare changes across the economy's economic
sectors.  There still remain significant  barriers  to
                                                         24Morgenstern  et al. (1998) estimates the multiplier of
                                                     abatement expenditures to total costs can be as low as 0.8.
                                                 B-30

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
assessing the potential magnitude and  direction of
actual  total welfare  changes, as  experienced by the
economy as a whole, to those estimated by a general
equilibrium  model.25   Without  insight  into  the
accuracy of general equilibrium model estimates, it is
difficult to characterize how direct cost  estimates
relate to general equilibrium cost estimates.

    In the 812 retrospective analysis (EPA, 1997), we
opted   for  the  general   equilibrium  approach,
recognizing that the Clean Air Act has a pervasive
impact on  the  U.S.  economy.   Moreover,  the
retrospective nature of the analysis provided us with
fairly well-developed historical data sets of goods and
service flows  throughout the economy.   These data
sets   facilitated  the   construction  of   extensive
expenditure data from which we modeled producer
and consumer behavior and estimated net social costs.
In the retrospective, our central  estimate of total
annualized costs, from 1970 to 1990, was  $523 billion.
In comparison, the  aggregate welfare effects were
estimated between $493 and  $621 billion.26

    Although   a   general  equilibrium  approach
represents a theoretically preferable, and potentially
more accurate, method for measuring social costs, as
described in Chapter 3 we adopted a direct compliance
cost approach  for  the  prospective analysis.   We
selected the simpler  direct cost modeling method for
three reasons:

    •   First, we believe that the direct cost approach
        provides a good first approximation of the
        economic impact of the CAAA on the U.S.
        economy.    For example,  recent  research
        suggests that ex ante analyses of regulatory
        costs are  far more  likely to overstate than
        understate costs.27 In addition, the direct cost
        approach,  because  it  does   not  reflect
        adjustments  to prices  and  quantities that
        might be adopted to mitigate the effects of
        regulation, likely  overstates  the producer
        surplus loss  to the entity that incurs the
        pollution control  cost expenditure.  Under
        these conditions, direct cost  may actually
        overestimate the social costs of a particular
        economic sector.  It is also possible that the
        direct cost estimates understate the effects of
        long-term changes in productivity  and the
        ripple   effects  of regulation  on  other
        economic sectors.

    •   Second, we  believe  that  the precision in
        estimating social costs that might be gained
        through a general equilibrium approach could
        be  compromised  by  the  difficulty and
        uncertainty associated with projecting future
        economic and technological  change.  The
        general equilibrium approach could provide
        many insights that the direct cost approach
        cannot, but as a tool for estimating social
        costs it is very data-intensive and introduces
        a significant level of additional uncertainty as
        a result.

    •   Third,  undertaking a  general equilibrium
        modeling exercise remains a very resource-
        intensive task. In light of our concerns about
        the potential gains in precision or accuracy of
        our social costs estimates for the purposes of
        comparing costs to benefits, we concluded
        that more detailed modeling would not be the
        most  cost-effective  use  of  the  project
        resources.
    25Harriiigton et al. (1999): "The general equilibrium effects of
environmental regulations are likely to be important, but are
likewise impossible to examine empirically. Computable general
equilibrium models  have not been tested  against real-world
outcomes and may be untestable."

    26 Estimates are presented in 1990 dollars.  The retrospective
states, "In general the estimated second order macroeconomic
effects were small relative to the size of the U.S. economy." The
rate of long term GNP growth between the control and no-control
scenarios amounted to roughly one-twentieth of one percent less
growth. It is important to note that although the difference is
small, the  direct compliance  cost method  does represent an
underestimation.
Limitations  and Uncertainties

    Several factors contribute uncertainty to the cost
estimates.

    •   Emissions Projections.  We base total cost
        estimates for individual CAAA provisions on
        projected emission reductions in 2000  and
        2010.  As a result, the  quality of the cost
    27 See, for example, Harrington et al (1999) for a comparative
analysis of ex ante and ex post regulatory cost estimates.
                                                  B-31

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        analysis results is dependent, in part, on the
        quality of the emission projection estimates.
    •   Evolving Rules.  We estimate many of the
        costs based on assumptions regarding how
        stringent evolving or draft rules may be when
        finalized.  Costs are likely to change as these
        rules are amended or finalized.

    •   Facility response to regulation. Facilities
        may respond to regulations  in  a manner
        different from our model assumptions and
        thereby affect cost estimates.   The cost
        estimates for individual CAAA provisions will
        ultimately depend on the mix of compliance
        options facilities choose to meet  each rule's
        requirements.   In  addition,  we  do  not
        quantify the effect of  economic incentive
        provisions, which provide greater flexibility to
        facilities affected by the  rules.28

    •   SIPs for  meeting ozone NAAQS.  It is
        difficult for  us to  predict how  States will
        design  control  plans for  meeting  ozone
        NAAQS attainment requirements.

    •   Technology  assumptions.   We  develop
        costs based on data for today's technologies.
        To  the  extent that  control  technologies
        improve over time and lower cost  control
        alternatives   become  available,  we  may
        overstate costs.

    •   Discount rate.  Discount rates affect costs.
        In some instances of this cost analysis, we use
        data sources that  do not explicitly  list the
        applied discount rate assumptions.

    In this section, we first discuss the impact of the
above  listed  key limitations.  We then identify cost
inputs  and conduct quantitative  uncertainty analyses
for those  factors.   Table  B-18  summarizes the
limitations and the likely effect  on the cost analysis
results.
    28 For example, the cost savings associated with a cap-and-
trade program, such as South Coast Air Quality Management's
Regional Clean Air Incentive Market (RECLAIM), is not reflected
in the prospective cost assessment.
                                                 B-32

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 TableB-18
 Potential Effects of Uncertainty on Cost Estimates

 Description
                      Potential Effect on Cost
                             Estimates
 Innovations in future emission control technology
 Emission projections:
     Growth factors/activity indicators
     RACT controls for individual States
 Inclusion of economic incentive provisions1
 Use of costs for rules that are currently in draft form (not yet finalized)
 Uncertainty of final State strategies for meeting Reasonable Further
    Progress (RFP) RFP requirements
 Inclusion of 7- and 10-year MACT standards
 Revisions to Title V cost estimate to reflect current State permit
   program costs	
                             Decrease

                             Unknown
                             Unknown
                             Decrease
                             Unknown
                             Unknown

                             Increase
                             Decrease
 Note:
     1 Examples include banking, trading, and emissions averaging provisions.
Emission Projections

    The selection of activity indicators for individual
source categories can  have significant  impacts  on
projected emissions, and in turn, on the cost estimates
in this analysis. In addition, we select RACT controls
based on representative controls, yet the  controls  for
individual  States/facilities  may differ  from these
representative controls.

Draft Rules

    EPA  is currently revising several promulgated
rules in response to public comments, legal actions, or
other factors.   The cost data used in this analysis
reflect the latest available estimates, yet these costs  are
subject to change as the  Agency modifies existing
rules. For example, while we were developing CAAA
costs, the Agency was also proposing a  rule to limit
summer season NOX emissions in a group of OTAG-
participating States. Cost estimates for  the regional
OTAG NOX strategy will most likely be different than
those for the Ozone Transport Rulemaking due to
uncertainty about the final form of the rulemaking.

    In an effort to maintain consistency  between
emission and cost data, we do not update its costs to
reflect modification to drafted and existing rules.  For
example,  because EPA revised the ozone  and PM
NAAQS after projecting emissions, we continued to
use earlier cost estimates that are consistent with  the
prior NAAQS control assumptions.  Another example
is   that  of  estimating  cost  for  the  proposed
compression ignition (CI) engine Phase II rule which
was not proposed  by the  time we  completed our
emissions  projection for  the  nonroad  sector.
Although costs are now available for the Phase II rule,
to maintain consistency with the benefits analysis we
include only Phase I costs.29

    In general, rule amendments such as exemptions
for particular types  of sources  or opportunities for
sources to postpone  compliance dates are  likely to
ease the regulatory burden on regulated sources, and
therefore, will result in lower total costs than those
estimated in this analysis.

Economic Incentive Provisions

    EPA created economic incentive provisions in
several rules to provide flexibility for affected facilities
that comply with the rules. These provisions include
banking, trading, and emissions-averaging provisions.
Flexible  compliance provisions lower the cost of
compliance.  For example, the emissions-averaging
program grants flexibility to facilities affected by the
marine vessels rule, the petroleum refinery NESHAP,
and the  gasoline  distribution NESHAP;   these
facilities can choose which sources to control, as long
as  they  achieve the required overall  emissions
reduction.  In many of the cost analyses, we do not
    29 However, this implies CI nonroad engine rule costs are
understated.
                                                B-33

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
attempt to quantify the effect that economic incentive
provisions will have on the overall costs of a particular
rule. In these cases, to the extent that affected sources
use  economic  incentive  provisions  to  minimize
compliance costs, costs may be overstated.

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
and Attainment Costs

    Considerable    uncertainty   surrounds    the
development of States' control plans for meeting
ozone NAAQS attainment requirements. We develop
the  RFP  cost  estimate by assuming that  ozone
nonattainment areas (NAAs) will take credit for NOX
reductions  for  meeting   progress  requirements.
Additional area-specific analysis would be necessary to
determine  the  extent  to  which  areas  find NOX
reductions  beneficial in meeting attainment and
progress  requirement targets.  Trading of NOX for
VOC to  meet RFP requirements may result  in
distributions of VOC and NOX emission reductions
that differ from those used in this analysis.

Future Year Control Cost Assumptions

    The  regulatory  documents  which provide cost
inputs  to  ERCAM  and the  IPM  contain the most
recent  data available, given existing  technological
development.  Between 2000  and 2010,  additional
control technologies will allow sources to comply with
CAAA requirements at lower costs.  For example, we
anticipates technological improvements for complying
with the multiple tiers of proposed emission standards
during the phase-in of nonroad engine controls; these
improvements will likely lead to reduced costs.  In
addition, the costs for certain control equipment may
decrease over time as demand increases. The trend in
cost of  selective catalytic reduction (SCR)  costs
illustrate  this.  Costs have decreased over the past
three years  as  more facilities  begin to  apply  the
technology. We also believes that even in the absence
of  new  emission  standards,  manufacturers  will
eventually upgrade engines to improve performance or
to control emissions more cost-effectively; firms will
institute   technologies  such   as  turbocharging,
aftercooling, and variable-valve  timing, all of which
improve engine performance.
Discount Rate Assumptions

    We apply a rate  of five percent to both  the
discount rate and cost of capital.  In some cases, we
base costs on analyses  that apply alternative discount
rate assumptions (usually seven percent).  Whenever
possible we recalculate total annualized costs (TAG)
for these rules in an effort to maintain consistency.
We use TACs, in turn, to  calculate  cost per ton
estimates that are applied to cost-equations. For some
source categories, there was insufficient data available
to identify the discount rate assumptions  used in the
TAG estimate and the relevant cost per ton estimates.
For example, the  national  municipal  landfills rule
applies only to facilities that emit above 50  megagrams
of  non-methane  organic  compounds  (NMOC).
However, the cost analysis for the proposed rule used
a  different  emissions  cutoff  (150 megagrams of
NMOC). Because we did not revise the cost analysis
to reflect the new cutoff, it is impossible  to replicate
the calculations used to estimate the TAG in the final
rule.   Additional research  would  be  necessary to
calculate costs for the national municipal landfills rule
under alternative discount rate assumptions.

Source-Specific Cost Equations

    We estimate the  costs  of Title III  control
measures for point and area source emitters using an
average annual cost per ton value. For future analyses,
assuming  sufficient data are available,  it may be
possible to develop source-specific control equations
using a similar approach to that used for point source
NOX emitters. The point source inventory generally
includes larger, inventoried point sources, and the area
source  inventory  includes   emissions for  smaller
emission points. For this reason, we try to determine
whether sufficient cost data by plant size are available
to model costs specific to smaller plants,  rather than
using an overall cost  effectiveness value across all
plant sizes. If costs are available for sources by size,
we apply the cost estimates for larger sources to point
sources and apply cost estimates for smaller model
plants to area sources. We do not, however, use this
approach in all cases due to insufficient data.
                                               B-34

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Sensitivity  Analyses  to  Quantify  Key
Uncertainties

    We develop cost estimates based on a variety of
studies and assumptions regarding future behavioral
responses to  provisions  of  the CAAA.   These
assumptions (i.e., changes in consumption patterns,
input costs, and technological innovation) introduce
some uncertainty to the cost projections. In order to
characterize   the  potential importance  of  these
uncertainties with respect to several provisions, we
conduct sensitivity tests on selected Post-CAAA 2010
cost estimates.  They are:

    •  Progress Requirements
    •  PM10 Nonattainment Area Controls
    •  Non-utility Stationary Source NOX
        Costs
    •  California Reformulated Gasoline
    •  Low Emission Vehicle Costs
    •  NOX Tailpipe/Useful Life Standards

    These provisions represent the most significant
contributors  to  total  costs.    Collectively,  they
constitute nearly half of the total 2010 Post-CAAA
estimated costs. In addition, we examine the impact
of alternative discount rates on the cost assessments.
We summarize the results of the sensitivity analyses in
Table B-19.

    A significant portion of the cost of attaining and
maintaining the one-hour  average ozone NAAQS is
attributable to  rate of progress (ROP)  and rate  of
further progress  (RFP) compliance expenses.  The
costs associated with  reducing  VOC  (and  NCQ
emissions  in  order  to   satisfy  these   progress
requirements are  particularly  difficult  to  estimate
because cost-effective control measures have not been
identified that will readily enable some ozone NAAs
to make  the required precursor emissions cuts. The
estimated costs of unidentified VOC controls is one
source of uncertainty that affects the overall cost of
ROP/RFP requirements.

    In the prospective, we assume that the cost of
Title I progress requirements is equal to the cost of
eliminating the VOC shortfall. We expect NAAs will
reduce  VOC  emissions  using  identified  control
measures.  The cost-effectiveness of each of these
measures is known, and we assume that the control
technique yielding the greatest reduction per dollar is
the first to be implemented, followed by the second
most cost-effective option, and so on until further
VOC  cuts are  no  longer necessary  to  satisfy
ROP/RFP requirements.

    We estimate that it will be possible to sufficiently
lower VOC emissions through implementation of
identified  VOC  controls  for  every  NAA with  a
shortfall, except Chicago and Milwaukee.  These two
exceptions, however, have NOx waivers and cannot
credit NOX cuts  towards RFP  requirements.  As  a
result, they will  have to  significantly lower  VOC
emissions;  the necessary reduction is  so  sizable in
both areas  that  neither will be able  to  make the
required cuts, even if it adopts  all of the identified
control measures.  Thus, in order to satisfy ROP/RFP
requirements,  Chicago and  Milwaukee will have to
implement  unidentified  VOC  emissions  control
techniques. The estimated costs associated with these
measures  are  a  source  of uncertainty  potentially
influencing the  overall  cost of  Title I  progress
requirements.   We conduct a sensitivity analysis to
help characterize  the influence of this uncertainty on
the 2010 progress requirements cost estimate.

    We base the three scenarios  of the  sensitivity
analysis upon different assumptions  regarding the
cost-effectiveness  of VOC shortfall controls.  For the
lower estimate, after applying identified controls (the
approximate cost per ton of reduction is known for
these measures), the remaining shortfall is eliminated
through the implementation of unidentified controls.
In  the  lower  estimate scenario,  we  estimate the
marginal cost of these unidentified measures is equal
to the weighted average of the cost per ton estimate
from the recently revise ozone NAAQS RIA, which
is  $10,000, and the average dollar per ton cost for
identified measures.30 The central estimate is identical
to the lower estimate with one exception, unidentified
controls  are assumed to  cost  $10,000 per ton of
      For example, in Chicago sixty percent of the required
reduction of VOC emissions will come from identified measures
at an average cost of $3,500 per ton. The remaining forty percent
will thus come through unidentified controls.  This means that,
according to the lower estimate, the approximate cost per ton of
reduction through the implementation of unidentified controls is
$6,000 [$3,500(.60) + $10,000(.40)].
                                                B-35

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
reduction in the central scenario. A flat $10,000 per
every ton of shortfall VOC emissions reduced, from
both identified and unidentified measures, is assumed
for the upper estimate.  Our sensitivity analysis shows
that ROP/RFP costs range from $0.61 billion to $2.5
billion, with  a central  estimate of $1.1 billion.  We
provide a more detailed breakdown of these costs in
Table  B-20.    It  is important  to note, that  this
sensitivity analysis is  the only  case in  which  the
primary estimate of our cost analysis differs from the
central case in a sensitivity test.
                                                 B-36

-------
TableB-19
Factors Affecting Cost of Major CAAA Provisions
Provision
Progress
Requirements
Factors Affecting
Cost
Cost for unidentified
measures is most
uncertain.
Conduct
Sensitivity
Analysis?
Yes
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
Continue to examine costs of identified measures in other specific areas.
Lower Bound: Assume average per ton cost of identified measures (e.g.,
Potential Effect of
Uncertainty on Post-
CAAA 2010 Cost
Estimates1
Central Estimate:
$1.1
                                                       $3,500 in Chicago) for all reductions, including unidentified measures.
                                                       Central Estimate:  Use cost figure for identified measures for that fraction of
                                                       reductions (e.g., $3,500 for 60 percent in Chicago) and assume $10,000 per ton
                                                       cost for unidentified measures.  This central estimate reflects more recent cost
                                                       per ton information than was applied to our primary cost estimate.
                                                       Upper Bound:  Assume $10,000 per ton cost for all reductions, including
                                                       identified measures. Our cost analysis adopts a conservative approach and
                                                       applies this cost per ton value to our primary cost analysis.
                                                                                          Range:
                                                                                       ($0.06-$2.5)
                  Impact of revised ozone
                  standard.
 No       Emissions projections in the 812 Prospective do not include revisions to the
          ozone NAAQS.
no estimate
California
Reformulated
Gasoline
Incremental fuel costs
show wide range and
are most uncertain.
Yes Lower Bound: Assume 7.3 cents per gallon cost from CARS.
Central Estimate: Current analysis assumes 12.3 cents per gallon cost from
CARS.
Upper Bound: Assume 17.3 cents per gallon cost from CARS.
Central Estimate:
$2.5
                 Gasoline sale
                 quantities are
                 important, but less
                 uncertain.
Yes       Gasoline sales are a function of vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
          Apply alternative VMT projection for California: California Motor Vehicle Stock,
          Travel, and Fuel Forecast, California Department of Transportation, November
          1997.
          Alternative VMT would impact emission scenario.
  Range:
($1.4-$3.5)
                                                                            B-37

-------
   Provision
Factors Affecting
      Cost
 Conduct
Sensitivity
Analysis?
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
 Potential Effect of
Uncertainty on Post-
  CAAA 2010 Cost
    Estimates1
PM NAA Controls  Base year emissions
                 and growth.
                         No       Emissions projections and growth estimates are underlying assumptions of the
                                  cost analysis.2
                                                                                        no estimate
                 Area specific plans may
                 differ from the "model
                 plan" applied.
                        Yes      Strategy for sensitivity analysis includes:
                                  1) Apply area-specific control measures where available.
                                  2) Use "model plan" when area plans are unknown.
                 Cost per ton estimates
                 and effectiveness of
                 individual measures.
                        Yes      Apply upper and lower bound cost estimates for model plan controls based on
                                  the SCAQMP, the MRI study of agricultural operations, and the PM NAAQS
                                  study:
                                      Agricultural Tilling:    Low$154/ton (1997 SCAQMP)
                                                         High $5,900/ton (midpoint of range from MRI study)
                                      Construction:        Low $1,900/ton (50% below value used)
                                                         High $5,700/ton (50% above value used)
                                      Paved Roads:       Low$50/ton (1997 SCAQMP)
                                                         High $1,350/ton (50% above value used)
                                      Unpaved Roads:     Low$560/ton (1997 SCAQMP)
                                                         High $2,700/ton for rural roads (PM NAAQS)
                                                                                      Central Estimate:

                                                                                           $2.2


                                                                                          Range:

                                                                                        ($0.9-$3.3)
                                                                          B-38

-------
   Provision
   Factors Affecting
        Cost
 Conduct
Sensitivity
Analysis?
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
 Potential Effect of
Uncertainty on Post-
  CAAA 2010 Cost
    Estimates1
LEV Costs
Will 49-State LEV
occur?
    No       Recently agreed to by the 23 automobile manufacturers that sell cars in the US
             and are regulated by EPA. Four States in the Northeast (MA, ME, NY,  VT) have
             opted not to join the NLEV program.
                                                        no estimate
                 Per vehicle costs.
                 Projected vehicle sales.
                           Yes       Current analysis uses CARB's per vehicle cost estimates. These estimates are
                                     the lowest and most fully documented, and differ from other industry estimates
                                     by a factor often.

                                     Lower Bound: 50% below study per vehicle cost estimates.
                                     Central Estimate: Use current study (CARS adjusted for national sales volume)
                                     per vehicle cost estimates.
                                     Upper Bound: Use unadjusted CARS per vehicle cost estimates.


                           Yes       Vehicle sales data were obtained from EPA's onboard vapor recovery RIA.

                                     Apply alternative sales projection: DOE's Annual Energy Outlook 1998 - NEMS
                                     Transportation Demand Model.
                                                                                                                                Central Estimate:
                                                                                                                                     $2.2
                                                                                           Range:
                                                                                        ($1.08-$2.5)

                                                                                     (national and CA LEV
                                                                                          combined)
                                                                          B-39

-------
    Provision
   Factors Affecting
         Cost
 Conduct
Sensitivity
Analysis?
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
 Potential Effect of
Uncertainty on Post-
  CAAA 2010 Cost
     Estimates1
Non-Utility
Stationary Source
NOx Costs
Unit-level cost
equations and cost per
ton.
                  Inventory data
                  elements (e.g.,
                  capacity, operating
                  rate) used in cost
                  calculations.
   Yes       ICI boilers account for 79 percent of the total point source NOx control cost
             estimate in 2010.  Apply+50 percent range. Other available data are 3-4 years
             old and would not reflect the fact that the control technology is being
             manufactured and applied by more sources.
                            No
             Inventory data elements are well-defined for each point source category.
                                                       Central Estimate:
                                                             $2.2

                                                            Range:
                                                         ($1.1 -$3.2)
                                                                                                                    no estimate
                  Cap applied to 37
                  States, proposed NOx
                  budgets affect only 22
                  States.
                            No       Current estimates overstate costs for fuel combustors in the 15 States not
                                      affected by the NOx cap. NOx SIP call RIA provides estimates for 22-state
                                      program.
                                                                                           no estimate
                  Banking not accounted
                  for.
                            No
                                               None
                                                          no estimate
NOx
Tailpipe/Useful
Life Standards
Per vehicle costs date
to 1991 FR Notice.
   Yes       Lower Bound:  No alternative estimates.  Scale down medium estimate by 50        Central Esimate:
             percent.                                                                          $1.7
             Central Estimate:  Use current $115 estimate from EPA.
             Upper Bound:  No alternative estimates.  Scale up medium estimate by 50              Range:
             percent.                                                                      ($0.83-$2.5)
                  Vehicle Sales
                            Yes
             Same as LEV projected vehicle sales. See above.
High Enhanced
I/M
Per vehicle costs are
most uncertain.
    No       Alternative per vehicle cost estimates are similar to the costs currently used in
             the model.
                                                          no estimate
                                                                            B-40

-------
Factors Affecting
Provision Cost
Vehicle registrations
Conduct
Sensitivity
Analysis?
No 1990 vehicle regis
Strategy for Sensitivity Analysis
itrations are well-documented, and the method used to proie
Potential Effect of
Uncertainty on Post-
CAAA 2010 Cost
Estimates1
iCt
                   are important, but less
                   uncertain.
                                          future registrations based on population projections is sound.
no estimate
Discount Rate

Economic
Growth Case
Study
Vary the discount rate.

Macroeconomic growth
projections may affect
cost drivers.
Yes Current cost estimates use a five percent discount rate. Vary the cost estimates
using two alternative discount rates, three percent and seven percent.

No The current methodology for calculating PM emissions relies on activity level
projections more than macroeconomic growth rates. For example, the model
uses the USDA agricultural baseline projections of farm acres planted to
calculate PM emissions from agricultural production, the largest source of PM.
The PM sources influenced by macroeconomic growth rates contribute only
about five percent of total PM emissions.
Central Estimate:
$3.0
Range:
($2.8 -$3.2)
no estimate
Notes:
1 Estimates are in billion 1990 dollars.
                                                                                  B-41

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    An additional source of uncertainty associated
with estimating the cost of ROP/RFP requirements
stems  from the  fact that the impact  of the revised
ozone  NAAQS  is not incorporated into  the  Post-
CAAA scenario.  We do not,  however, conduct  a
sensitivity test designed to characterize the influence
of the  stricter NAAQS. In this instance, developing
a cost range would not be very meaningful since
benefits, as well as costs, would be affected  by the
changed NAAQS.
 Table B-20
 Rate-of-Progress Cost Sensitivity Summary
                                           Annual Post-CAAA2010 Costs (million 1990 dollars)
Ozone Nonattainment
Area
Chicago-Gary-Lake County
Dallas-Fort Worth
El Paso
Grand Rapids
Los Angeles-South Coast
Louisville
Milwaukee-Racine
Muskegon
Nashville
Salt Lake City
Sheyboygan
Kewaunee Co. Wl
Monitowoc Co. Wl
Total
Low Estimate
$430
0.4
8.5
0.2
0.8
0.1
120
0.6
15
28
0.5
0.2
1.1
$607
Central Estimate
$810
0.4
8.5
0.2
0.8
0.1
210
0.6
15
28
0.5
0.2
1.1
$1,080
High Estimate
$1,400
61
76
27
44
30
430
9.3
130
180
8.2
1.7
11.3
$ 2,500
    PM10 nonattainment area controls account for
roughly seven percent of total annual costs in 2010.
Two  sources  of uncertainty with respect to our
estimate are: (i) how well the model plan mirrors
actual application of controls in nonattainment areas,
and (ii) how representative the cost per ton estimates
used in the model are of actual control measure costs.
We develop a  sensitivity  analysis  that incorporates
both factors. We analyze how well the model replicate
selected SIP controls by applying the prospective cost
equations to areas  that have already implemented
controls.31 The second part of the sensitivity analysis
assesses the impact of higher and lower cost per ton
estimates on the original set of control measures. In
cases where there were no alternative estimates, we
adjust values up and down by fifty percent.32
    31 We use a survey of SIPs designed in 1991 and implemented
in 1995.

    32 The sensitivity analysis does not reflect point source
controls.
                                                B-42

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Our analysis highlights two primarily differences
between model and  actual SIP designs.  First, the
model plan probably overstates the  application of
fugitive dust controls in practice.  Second, over half of
the  areas  that have adopted  emission measures
emphasized point source controls, at lower cost than
reductions that could be achieved through  other
measures.  Testing the  uncertainty of cost per ton
values resulted in a range between $0.9 and $3.3 billion
in PM10  nonattainment costs.  Total area source PM
control costs had a low estimate of $1.5 billion and a
high estimate of $3.3 billion.  We summarize these
results in Table B-21.
 Table B-21
 Area Source PM Control Cost Sensitivity Analysis, Year 2000
 (in million 1990 dollars)
Source Type
Agricultural Burning
Agricultural Tilling
Beef Cattle Feedlots
Construction Activity
Paved Roads
Unpaved Roads
Total
Central
Estimate
$39
3.9
1.7
1,700
440
0.8
$2,200
Model Plan Sensitivity
Analysis
$23
1.5
0.3
1,070
380
0.5
$1,500
Low
Estimate
$20
0
0.9
870
13
0.2
$907
High
Estimate
$58
20
2.6
2,600
650
1.2
$3,300
 Note:
         1 Examples include banking, trading, and emissions averaging provisions.
         * Costs are in millions of 1990 dollars.
    Another significant portion of total CAAA cost is
incurred by non-utility stationary NOX sources.  This
category contributes approximately eight percent of
total costs in 2010. Its costs reflect unit-level costs for
combustion processes at industrial, commercial, and
institutional facilities.  We identify the accuracy of
future control costs assessment (nationwide and for
the subset of OTAG states subject to the NOX SIP
Call) as a source of uncertainty that may affect  cost
projections.   Our  evaluation  of  this uncertainty
involves applying alternative unit cost estimates.  For
the sensitivity analysis, we estimate upper and lower
estimates by varying prospective costs up and down
by fifty percent.33 As a result, the central estimate for
2010 is $2.1 billion, and costs range from $1.1 billion
to $3.2 billion.
     33 After reviewing alternative cost studies sponsored by
STAPPA/ALAPCO and the OTAG stationary source committee
EPA found the studies relied on the same sources used by the 812
Project Team.  Consequently, the agency opted for the above
mentioned approach to varying cost inputs.
                                                  B-43

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    By  2010, we estimate California's reformulated
gasoline program will cost $2.5 billion annually. The
program is a significant factor in the our cost analysis,
because it represents eight percent of total annual
CAAA costs and ten percent of national gasoline sales.
We  identify  two  primary  sources  of uncertainty,
projected   car   sales   and  projected   gasoline
consumption levels.  The sensitivity analysis varies
costs by applying the high  and low cost per gallon
estimates developed by GARB. The test indicates that
cost  may range  between  $1.4   and $3.5  billion.
Moreover, we  integrate into the  sensitivity  test
alternative projections of car  sales  as  a proxy for
consumption levels.34  California's  Department of
Transportation    calculated   VMT    projection
approximately five percent lower than the projection
we use in  the prospective. This lower VMT estimate
estimaes costs of $2.27 billion in 2010 (compared with
the central estimate of $2.45 billion).

    Our estimate of low emission vehicle (LEV) costs
are also subject to similar sources of uncertainty. We
rely   on  assumptions  regarding  the  types  of
implemented   emission  control  technology,  its
associated  costs  (estimated  as  costs  per vehicle),
projected vehicle sales, and the extent to which  LEV
will be adopted around the  country.   We conduct
sensitivity analyses  for costs  of both the California
LEV program and a 49-State LEV program.  The
analyses reflect uncertainty with respect to cost per
vehicle and vehicle sales.  To test the uncertainty
related to  car sales, we  use an alternative set of
projections from the Department of Energy. The low
estimate reflects per vehicle costs that are fifty percent
below baseline costs. We use  CARB's high estimates,
which were unadjusted for national sales volume, to
develop a high estimate.  Our  sensitivity analysis result
are a low estimate of $0.55 billion and a high estimate
of $1.34 billion for California's LEV costs in 2010.
For  a 49-State LEV program, the estimates range
between $0.53 billion to $1.34 billion.  The central
estimates are  $1.1  billion for the California  LEV
program and  $1.06 billion  for  the  49-State  LEV
program. We  summarize results in Table B-22.
    34 EPA used VMT projections by California Department of
Transportation.
                                                 B-44

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        Table B-22
        Results of Sensitivity Analysis of LEV Costs
                                         Post-CAAA 2010 Annual Cost (million dollars)
Program
California LEV
49-State LEV
Central
$1,100
1,060
Low
$550
530
High
$1,100
1,300
Alternative VMT
$870
820
        TOTAL                 $2,200        $1,080

        Note: Columns may not sum to totals due to rounding
          $ 2,500
$ 1,700
    Costs associated with NOx Tailpipe/Useful Life
Standards are a sizable portion of both Title II and
total CAAA costs.  By 2010, we estimate these costs
will contribute nineteen percent of the Title II motor
vehicle costs. As a share of total CAAA costs, it is six
percent.  Key sources of uncertainty are the same as
those associated with LEV, per vehicle costs and
projected car sales.  Similarly, the sensitivity analyses:
(i) scaled per vehicle  costs up and down by  fifty
percent;  and  (ii) used alternative sales  projections
generated  by the  Department  of Energy.    The
variation of cost inputs produced a cost range of $0.83
billion to $2.48 billion for 2010.  Application of sales
projections by the Department of Energy resulted in
costs slightly lower than the central estimate, $1.25
billion compared with $1.65 billion respectively.

    Unlike the other sensitivity analyses, the discount
rate affects cost estimates for multiple provisions. As
noted, we  calculate total annualized cost estimates
using a 5 percent discount rate. However, variations
in the discount rate can potentially have a significant
effect  on  the  overall cost  estimate, because  the
discount rate is also used as an estimate of the real
cost of capital to finance pollution control equipment.
 Our sensitivity analysis  of annualized  focuses on
source  categories  where available  information  is
available to  distinguish  capital  from operating and
maintenance expenses.  Source sectors and pollutants
include non-utility  VOC and NOX and area source
VOC, NOx, and PM.
    We present the discount rate sensitivity analysis
results in Table B-23.  We estimate total annualized
costs using three discount rates, three percent, five
percent,  and  seven percent.   As  a result,  costs
estimates vary  from two percent to  fifteen percent.
The results of the analysis do  not  assess how the
discount rate would impact a large fraction of the total
estimated  costs   in  the  Post-CAAA  scenarios.
Excluded costs  include motor vehicles and PM10 area
source categories in nonattainment areas. Most of the
capital costs associated with motor vehicle provisions
are in the form of research and  development.  PM10
area source costs are generally calculated using a cost
per  ton  estimate, which does  not  have  sufficient
available data for identifying the  discount rate.
                                                 B-45

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
       Table B-23
       Discount Rate Sensitivity Analysis for 2010 Cost Estimates
                                      Capital Cost (million 1990 dollars)
                                              Discount Rate
                       Percent Difference
Sector
Non-Utility

Area


Total
Pollutant
VOC
NOX
VOC
NOX
PM

3%
$480
1,400
508
17
430
$ 2,800
5%
$501
1,500
540
18
440
$ 3,000
7%
$530
1,600
570
20
440
$3,100
Rate
11%
12%
11%
15%
2%
11%
    The sensitivity analyses assess the potential effect
of uncertainty on components of the total CAAA
costs.  We project costs for progress requirements,
PM  nonattainment area controls, non-utility NOX
sources,  and utility emissions, based on modeling
future emission controls. Accurately identifying the
set of controls that will be adopted introduces a key
source of uncertainty. The analyses indicate that there
may be considerable variability in the cost estimates.
However, it is important to note that for most of
these scenarios, the high estimates are most likely
representative of upper bounds.   There  are two
sources of uncertainty associated with the  motor
vehicle  provisions.   The first source  is projecting
future car sales. The second is the accuracy of per
vehicle costs. The high and low estimates relative to
the central estimate  do not present as wide a range.
                                                B-46

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 References

 GARB,  1990:    California  Air Resources  Board,  "Reformulated  Gasoline:    Proposed  Phase  I
        Specifications - Technical Support Document," August 13, 1990.

GARB,  1991: California Air Resources Board, "California Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline Specifications -
        Volume 1 - Proposed Regulations for California Phase 2 Reformulated Gasoline - Staff Report," October
        4,1991.

DRI,  1993:  DRI/McGraw-Hill, "Review  of the U.S. Economy:  Summer 1993 - The 25-Year Outlook:
        Dynamics Within the Trend," Summer 1993.

EPA, 1990:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis:  Control of Sulfur and
        Aromatic Contents of On-Highway Diesel Fuel," NTIS #PB93-207660,June 1990.

EPA, 1991d: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "MOBILE4.1 Fuel Consumption Model," Draft output
        provided by the Office of Mobile Sources, Ann Arbor, MI, August 12,1991.

EPA, 1992:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis/Regulatory Flexibility Act:
        Operating Permits Program Part 70," EPA-450/2-91-011,June 1992.

EPA, 1992c:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "I/M Costs, Benefits, and Impacts Analysis," (Draft),
        February 1992.

EPA, 1993d: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis — On-Board Diagnostics,"
        Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Mobile Sources, January 27,1993.

EPA, 1993f:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Final Regulatory Impact Analysis: Onboard Refueling
        Emission Regulations for Light Duty Vehicles and Trucks and Heavy Duty Vehicles," Office of Mobile
        Sources, Regulation Development and Support Division, December 1, 1993.

EPA, 1993g:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Final Regulatory Impact Analysis for Reformulated
        Gasoline," Office of Mobile Sources, Ann Arbor, MI, December 13, 1993.

EPA, 1995: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulatory Impact Analysis for Part 71, Federal Operating
        Permits Rules," May 1995.

EPA, 1997a:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Air Emissions Estimates from Electric Power Generation
        for the CAAA  Section 812 Prospective Study," prepared by Office of Air and Radiation, February 1997.

EPA, 1997f:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Final Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions
        of Air Pollution from Highway Heavy-Duty Engines," Office of Mobile Sources, EPA-420-R-97-011,
        September 1997.

 EPA, 1996:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "EPA's Clean Air Power Initiative," Oct.  1996.
        Obtained from http://www.epa.gov/capi/capifs3.html, September 1998.


                                              B-47

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
FHWA, 1991: Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, "Highway Statistics 1991,"
        1991.

Green, 1994:  K. Green, Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), letter to Bruce
        Carhart, Ozone Transport Commission, Washington, DC, June 2,1994.

Harrington, Winston and Virginia McConnell, "Coase and Car Repair: Who Should Be Responsible for Emissions
        of Vehicles in Use?"  Discussion Paper 99-22, Resources for the Future, February 1999.

Hazilla, Michael and Raymond J. Kopp.  "Social  Cost of Environmental Quality Regulations: A General
        Equilibrium Analysis." Journal of Political Economy, 98 (1990): 853-873.

Oge, 1997: Margo T. Oge, "Clean Fuel Fleet Implementation," memorandum from Margo T.  Oge, Director,
        Office  of Mobile Sources  to EPA  Regional Directors, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
        Washington, DC, May 22,1997.

Pechan, 1997a:  E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Emission  Projections  for the  Clean Air Act Section 812
        Prospective Analysis," External Review Draft, February 12, 1997.

Pechan, 1997b:  E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "The Emission Reduction and Cost Analysis Model for NOX
        (ERCAM-NO,)," Revised Documentation,  September 1997.

Pechan, 1997c:  E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., "Analysis of Costs and Benefits of a National  Low Emission
        Vehicle Program," Springfield, VA, prepared for Industrial Economics, Inc., Cambridge, MA, December
        1997.

Pechan, 1998: E.H.Pechan & Associates,  Inc.  "Clean Air Act Section 812 Prospective  Cost Analysis - Draft
        Report," Springfield, VA, prepared for Industrial Economics, Inc., Cambridge, MA,  September 1998.

Wysor, 1988: T. Wysor, Office of Mobile Sources, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Ann Arbor, MI,
        personal communication, April 4,1988.
                                               B-48

-------
            Quality Modeling
                                                                           X
                                                                           0)
Introduction

    Section  812  of  the  1990  Clean  Air  Act
Amendments (CAAA)  requires  the  U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) to perform periodic,
comprehensive, prospective analyses of the costs and
benefits  associated  with  programs  implemented
pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA).  Such analysis
requires the estimation of future-year emissions levels
and associated air-quality-related values for scenarios
reflecting compliance with the CAA, as well as  for
scenarios for which the effects of programs associated
with the CAA are not accounted for in establishing the
future-year estimates.   This report summarizes  the
results of an air quality  modeling and analysis study
designed to estimate the  effects of the CAAA on
future air quality. The Section 812 prospective study
includes  analysis  of following  criteria pollutants:
ozone, particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen oxide (NO), nitrogen  dioxide (NO2), and
carbon monoxide (CO).  Future-year estimates of
these atmospheric constituents were obtained through
the application  of air  quality modeling tools  and
techniques, as described in this report.

    An integral component of the modeling analysis
was the  estimation  of future-year emission levels
associated with  the  two CAAA scenarios  and two
future years. Scenarios that incorporate the emission
reductions associated with CAAA are referred to as
Post-CAAA while those that incorporate growth but
reflect 1990 regulations are referred to as Pre-CAAA.
The two future  years considered in the analysis  are
2000 and 2010.  The emissions  estimates  (Pechan,
1998) provide the basis  for the estimation of ozone,
PM, and other criteria  pollutant concentrations
associated with each  scenario and future year.

    Future-year  estimates of ozone concentrations
were obtained through the combined application of
the Urban Airshed Model (UAM)  and the variable-
grid UAM (UAM-V), yielding urban- and/or regional-
scale estimates  of ozone concentrations for each
scenario  and future  year for the entire U.S. (48
contiguous states).

    Concentrations of primary and secondary PM for
the future-year  scenarios (including PM10, with a
diameter of less than 10 micrometers, and PM25, with
a  diameter  of  less  than  2.5  micrometers)  were
estimated through the combined application of the
Regional Acid Deposition Model/Regional Particulate
Model (RADM/RPM) and the Regulatory Modeling
System   for  Aerosols   and  Acid  Deposition
(REMSAD). RADM/RPM was used for the eastern
U.S., while REMSAD was applied to the analysis of
PM within the western U.S.

    An emissions-based, linear "roll-back" technique
was used to  estimate  future-year concentrations for
the other pollutants considered as part of this analysis
- SO2, NO, NO2, and CO.

    Following application of the modeling techniques,
site-specific estimates of future-year air quality were
obtained by adjusting observational data (correspond-
ing to a base year of 1990)  in accordance with the
changes  in air  quality predicted  by the  modeling
systems.  Statistical quantities or "profiles" describing
the predicted concentration distributions for each
monitoring site were  then calculated. The resulting
statistical concentration distributions provide the basis
for the examination and quantification of the effects
of changes in air quality on health, agriculture, and the
economy (i.e., physical effects and economic valuation
modeling) resulting from compliance with the CAAA.

    The  remainder of this  report summarizes the
methods and results of the section 812 prospective air
quality modeling  analysis.   An  overview of the
modeling/analysis methodology is provided in section
2.  The methods and results for ozone are presented
in  section 3.  The methods  and results for  PM are
                                              C-1

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
provided in section 4. The linear-rollback modeling
for the other criteria pollutants is  summarized  in
section 5. A  discussion of the attributes and limita-
tions  of the modeling analysis methodologies  is
provided in section 6. Finally, recommendations for
further research are given in section 7.
Overview of the Section 812
Prospective Modeling Analysis

    The  air quality  modeling component of the
section   812  prospective  analysis  included  the
application of a variety of air quality modeling tools
and  techniques, as well  as  the  combined use of
observational data and modeling results to estimate
future-year  concentrations   of   several  criteria
pollutants. An overview of the modeling approach is
provided in this section of the report.

    The overall objective of the modeling exercise was
to provide base- and  future-year estimates of ozone,
PM, SO2, NO, NO2, and CO for the subsequent
analysis of  the effects of the  CAAA  on health,
agriculture, and the economy within the continental
U.S.  Although the CAAA applies to the entire nation,
due  to  geographical considerations,  the modeling
domain includes  the contiguous 48  states.  The
modeling was performed  for a base year  (1990) and
for  four future-year scenarios.    The  future-year
scenarios  include  Post-CAAA  and  Pre-CAAA
scenarios (the former  incorporating emission changes
associated with measures  and programs pursuant to
the CAAA) for the years 2000 and 2010. These years
were selected  to  accommodate  implementation
schedules  and  time  for  effectiveness  periods
associated with many of the CAAA measures and
programs.

Air Quality Models and Databases

    To   the  extent  possible,   the   section  812
prospective  modeling  analysis   utilized  existing
modeling databases (from State Implementation Plan
or  other regional-scale  modeling efforts).   To
accommodate the geographical extent and resolution
required  for  this study,  these  included the input
databases corresponding to both urban- and regional-
scale  applications  of  several  different modeling
systems. The lack of an existing comprehensive, fully
tested, integrated modeling system (and associated
databases)  for  use  in  this  study  precluded  the
integrated analysis  of the various pollutants. This,
however,  may  be an  area  for improving  future
prospective analyses.

    The UAM and UAM-V modeling systems were
applied to the analysis of the effects of the CAAA on
ozone air quality. Specifically, the UAM-V modeling
system was applied for the regional-scale analysis of
ozone concentrations within  both  the  eastern  and
western portions of the U.S. (separately).  The analysis
of the eastern U.S. relied upon the use of modeling
databases developed as part of the Ozone Transport
Assessment Group (OTAG) regional-scale modeling
analysis.  This modeling system was also applied for
the western U.S., but at a relatively coarse resolution.
To enhance the analysis for selected urban areas in the
western U.S., the regional-scale modeling results were
supplemented with higher-resolution modeling results
for Los Angeles, Phoenix, and the San Francisco Bay
Area.  The results for both Los Angeles and Phoenix
were obtained using the UAM modeling system, while
those  for the San Francisco Bay Area were obtained
using the UAM-V modeling system.

    The  RADM/RPM and  REMSAD modeling
systems were used to estimate PM concentrations for
the eastern and western  U.S., respectively.   Again,
many of the inputs for application of these models
were developed as part of other studies and adapted
for use  in the section 812 prospective modeling
analysis.

    As noted earlier, an emissions-based, linear "roll-
back" technique was used to estimate future-year
concentrations  for SO2, NO, NO2, and CO.  This
approach was used for all areas of the continental  U.S.

    All of the modeling applications relied on the use
of detailed estimates  of emissions for the base  year
and each of the future-year scenarios.   These are
described  by (Pechan,  1998).   Modeling emission
                                               C-2

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
inventories  were  prepared  using the  Emissions
Preprocessing System (EPS2.5) (SAI, 1992).

Methodology for the Combined Use of
Observations and Air Quality Modeling
Results

    The 812 prospective modeling analysis included
several steps.  First, concentration estimates for each
pollutant of interest, corresponding to a base year of
1990, were prepared based on 1990 emissions and
application of the appropriate modeling tool(s). For
each scenario, the remaining steps consisted of (1)
preparation of  future-year, model-ready emission
inventory estimates, (2) application of the appropriate
modeling  technique to  estimate  the  change in air
quality from the base year of 1990, (3) adjustment of
the 1990  observed  data to  reflect  the  change as
predicted by the modeling system, and (4) calculation
of statistical quantities or "profiles" describing the
predicted pollutant concentration distribution for each
monitoring site.

    Conceptually,  the methodology for estimating
future-year ozone air quality using both observations
and modeling  results is rather simple.  The modeling
results are used to calculate adjustment factors for
each  monitoring  site that is located within  the
modeling domain. This is done on a grid-cell by grid-
cell basis (i.e., the adjustment factor for a monitoring
site is based on the simulation results for the grid cell
in which it is  located).  The  adjustment  factor
represents  the  ratio of  the  future-year-scenario
concentrations to the base-year concentrations and is
calculated using appropriately matched  values for
several different concentration levels (i.e., the changes
in concentration are dependent upon concentration
level).    The  observed  concentrations  for   each
monitoring  site  are then modified using the  site-
specific (or grid-cell-specific) adjustment factors. The
resulting values  represent the estimated future-year
concentrations.
    This approach to estimating future air quality
differs from  that for a  typical  air quality model
application (e.g., for ozone attainment demonstration
purposes) in that the modeling results are used in a
relative sense, rather than an absolute sense. This may
enhance the reliability of the future-year concentration
estimates, especially in the event that the uncertainty
inherent in the absolute concentration values is greater
than that associated with the response of the modeling
system to  changes in emissions.

    Although the ratios are calculated using modeling
results for a limited number of simulation days, it is
assumed, using this methodology, that the ratios can
be   used   to   represent  longer   time  periods.
Consequently, all observations contained within the
dataset (a few exceptions are discussed later in this
document) are  adjusted using the model-derived
ratios. Thus, by applying the model-derived ratios to
observed  values representing longer periods, this
approach also permits the estimation of seasonal and
annual concentration distributions - a requirement for
this  study. Following the calculation of various la-
bour rolling  averages  for  each  monitoring  site,
statistical  quantities,  or  "profiles",  describing the
ozone  distribution  for each  monitor  are  then
calculated.

    The  future-year  air  quality profile  estimation
methodology, as applied to the analysis of results for
the section 812 prospective analysis, is described in
detail in the remaining sections of this document. A
flowchart  illustrating the methodology is provided in
Figure C-l. The procedure makes use of the statistical
functions  and data  handling  capabilities  of the
Statistical  Analysis Software (SAS) package.
                                                 C-3

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Figure C-1
 Schematic diagram of the future-year concentration estimation methodology.
                      1990
                   (Base Case)
               city
\
    AQ Model
    Predictions
                           Cone
                               -city3
   j»oV \ \^. \/\
    \ \ \ ^yV ^^-

          countyl
                                               Cone
                                                                           Cone
                                                                          \\ \ \ \ \~x
                                    -|post-CAAA|->

                                             Ratio to Base Case
                               S\\\N\—TpcrtCAAAl-fr    \\S\SS\
                               \\ \ \ \ \\  	       \\ \ \ \ \\
                                                                         Ratio to Base Case
                                Adjustments
                                  Factors
                     cityl
        AQ
    Observations
                 i  city2
                          cityS
                       AQ
                     Results
                                countyl
                      Concentration
                      distributions
                                  Concentration
                                   distributions
Concentration
 distributions
 [NOTE: Figure illustrates how model results and observations are used to produce air quality profiles (concentration distributions)
 for the benefits analysis. The figure shows model runs at the top; four sets of "ratios" of model results in space in the middle; and
 frequency distributions of pollutant monitor concentrations and the space-dependent scaling of these by the ratios of the model
 predictions on the bottom.]
Estimating the Effects of the
CAAA on Ozone Air Quality

    Future-year ozone concentrations corresponding
to the Post-CAAA and  Pre-CAAA scenarios were
estimated through application of the UAM and UAM-
V modeling systems.  This section  of the report
contains an overview of the modeling systems and, for
 each geographical domain, a description of the
                                   application procedures and results.  The calculation
                                   of ozone  air quality  profiles  using the  combined
                                   modeling results from the regional-  and urban-scale
                                   modeling applications is also described.

                                       For ease of reading, all figures follow the text in
                                   this section.
                                                 C-4

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Overview of The UAM and UAM-V
Photochemical  Modeling
Systems

UAM

    The UAM is a three-dimensional photochemical
grid model that calculates concentrations of pollutants
by simulating the physical and chemical processes that
occur in the atmosphere.  It is formulated based on
the atmospheric  diffusion or  species  continuity
equation.  This equation represents a mass balance
that includes all of the relevant emissions, transport,
diffusion, chemical reaction, and removal processes in
mathematical terms.  The UAM incorporates  the
Carbon Bond IV chemical mechanism, which groups
pollutant species to limit the number of chemical
reactions, while permitting reasonable accuracy in
simulating ozone and its precursors.

    The major factors that affect photochemical air
quality include:

    •  spatial distribution of emissions  of volatile
       organic compounds (VOC) and NOX, both
       natural and anthropogenic,
    •  composition of the emitted VOC and NO^
    •  spatial and temporal variations in the wind
       fields,
    •  dynamics of the boundary layer, including
       stability and the level of mixing,
    •  chemical reactions involving VOC, NOX, and
       other important species,
    •  diurnal variations  of solar  insolation and
       temperature,
    •  loss of ozone and ozone precursors by dry
       and wet deposition, and
    •  ambient background concentration of VOC,
       NOx,  and other  species in, immediately
       upwind, and above the region of study.

    The UAM simulates all of these processes. The
species  continuity equation is   solved  using  the
following fractional steps: emissions  are injected;
horizontal advection/diffusion is calculated; vertical
advection/diffusion and deposition are calculated; and
chemical transformations are performed for reactive
pollutants. The UAM performs these four calculations
during each time step. The maximum time step is a
function of the grid size and the  maximum wind
velocity and diffusion coefficient. The typical time
step is 10-15 minutes for coarse (10-20 km) grids and
a few minutes for fine (1-2 km) grids.

    Because it accounts for spatial and temporal
variations as well as differences in  the reactivity of
emissions,  the UAM is ideal for evaluating the air-
quality effects of emission control scenarios.  This is
achieved by first replicating a historical ozone episode
to establish a base-case simulation. Model inputs are
prepared from observed  meteorological, emissions,
and air  quality  data  for the episode  days using
prognostic meteorological modeling and/or diagnostic
and interpolative modeling techniques. The model is
then applied with these inputs, and the  results are
evaluated to determine model performance. Once the
model results have been evaluated and determined to
perform within prescribed levels, the same base-case
meteorological inputs are combined with modified or
projected emission inventories to simulate  possible
alternative/future emission scenarios.

    The current UAM modeling system was released
by the EPA in 1990 and is fully documented in the
UAM user's  guide  (SAI, 1990).   Features of the
modeling  system  include a  mixing-height-based
vertical  coordinate system and flux- and process-
analysis capabilities  to facilitate the comprehensive
assessment  of  model   performance   and   the
interpretation of simulation results.

UAM-V

    The  UAM-V modeling system represents  an
extension of the UAM.   Like UAM,  the UAM-V
incorporates   the   Carbon  Bond IV  chemical
mechanism. Other features of the UAM-V modeling
system include:
                                               C-5

-------
                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
•   Variable vertical grid structure: The structure of
    vertical layers can be arbitrarily defined. This
    allows for higher resolution near the surface
    and facilitates matching with  output from
    prognostic meteorological models.

•   Three-dimensional  meteorological  inputs:  The
    meteorological  inputs  for UAM-V  vary
    spatially and temporally.  These are usually
    calculated using a prognostic meteorological
    model.

•   Variable  grid resolution for chemical kinetic
    calculations: A chemical  aggregation  scheme
    can  be  employed,  allowing  chemistry
    calculations to be performed on a variable
    grid while advection/diffusion and emissions
    injections are performed on a fixed grid.

•   Two-way  nested  grid:  Finer grids  can  be
    imbedded in coarser grids for more detailed
    representation    of   advection/diffusion,
    chemistry, and emissions.  Several levels of
    nesting can be accommodated.

•   Updated   chemical mechanism:  The   original
    Carbon Bond IV chemical mechanism  has
    been  updated  to  include  the  XO2/RO2
    reaction, along with new temperature effects
    for   PAN   reactions.     Aqueous-phase
    chemistry is also an option.

•   Dry deposition algorithm:  The dry deposition
    algorithm is similar  to that  used  by  the
    Regional Acid Deposition Model (RADM).

•   True mass balance: Concentrations are advected
    and diffused in the model using units of mass
    per unit volume rather than parts per million.
    This  maintains  true  mass balance in  the
    advection and diffusion calculations.
                     
-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
period, the exceedances occurred mostly within the
southeastern U.S. During the 1995 period, high ozone
concentrations  were  observed  in  several regions
including  the  Lake Michigan area,  the Northeast
Corridor,  and the Southeast.  These periods were
chosen to be representative of regional-scale ozone
transport events for the southeastern and eastern U.S.
respectively.  In both cases, the extent of the high
ozone  concentrations  is attributable  to persistent,
regional-scale   ozone   conducive   meteorological
conditions. The simulation periods include two and
three initialization (or start-up) days, respectively.
These  are  included   to   reduce  the  effects  of
uncertainties in the initial conditions on the simulation
results.

    Input Preparation

    The UAM-V modeling system requires a variety
of input files that contain  information pertaining to
the modeling domain and  simulation period. These
include gridded, day-specific emissions estimates and
meteorological fields; initial and boundary conditions;
and land-use information.

    Separate emission inventories were prepared for
the base-year and each of the  future-year scenarios.
All other  inputs  were specified  for  the  base-year
model application (1990) and remained unchanged for
each future-year modeling  scenario.

    Modeling Emission Inventories

    The   UAM-V  requires   detailed   emission
inventories containing temporally allocated emissions
for each grid cell in the modeling domain and for all
primary pollutant species represented by the chemical
mechanism.  An extended version of EPA's UAM
Emissions Preprocessor System, Version 2.0, or EPS
2.0 (SAI, 1992) called EPS 2.5e was used to process
the inventories. In addition to the capabilities of EPS
2.0,  this  system  has   been enhanced to  facilitate
regional-scale model applications of participate matter
and toxic species, as well as ozone precursors.
    Each inventory includes weekday/weekend area
source emissions, typical summer day utility emissions,
weekday/weekend non-utility point source emissions,
and day-specific biogenic emissions.  The on-road
motor-vehicle  emissions  were  based  on  typical
summer weekday/weekend estimates.

    Anthropogenic input emissions inventory data
were provided by Pechan (1998). These included area
and point source emissions data from the National
Particulates  Inventory  (by county  and for specific
point sources), county-level vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) estimates, and mobile-source emission  factors
for VOC, NOx, and CO.   Area source emissions
include  emissions from a variety of sources such as
commercial  and residential  fuel combustion, non-
point-source industrial emissions, solvent utilization,
construction  equipment,   off-highway  vehicles,
gasoline distribution, furniture refinishing, and lawn
mowers. Day-specific, model-ready biogenic emission
inventories were obtained from the OTAG database.
Preparation  of the emission inventory data  is
described  in detail by Pechan (1998).   A brief
description of the emissions processing is provided in
this section.

    Preliminary processing of the data prior to the
application of the  EPS 2.5e system was necessary.
This  consisted of generating the  on-road  mobile
emissions and reformatting all data into Atmospheric
Information Retrieval System (AIRS) Mobile-Source
Subsystem (AMS) and Facility Subsystem (AFS) work-
file formats.    On-road  mobile  emissions were
generated using the inputs provided by EPA and the
MOBILESa model. The outputs from MOBILESa
include future-year  emissions of the ozone precursor
pollutants VOC, NOX, and CO. MOBILESa accesses
a matrix of emissions factors that  are based on
temperature, speed, and other site-specific  parameters.
Estimates  of VMT were  multiplied  by  emission
factors  to generate on-road motor  vehicle emission
estimates.   The VMT  estimates were provided at
county level  and were broken down into 12 different
urban and rural roadway classifications.
                                                C-7

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    All  anthropogenic emission inputs  to  UAM-V
were preprocessed through the EPS 2.5e emissions
processing system. Photochemical grid models such
as the UAM-V require detailed emission  inventories,
containing hourly emissions for each grid cell in the
modeling domain for each species being simulated.
The core EPS system  is a  series of FORTRAN
modules  that incorporate  spatial,  temporal,  and
chemical resolution into  an emissions inventory used
for photochemical modeling. Point, area, and mobile
source emission data were processed separately to
facilitate both data tracking for quality control and the
use of the data in evaluating the effects of alternative
control   strategies   on   simulated  air  pollutant
concentrations. The mobile source component was
further  broken down into rural  and urban motor
vehicle emissions based on the roadway classifications.
The model-ready components  (including biogenic)
were then merged to generate the final model inputs.

    The   UAM-V  requires  hourly  estimates  of
emissions for each grid cell  to accurately  simulate
hourly concentrations of ozone. Accordingly, annual
average  or peak ozone  season daily emission rates
must be adjusted  to reflect  the  conditions of the
ozone  episode being modeled, including  seasonal
adjustments for activity levels (if base year emissions
are reported as annual averages), adjustments for the
day of the week, and hourly temperature and activity
adjustments for each hour of the episode day.  EPA
has developed a default set of temporal allocation
factors (TAF) for each source category and these have
been incorporated into EPS 2.5e.  TAF were applied
to all model inputs. For  the eastern U.S. domain, the
available typical peak ozone season day NOX and VOC
emissions were adjusted for day of week and hourly
allocation.

    The   Carbon-Bond  IV  chemical  mechanism
employed by the UAM-V modeling system, groups or
"lumps" pollutants to limit the number of reactions
and  species to a  reasonable  level while permitting
reasonable accuracy in predicting air quality. Ozone
precursor hydrocarbon emissions were aggregated into
the carbon-bond  species  required by the  UAM-V
using speciation profiles developed by the  EPA (1991)
and the default assignments provided with EPS. The
chemical speciation scheme for VOCs includes eight
categories:   olefins,   paraffins,   toluene,   xylene,
formaldehyde,  higher  aldehydes,  ethenes,   and
isoprene. For this study, the default NOXspeciation of
90 percent  NO and 10 percent  NO2 by weight,
included in EPS 2.5e, was assumed for all point and
area sources.

    For  the UAM-V model  to accurately simulate
observed air quality concentrations for the selected
grid, it must be supplied with emissions data that have
the same degree of spatial resolution (i.e., by grid cell).
The  effort  required to implement this  resolution
varies depending on the type of source.  For point
sources,  geographical coordinates  for each  source,
typically  reported to within a fraction of a kilometer,
are used for direct assignment of emissions to the
appropriate grid cells. By contrast, spatial resolution
of emissions reported as county totals, as is usually the
case  for  area sources and motor vehicles, requires
substantially more effort.   The most commonly
employed approach  for apportioning  county-level
emissions to grid cells is to use a surrogate indicator
for spatial distribution of emission levels or activity
(e.g., population, type of land use, or location of major
links such as interstate roadways or airport runways).
A spatial  allocation  surrogate is a quantity whose area!
distribution is either known or has been estimated and
is assumed to be similar to the areal distribution of
emissions from some source category whose spatial
distribution is  not well  known.   County-level
emissions are spatially allocated to the grid cells of the
modeling domain.   Surrogate data input used to create
the spatial allocation factors included U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS)  land-use data, 1990 census data, and
digitized  county boundaries.

    Emissions totals by component for VOC, NOX,
and CO  for the base- and future-year scenarios are
provided in Table C-l. This table shows increases in
VOC and NOX under the Pre-CAAA scenarios and
substantial decreases under the Post-CAAA scenarios.
The decreases in VOC are  primarily attributable to
reductions   in  area-  source  and  motor-vehicle
emissions. The  decreases in NOX are due to decreases
in motor-vehicle and utility and  non-utility point-
source emissions.
                                                C-8

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Air Quality, Meteorological, and
    Land-Use Inputs

    The  air quality,  meteorological,  and land-use
inputs for application of the UAM-V modeling system
for this study were identical to  those used for the
OTAG modeling exercise.  The initial and boundary
concentrations  for  the  OTAG simulations were
represented by "clean" air values for all species. The
individual species concentrations vary slightly with
elevation (or height above the ground) and with time
of day, and  are approximately 0.1 parts per billion
(ppb) of NOX, 5 parts per  billion carbon (ppbC) of
reactive hydrocarbons (RHC), and 100 ppb of CO.
The boundary concentrations for ozone range from
about 31 to 34 ppb.  Further detail on the OTAG
initial  and  boundary   concentrations   has  been
presented in OTAG publications (e.g., Deuel et. al.,
1996).

    Other input data required by the UAM-V model
for simulating the ozone  episodes  (including the
meteorological and land-use inputs)  were obtained
directly  from   the  OTAG   datasets   without
modification. Model options were the same in the
current application  as in  the  OTAG  application,
except that  the plume-in-grid (P-i-G)  treatment (a
detailed treatment of the chemistry and geometry of
plumes  from  elevated  point  sources) was  not
employed.   This exception was  made in order to
reduce the demands on computer resources.
                                               C-9

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table C-1
Emission Totals by Component for each Scenario for the OTAG Domain (tpd)
voc

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
33,417
17,518
8,247
87
59,270
2000 Pre-
CAAA
38,517
15,102
9,027
81
62,727
2000 Post-
CAAA
27,982
10,074
7,317
82
45,454
2010 Pre-
CAAA
43,113
17,400
10,194
111
70,818
2010 Post-
CAAA
8,638
8,552
8,204
113
45,507
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
12,109
17,915
6,647
17,637
54,307
2000 Pre-
CAAA
13,858
17,463
7,345
20,668
59,335
2000 Post-
CAAA
13,351
14,923
4,444
8,254
40,972
2010 Pre-
CAAA
15,770
20,222
8,365
22,670
67,026
2010 Post-
CAAA
13,741
12,616
4,681
5,182
36,220
CO

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
46,606
147,842
13,766
710
208,924
2000 Pre-
CAAA
53,087
112,656
15,463
784
181,990
2000 Post-
CAAA
51,544
84,569
15,463
811
152,388
2010 Pre-
CAAA
58,952
124,385
17,192
1,225
201,753
2010 Post-
CAAA
57,100
78,396
17,192
1,327
154,015
       C-10

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    UAM-V Simulation  Results for the
    Eastern U.S.

    Model Performance

    The  assessment of model performance  is an
important component of a modeling analysis and is
used to ensure that the modeling system, including the
inputs, is able to replicate the  observed concentration
levels associated with the historical modeling episode
period.   The evaluation  of  model  performance is
typically  achieved  through  the  comparison  of
simulated concentrations with observed data. In this
case, the observed data  correspond to the actual
episode period and the emissions reflect  emission
levels for that same period/year.  For the OTAG
modeling component, model performance considered
the base-case applications for 1993 and 1995.

    Model  performance for  the OTAG  episodes is
documented in the OTAG modeling report (OTAG,
1997).  In general, the observed ozone concentration
levels were represented in the simulations, with some
over- and under-estimation of the maximum values.
Scatter plots comparing the simulated and  observed
concentrations for key modeling days for each episode
(28 July 1993 and 15 July  1995) show generally good
agreement between the simulated and observed values,
with some tendency for over-  and underestimation on
all days, distributed among the concentration levels
(scatter along the axis).   These  are typical of  the
comparisons for the other simulation days.

    Since the simulation results corresponding to all
concentration levels will be  used to  adjust  the
observed data for Section 812 modeling analysis a
comparison of the mean values was also  performed.
Plots comparing the mean values for each simulation
day of the 1993 and 1995 simulation periods in both
cases show that the mean simulated values are slightly
higher than the mean observed values, but the day-to-
day tendencies are similar.
    For  the 1993  simulation  period,  the  mean
unsigned relative error (or normalized bias) ranges
from approximately -15 percent to 1 percent.  The
corresponding values for the 1995 simulation period
are -12 to 9 percent.  These are all within the EPA
recommended range (for urban-scale modeling) of
+ 15 percent.  For both simulation periods, the mean
relative error (or gross error) is less than 25 percent
for each simulation day. The EPA recommended
range is less than 35 percent.

    The good agreement between the simulated and
observed ozone concentrations, suggests  that the
OTAG    modeling    system    (including   the
meteorological, air quality, and geographical inputs)
provides  an appropriate basis for  the Section 812
prospective modeling.

    UAM-V Modeling Results

    The UAM-V simulation results for the Pre- and
Post-CAAA scenarios were used in this study to
calculate factors for adjustment of observed data and
estimation of future-year  concentration levels. These
were  calculated   by  comparing  the   simulated
concentrations   corresponding   to  each  future-
year/scenario simulation  with those for the base-year
simulation (1990).  Examples of this comparison are
illustrated using isopleth plots for maximum ozone
concentration in Figures C-2 and C-3.1 These isopleth
plots  correspond to  1995  simulation  period  and
depict differences in maximum ozone concentration
for 15 July  between the 1990 baseline and the 2010
Pre- and 2010  Post-CAAA scenarios, respectively.
The differences are calculated as scenario minus base,
so that negative values indicate lower concentrations
for the future-year scenario.  These plots indicate that
for 2010 the  Pre-CAAA  simulation  results are
characterized by increases in ozone, while the Post-
CAAA results  show  decreases  in  ozone.   Similar
results were found for both future years and for both
episodes  modeled (SAI,  1999). The increases occur
over the  mid- and southern sections of the  domain
while the decreases  are more widespread. Both the
    'For many of the figures in this appendix the Pre-CAAA
scenario and Post-CAAA Scenario are referred to as Pre-CAAA90
and post CAAA90, respectively.
                                               C-11

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
increases  and   decreases  are  larger  and  more
widespread for 2010.

    It is also useful to directly compare the Pre- and
Post-CAAA simulation results for each future year.
This gives a direct indication of the effects of the
CAAA on the simulated ozone concentrations. For
example,  Figure C-4 illustrates the  differences  in
maximum simulated ozone concentration between the
Pre- and Post-CAAA simulations for 2010 for the  15
July 1995 simulated ozone episode. The differences
are calculated as Post-CAAA minus Pre-CAAA,  so
that negative values indicate lower concentrations for
the Post-CAAA scenario. In general the results  of
these  comparisons indicate that except for isolated
increases  (single grid cells),  the  simulated daily
maximum ozone concentrations for the Post-CAAA
scenario are lower than the corresponding Pre-CAAA
values for both future years.  The spatial extent of the
decreases is greater for 2010.

Regional-Scale Modeling of the
Western U.S.

    Application of the UAM-V modeling system  to
the western U.S. utilized inputs from the regional-scale
application of REMSAD (as described in the next
section  of this report).   The  objective  of this
application was to  provide regional-scale  ozone
concentration  estimates  for  those  areas  that are
neither included in the  OTAG domain nor in the
urban-scale analyses. The application procedures and
modeling results are summarized in this section.

    UAM-V Application Procedures for
    the  Western U.S.

    Modeling Domain

    The modeling domain used to obtain results for
the western  U.S.  is identical to  that  used for
application of the  REMSAD modeling system (as
described in the following section of this report) for
the PM-related analysis of the CAAA. The modeling
domain  encompasses  the  contiguous  48  states,
extending from  126 degrees west  longitude to 66
degrees west longitude, and from 24 degrees north
latitude to 52 degrees north latitude. A grid cell size
of 2/3 longitude by 1/2 latitude (approximately 56 by
56 km) results in a 90 by 55 grid (4,950 cells) for each
vertical layer. Eight vertical layers were used. Note
that  although  the  domain  includes  the  entire
contiguous  48  states, results  using  this domain
configuration were only used  to  estimate  ozone
concentrations for the western states.

    Simulation Period

    For  the western U.S., the  simulation period
included 1-10 July 1990.  As  noted earlier,  this
simulation period was selected to accommodate use of
the  REMSAD inputs and, therefore, represents the
summertime simulation period for PM modeling of
the  western U.S. This period is characterized by high
ozone concentrations (in excess of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS) in the Los Angeles area on all days, and in
the  San Joaquin Valley on 9 and 10 July.  Relatively
high concentrations were also observed in the San
Francisco Bay Area, the Sacramento Valley, the San
Diego area, and Denver. Throughout the remainder
of the domain, concentrations typically did not exceed
100 ppb.  The   simulation  period includes three
initialization (or start-up) day that were included to
limit the influence of the initial  conditions on the
simulation results.

    Input Preparation

    Preparation   of  the  model-ready  emission
inventories for this application utilized the  same data
and followed the same  procedures outlined in the
previous section of this report.  Emissions totals for
the  base- and future-year scenarios are provided in
Table C-2 for VOC, NOX, VOC, and CO.

    The meteorological, air quality, and land-use
related inputs were identical to those used  for the
application of the REMSAD modeling system to the
western U.S.  The reader is referred to Section 4 of
this report for a description of these  inputs  and input
preparation procedures.
                                               C-12

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
        Table C-2
        Emission Totals by Component for each Scenario for the Entire U.S. (tpd).
voc

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
33,972
18,659
9,503
96
62,229
2000 Pre-
CAAA
39,154
16,454
10,298
85
65,991
2000 Post-
CAAA
27,620
10,683
8,457
85
46,845
2010 Pre-
CAAA
43,708
18,776
11,606
134
74,224
2010 Post-
CAAA
28,575
8,804
9,454
137
46,970
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
13,766
20,399
7,964
20,188
62,316
2000 Pre-
CAAA
15,659
20,660
8,694
22,787
67,800
2000 Post-
CAAA
15,252
17,421
5,645
11,170
49,487
2010 Pre-
CAAA
17,697
24,142
9,803
24,808
76,450
2010 Post-
CAAA
15,794
14,696
5,985
10,319
46,793
CO

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
UAM-V Simulation
Western U.S.
Base 1990
70,069
171,181
16,478
861
258,589
Results for
2000 Pre-
CAAA
80,679
142,346
18,257
796
242,078
2000 Post-
CAAA
79,155
103,332
18,257
804
201,547
the although typical
2010 Pre-
CAAA
90,198
153,706
20,210
1,243
265,357
2010 Post-
CAAA
88,240
92,058
20,210
1,269
201,777
model performance crite
applicable for the grid resolution and do:
    Model Performance

    Model performance for ozone was assessed for
the entire western region and  for five subregions.
Model performance was evaluated through graphical
comparison of the simulated and observed regional
and  subregional  maximum ozone  concentration
patterns and values. Quantitative measures of model
performance were calculated on a subregional basis,
used for this analysis. Overall, the results indicate that
ozone  concentrations  in  the  western  U.S.  are
somewhat underestimated, relative to the observed
values. On a subregional basis, the results vary from
day to day and can be characterized as follows:

    •   Southern California Coast: Gross concentra-
        tion gradients are directionally represented in
        the simulation results,  with  lower values
        along the coast and higher ozone  inland.
        However, the resolution is not sufficient to
                                              C-13

-------
                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    resolve even the higher values within the Los
    Angeles  Basin.   The  maximum simulated
    value  on  any day  is  83 ppb,  while the
    maximum observed value exceeds 100 ppb (at
    a number of the  sites within the region)  on
    any given day  of the  simulation period.
    Results corresponding to Los Angeles  were
    not used  in  subsequent portions of the
    analysis.

•   Northern California/Southern Oregon/Cent-
    ral and Western  Nevada: Simulated ozone
    concentrations  tend  to be  lower   than
    observed in the Sacramento Valley and San
    Joaquin Valley as well as (toward the end of
    the simulation period) the eastern portion of
    the San Francisco Bay Area. Daily maximum
    simulated ozone  concentrations in the San
    Joaquin Valley range from approximately 60
    to 86 ppb. Observed values greater than or
    equal to  100 ppb were  recorded during 7-10
    July.    Representation  of  the   observed
    concentration pattern improves throughout
    the  simulation period.  Concentrations at
    monitors in Oregon and Nevada are generally
    well represented.  Results corresponding to
    northern California were not used in the
    subsequent analysis.

•   Pacific Northwest/Eastern Washington: Low
    observed ozone concentrations are slightly to
    moderately overestimated through 7 July and
    underestimated (in some cases just slightly)
    for  8-10  July.   For  days  with  ozone
    concentrations greater than  40 ppb, the
    normalized bias ranges  from approximately -
    12 to 20 percent.  The normalized gross  error
    is less than about 38 percent.

•   Four  Corners  States:  Maximum  ozone
    concentration in Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Salt
    Lake City are reasonably well represented in
    the simulation results. Concentrations for the
    Denver  are  consistently underestimated.
    Those for Albuquerque and El Paso are well
    represented  for  certain  of the  days and
    underestimated for others. There are also a
        few isolated sites for which maximum ozone
        is reasonably well simulated (the observed
        concentrations are low).  The normalized bias
        ranges from approximately -5 to 14 percent.
        The normalized gross error is  less than 40
        percent. Results for Phoenix were not used
        in the subsequent analysis.

    •   Montana/Idaho/Wyoming/ Western Portion
        of Dakotas:  Day-to-day  differences  in
        concentrations are  not well  represented,
        however, the simulated values are generally
        consistent with the limited observations. The
        normalized  bias  ranges  from zero  to
        approximately 30 percent.  The normalized
        error is greater than 35 percent for four of
        the simulation days.

    •   Note on the Eastern U.S.: Maximum simula-
        ted   ozone   concentrations  range  from
        approximately 160 to 250 ppb during the
        simulation period.   Simulated  peaks  occur
        over  Baton Rouge, Houston, St. Louis, and
        Atlanta with some high values along the NE
        corridor.  These values  have not yet been
        compared  with observations, but simulated
        ozone concentrations are much higher in the
        east than in the west.

    In general, the  coarse resolution limits the ability
of the modeling system to resolve peak concentrations
and, in some  cases, concentration gradients (such as
those that occur along the coast of California). Based
on these results, it was decided that the western ozone
modeling results could be used  to characterize the
regional-scale concentration changes but would be
supplemented with higher resolution modeling for
Los  Angeles, the   San  Francisco  Bay Area  (and
portions of northern California), and Phoenix.

    Simulated and observed concentrations for two of
the modeling days (4 and 8 July 1990) were compared
by SAI (1999). The differences between the simulated
and observed  values are typically larger than those for
the  OTAG simulations (possibly due to the coarser
grid  resolution) and represent both  under- and
overestimation   of  the   maximum   observed
                                           C-14

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
concentrations.   Underestimation of  the higher
concentrations  is prevalent for nearly  all of the
simulation days.

    In addition, a comparison of mean simulated and
observed values by SAI showed that, while the highest
values are underestimated, the mean simulated values
are slightly greater than the observed means (SAI,
1999).

    The  model performance  evaluation  for  the
western ozone modeling application suggests that the
modeling results can be used for  the regional-scale
analysis. Although the peak concentrations tend to be
underestimated,  there is not a uniform bias in the
representation of the daily maxima. In addition, the
mean values are fairly well characterized.

    UAM-V Modeling Results

    The UAM-V simulation results corresponding to
the Pre- and Post-CAAA  scenarios  for 2010 are
compared to the base-year values in Figures C-5 and
C-6, respectively.   The  isopleth  plots  depict the
differences in maximum ozone concentration for 8
July between the base (1990) simulation and the 2010
Pre- and Post-CAAA simulations,  respectively.  The
differences are calculated  as scenario minus base, so
that negative values indicate lower concentrations for
the future-year scenario.  Similar results were found
for both  future years modeled  (SAI,   1999)  and
indicate increases in daily maximum ozone for large
portions  of the  western U.S. with smaller areas of
decrease  (e.g., over California)  for the  Pre-CAAA
scenario.  For the  Post-CAAA scenarios, the plots
indicate widespread decreases  with  small  areas of
increase.

    A  comparison  of the Pre-  and Post-CAAA
simulation results for 2010 is provided in Figure  C-7.
The differences are calculated as Post-CAAA minus
Pre-CAAA, so that negative values indicate lower
concentrations for the Post-CAAA scenario.  This
comparison indicates lower ozone concentrations for
the Post-CAAA scenario compared to the Pre-CAAA
scenario over most of the western U.S., with some
increases in the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles,
and Seattle. The simulation results suggest that NOX
reductions within these areas are disbeneficial with
respect to ozone air quality. This is likely attributable
to the reduced ozone titration that occurs in  the
simulation when NOX emissions are reduced. This
phenomenon is  most frequently apparent in area
where  NOX emissions  are  large relative to  VOC
emissions (VOC-limited areas).

Urban-Scale Modeling of the San
Francisco Bay Area

    High-resolution, urban-scale modeling of the  San
Francisco Bay Area (northern California) was intended
to provide an  improved basis (compared to  the
regional-scale application of UAM-V for the western
U.S.) for the estimation of future-year ozone profiles
for the Bay Area and portions of northern California.
With the exception of the emission inventories, all
inputs for this application were obtained from the  Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD),
and used by permission.  The application procedures
and modeling results are summarized in this section.

    UAM-V Application   Procedures  for
    the San Francisco Bay Area

    Modeling Domain

    The modeling domain for this application of the
UAM-V modeling system includes the San Francisco
Bay Area, the Monterrey Bay Area, Sacramento,  and
a portion of the San Joaquin Valley. The location  and
geographical extent of the domain is illustrated in
Figure C-8.  The domain consists of 102 by  102
horizontal grid cells with a grid spacing of 4 km. It
also includes 16 vertical layers.

    Simulation Period

    The simulation  period for the application to
northern California is 3-6 August 1990. This episode
period occurred during the San Joaquin Valley  Air
Quality Study and was characterized by moderate to
                                               C-15

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
high ozone concentrations in the San Francisco Bay
Area on 5 and 6 August, and in the Sacramento area
and the San Joaquin Valley on 4, 5, and 6 August. The
observed peak in the Bay Area was 120 ppb, while that
for the other two more inland areas reached 150 ppb.
The simulation period includes one initialization (or
start-up) day that was included to limit the influence
of the initial conditions on the simulation results.

    Input Preparation

    Preparation   of  the  model-ready   emission
inventories for this application utilized the same data
and followed the same procedures  outlined in  the
previous section of this report. Emissions totals for
the base- and future-year scenarios are provided in
Table C-3 for VOC, NOX, and  CO.  This table
indicates  a downward trend in emissions  (between
1990 and 2000) followed by an upward trend (between
2000 and  2010) for the Pre-CAAA scenario.  The
increases are attributable to area- source and motor-
vehicle emissions (i.e., increases in population and
vehicle miles traveled).  Emissions for both future
years are lower than the base-year for the Post-CAAA
scenario.   The decreases  are primarily  due to  a
reduction in motor-vehicle emissions.

    The meteorological,  air quality, and  land-use
related inputs were prepared by the BAAQMD for use
in their SIP modeling analysis. Documentation of the
input preparation procedures and resulting inputs is
available  on-line  (BAAQMD,  1998).   Initial and
boundary conditions for the future-year applications
were estimated based on the corresponding emission
reductions for VOC and NOX; for ozone the square
root of the product of the VOC and NOX reduction
factors was used.
                                               C-16

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
     Table C-3
     Emission Totals by Component for each Scenario for the San Francisco Bay Area (tpd)
voc

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
783
900
111
1
1,795
2000 Pre-
CAAA
795
572
110
0
1,477
2000 Post-
CAAA
644
223
110
0
977
2010Pre-
CAAA
886
680
110
1
1,677
2010 Post-
CAAA
698
97
93
1
889
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
381
850
202
46
1,479
2000 Pre-
CAAA
407
827
197
4
1,435
2000 Post-
CAAA
392
545
140
4
1,081
2010Pre-
CAAA
458
1,014
197
2
1,671
2010 Post-
CAAA
396
337
140
2
874
CO

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
UAM-V Simulation
Base 1990
1,846
7,414
123
46
9,429
Results for
2000 Pre-
CAAA
2,113
5,652
119
9
7,893
the values
2000 Post-
CAAA
2,098
2,526
119
10
4,753
2010Pre-
CAAA
2,411
6,630
119
26
9,186
2010 Post-
CAAA
2,394
1,444
119
26
3,983
with a tendency for underestimation of th
    San Francisco Bay Area

    Model  Performance

    Model  performance  was  evaluated  by  the
BAAQMD as part of their SIP modeling analysis and
the inputs  (with  the  exception of  the modeling
emission inventories) were used directly for the 812
prospective  modeling  analysis.    Sscatter  plots
comparing the maximum simulated  and observed
ozone concentrations for both simulation periods are
available in (SAI, 1999).  These comparisons indicate
good agreement between the simulated and observed
observed ozone concentrations.   Mean  values are
underestimated by about 10 to 15 percent on all days,
which is within the current EPA range for acceptable
urban-scale model performance (SAI, 1999).

    Since  good model performance  is  achieved,
results of the model  performance evaluation for
ozone suggest that the UAM-V modeling platform for
northern California (including the meteorological, air
quality,  and  geographical  inputs)  provides  an
appropriate basis for the Section  812 prospective
modeling.
                                             C-17

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    UAM-V Modeling Results

    Comparison of the UAM-V simulation results for
the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios with the base-year
values indicates both increases and decreases in the
simulated concentrations for the Bay Area , both of
which are greater in magnitude and more widespread
for the Post-CAAA scenario and for 2010. Isopleth
plots for the Bay Area are available in (SAI, 1999).

    A  comparison  of the  Pre- and  Post-CAAA
simulation results for 2010 is provided in Figure C-9.
The differences are calculated as Post-CAAA minus
Pre-CAAA, so  that negative values  indicate lower
concentrations for the Post-CAAA scenario.   This
comparison indicates that the CAAA results in higher
daily maximum ozone  in the Bay Area  but lower
ozone  throughout the remainder  of the domain.
Similar results were obtained for 2000  (SAI, 1999).
These  results are qualitatively  consistent with the
regional-scale modeling results presented in  the
previous section of this report. However, the extent
of the increases is more limited and the decreases are
greater in the refined modeling.  Note the increases
occur  in  areas  where  the  base-year   ozone
concentrations are low to very low.

Urban-Scale Modeling of the Los
Angeles  Area

    High-resolution, urban-scale modeling of the Los
Angeles area was intended to provide an improved
basis (compared to the regional-scale application of
UAM-V for the western U.S.)  for the estimation of
future-year  ozone profiles for this area.  With the
exception of the emission inventories, all  inputs for
this application were obtained from the South Coast
Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and
used by permission. As noted earlier, modeling of this
area was performed using the UAM modeling system.
The  model  formulation is similar to that  for the
UAM-V modeling system, but lacks certain  features
that  make  UAM-V suitable  for  regional-scale
applications.    The  application  procedures  and
modeling results are summarized in this section.
    UAM Application Procedures for the
    Los Angeles Area

    Modeling Domain

    Application of the UAM-IV for the Los Angeles
area was based on modeling performed by SCAQMD,
as reported in the 1994 Air Quality Management Plan
(SCAQMD, 1994).  The modeling domain for this
application is a 65 by 40 array of 5 km resolution grid
cells. The domain also contains 5 vertical layers. The
domain encompasses the  South Coast Air  Basin
(SoCAB) (from Los Angeles to beyond Riverside) and
a portion of the Mojave Desert.  The location and
geographical extent of the domain  is illustrated  in
Figure C-8.

    Simulation Period

    Two simulation periods  were included  in the
modeling analysis for Los Angeles: 23-25 June 1987
and 26-28 August 1987.   Both of these episodes
occurred during the 1987 Southern California Air
Quality Study (SCAQS).  In both cases, the simulation
period includes one initialization, or start-up, day (in
order to  reduce the influence  of the somewhat
uncertain initial concentrations on model results).

    Input Preparation

    Preparation  of  the  model-ready  emission
inventories for this application utilized the same data
and followed the  same procedures outlined in a
previous section of this report. Emissions totals for
the base- and future-year scenarios are provided  in
Table C-4 for VOC, NO,, and CO. The Post-CAAA
scenarios are characterized by lower emissions than
the base year and  the Pre-CAAA scenarios.   The
differences are largely attributable to changes in the
motor-vehicle emissions.

    The  meteorological, air  quality, and land-use
related inputs were prepared by the SCAQMD for use
in their SIP modeling analysis. The reader is referred
to  SCAQMD  (1994  and   1996)   for  detailed
information on the input preparation procedures and
resulting inputs. Initial and boundary conditions for
                                              C-18

-------
                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
the future-year applications were estimated based on
the corresponding emission reductions for VOC and
NOX; for ozone the square root of the product of the
VOC and NCX reduction factors was used.
          Table C-4
          Emission Totals by Component for each Scenario for Los Angeles (tpd)
VOC

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated

Base 1990
758
1,179
197
1
Total 2,135
2000 Pre-
CAAA
770
999
196
3
1,968
2000 Post-
CAAA
607
410
196
3
1,216
2010Pre-
CAAA
871
1,168
196
2
2,237
2010Post-
CAAA
700
213
158
2
1,073
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated

Base 1990
450
993
216
19
Total 1,678
2000 Pre-
CAAA
467
1,280
186
19
1,953
2000 Post-
CAAA
453
879
139
18
1,489
2010Pre-
CAAA
529
1,573
186
12
2,300
2010Post-
CAAA
463
626
139
8
1,236
CO

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated

Base 1990
1,142
9,046
208
2
Total 10,398
2000 Pre-
CAAA
1,302
10,043
197
43
11,586
2000 Post-
CAAA
1,286
5,046
197
44
6,573
2010Pre-
CAAA
1,515
11,278
197
34
13,024
2010Post-
CAAA
1,495
3,728
197
35
5,456
DAM Simulation Results for the Los
Angeles Area

    Model Performance

    Model performance was evaluated by SCAQMD
as part of their SIP modeling analysis and the inputs
(with  the exception  of the modeling  emission
inventories) were used directly for the 812 prospective
modeling analysis.    Comparisons of  maximum
simulated and observed concentrations for each of the
simulation periods are available in (SAI, 1999).  They
indicate a tendency for underestimation of the high
observed ozone concentrations. This underestimation
                                            C-19

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
also shows up in the comparison of the mean values
(SAI, 1999).

   While the urban-scale results are much better than
those obtained with the coarser-resolution grid, both
the maximum and mean values are underestimated.
For the primary episode days,  the normalized bias
exceeds the  EPA recommended  range,  while the
normalized gross error is within approximately 35
percent. While this does not preclude the use of these
results  for the 812 study, it should be noted that the
simulated changes in ozone between the  base- and
future-year scenarios may be influenced by the lack of
good model performance.  Use of the simulation
results in the relative sense (through the calculation of
adjustment factors)  should reduce the uncertainty,
compared to use of the absolute values.

    DAM Modeling Results

   Comparison of the UAM-V simulation results for
the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios with the base-year
values  shows large  reductions in daily  maximum
ozone  for  all four  future-year scenarios.  Some
increases in ozone are simulated for 2010 for the Pre-
CAAA scenario; overall, the extent and magnitude of
the reductions is greater for the Post-CAAA scenario
for both years.  Isopleth plots for the Los Angeles
area are available in (SAI, 1999).

   A  comparison  of the  Pre-  and Post-CAAA
simulation results for 2010 is provided in Figure C-10.
The differences  are calculated as Post-CAAA minus
Pre-CAAA,  so  that  negative values  indicate lower
concentrations for the Post-CAAA scenario.  This
comparison   indicates   lower   maximum  ozone
concentrations under the Post-CAAA scenario for
both years. Small increases occur over the urban area;
these are smaller in extent and magnitude than for the
regional modeling application.  Similar results were
found for 2000 (SAI, 1999).
Urban-Scale  Modeling of the Maricopa
County (Phoenix) Area

    High-resolution,   urban-scale  modeling  of
Maricopa County, Arizona  (which includes the
Phoenix  urban  area)  was intended to provide an
improved basis  (compared to  the regional-scale
application of UAM-V for the western U.S.) for the
estimation of future-year ozone profiles for this area.
With the exception of the emission inventories, all
inputs for this application were  obtained from the
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), and
used by permission. As noted earlier, modeling of this
area was performed using the UAM modeling system.

    DAM Application Procedures for the
    Phoenix Area

    Modeling  Domain

    The modeling domain for the application of the
UAM  modeling system  to  the Phoenix  area
encompasses  the urbanized portion of Maricopa
County, Arizona;  this domain was based on that used
for a previous  application of UAM  for the  area
(Douglas et al., 1994). The domain consists of a 44 by
33 array of 2 km grid cells and 5 vertical layers.  The
location and geographical extent of the domain  is
illustrated in Figure C-8.

    Simulation Period

    Two ozone episodes were also simulated for the
Phoenix area: 9-10 August 1992 and 13-14 June 1993.
Exceedances of the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone were
recorded during  both episodes.   Each period also
includes one initialization day.

    Input  Preparation

    Preparation  of  the  model-ready  emission
inventories for this application utilized the same data
and followed the same  procedures outlined  in a
previous section of this report. Emissions totals for
the base- and future-year scenarios are provided in
                                              C-20

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table C-5 for VOC, NOX, and CO. The changes in
emissions are characterized by both  increases and
decreases, reflecting an expected growth in population
that is offset by fleet turnover and other emission
reduction measures.

    The  meteorological,  air quality,  and land-use
related inputs were prepared by Douglas et al. (1994).
The reader is referred  to this technical report for
detailed  information on the  input  preparation
procedures and resulting inputs. Initial and boundary
conditions  for  the  future-year  applications were
estimated based  on the corresponding  emission
reductions for VOC and NOX; for ozone the square
root of the product of the VOC and NOX reduction
factors was used.

    DAM   Simulation  Results  for  the
    Phoenix Area

    Model Performance

    Model performance was evaluated by Maricopa
Association of Governments (MAG) as part of their
SIP modeling analysis  and  the  inputs (with  the
exception of the modeling emission inventories) were
used  directly for  the  812 prospective modeling
analysis.  Comparison  of hourly  simulated and
observed  ozone   concentrations  indicates  good
agreement between the simulated and observed values.
Mean values are well represented as well. Plots of
these comparisons are available in (SAI, 1999).   For
the primary modeling days, the normalized bias  and
error statistics indicate very good model performance.
The values are less  than 5 percent (bias) and 20
percent (error) respectively (SAI, 1999).

    The model performance results indicate that the
UAM modeling system (including the meteorological,
air quality, and land-use input) are appropriate for use
in the Section 812 prospective analysis.

    UAM Modeling Results

    Comparison of the UAM-V simulation results for
the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios with the base-year
values indicates both increases and decreases for the
Pre-CAAA scenario simulations and large decreases
for the Post-CAAA scenario simulations. Isopleth
plots for the Phoenix area are available in (SAI, 1999).

    A  comparison of the  Pre- and  Post-CAAA
simulation results for each future year indicates  that
the CAAA measures  reduce daily maximum ozone
concentrations  within the  Phoenix  domain   by
approximately 10 to 20 ppb (more  or less in some
areas) for both future years.  Isopleth plots for the
Phoenix area are available in (SAI, 1999).
                                              C-21

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table C-5
Emission Totals
by Component for each Scenario for Phoenix (tpd)
voc

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated
Total
Base 1990
241
184
2
0
426
2000 Pre-
CAAA
310
215
2
0
527
2000 Post-
CAAA
201
141
1
0
344
2010Pre-
CAAA
369
231
2
0
602
2010Post-
CAAA
250
85
2
0
337
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated
Total
Base 1990
213
151
1
0
371
2000 Pre-
CAAA
270
214
1
0
485
2000 Post-
CAAA
259
174
1
0
434
2010Pre-
CAAA
326
264
2
0
592
2010Post-
CAAA
290
147
2
0
438
CO

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Low Level
Elevated
Total
Base 1990
684
1,186
0
1
1,871
2000 Pre-
CAAA
820
2,001
0
1
2,822
2000 Post-
CAAA
795
1,538
0
1
2,334
2010Pre-
CAAA
941
1,883
0
1
2,825
2010Post-
CAAA
907
1,002
0
1
^^^Qlt^
       C-22

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Calculation of Ozone Air Quality
Profiles

    The  overall  objective  of the  photochemical
modeling exercise was to provide estimates of future-
year ozone air quality  for 2000  and 2010  (for
assessment of the effects of the CAAA).  This was
accomplished  using an approach  that combines
observed data  and  air  quality  modeling results to
estimate  future-year concentrations.   The method-
ology is designed to provide site-specific, seasonal and
annual  ozone  concentration  distributions.    The
statistical concentration distributions  are estimated
(based on  the  results of air quality modeling)  for
specific future-year scenarios and, in turn, provide the
basis for examination and quantification of the effects
of changes in air quality on health, agriculture, etc.
(i.e.,  physical  effects  and  economic  valuation
modeling).  Through comparison with corresponding
results for a baseline simulation (in this case without
the CAAA measures and programs), the effects of the
CAAA can be assessed.  The future-year air quality
profile estimation  methodology,  as  applied to  the
analysis of the CAAA, is described in this section.

Overview of the Methodology

    Conceptually, the methodology  for estimating
future-year ozone air quality using both observations
and UAM-V simulation results is rather simple.  The
UAM-V  simulation results are  used to  calculate
adjustment factors for selected ozone monitoring sites
within the modeling domain. This is done on a grid-
cell by grid-cell basis (i.e., the adjustment factor for a
monitoring site is based  on the simulation  ozone
concentrations for the grid cell in which it is located).
The adjustment factor  represents the ratio of the
future-year-scenario to the base-year concentrations
and is calculated (using the appropriately matched
values) for  several different concentration levels (i.e.,
the changes in concentration are dependent upon
relative concentration level).  The observed  ozone
concentrations  for  each monitoring site  are then
modified using the site-specific (or grid-cell-specific)
adjustment factors. The resulting values represent the
estimated future-year ozone concentrations for the
modeled scenario.

    As  noted  earlier  in  this  report,  the  overall
approach to estimate future air quality differs from
that for a typical air quality model application (e.g., for
attainment demonstration  purposes)  in  that  the
modeling results are used in a relative  sense, rather
than  an  absolute  sense.   This may  enhance  the
reliability of the future-year concentration estimates,
especially in the event that the uncertainty inherent in
the absolute concentration values is greater than  that
associated with the response of the modeling system
to changes in emissions. This approach also permits
the estimation of seasonal and annual concentration
distributions, a requirement for this study.

    Although the ratios are calculated using modeling
results for a limited number of simulation days,  it is
assumed, using this methodology, that the ratios can
be   used  to  represent   longer   time   periods.
Consequently, all observations contained within the
dataset are adjusted using the  model-derived ratios.
Following adjustment of the observed data, statistical
quantities,  or  "profiles",   describing  the  ozone
distribution  for  each monitoring  site are then
calculated.

Description of the Observation Dataset

    One of the unique aspects of this approach to
evaluating future ozone  air quality  is the use of
observed ozone concentrations to supplement model
results.   As such, one of the earliest tasks was the
creation  of a dataset containing the observed hourly
ozone concentrations for all monitoring sites located
within the modeling domains for the months of May
through September 1990.

    Hourly ozone  concentrations for 1990 were
extracted from the Aerometric Information Retrieval
System  (AIRS) and input  into a  single AMP350-
format datafile. From the information contained in
this   file,  two SAS  datasets  were  created:    a
concentration dataset  and  a monitor information
dataset).   The concentration  dataset  contains  the
                                                C-23

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
hourly concentrations  for each monitor, with each
record in the dataset representing a single monitor-
day.   The  monitor information dataset  contains
monitor-specific information such as land-use and
location.

    In creating the concentration dataset, some data
handling issues arose  and  were addressed  in  the
following manner:

    •   In some instances, multiple ozone monitoring
        devices were operated at the same location.
        Even though these different devices have  the
        same  AIRS state-county-site identification
        code  (ID),  they are  differentiated  by a
        parameter occurrence  code  (POC).  The
        AIRS state-county-site ID was concatenated
        with the POC to form a unique identifier for
        each monitor. A POC greater than 5 typically
        indicates that a device was being calibrated;
        information/data   for   these   monitors
        was/were not included in either the monitor
        or the concentration dataset.

    •   In the AIRS database, ozone concentrations
        are  reported using  the default unit  of  the
        reporting agency.  Thus, multiple units were
        present in the AMP350  file.   For ease of
        analysis,  all of the  concentrations  were
        converted to a single unit, ppm.

    •   Missing ozone concentrations in  the AIRS
        AMP350 report are indicated by a blank in
        the  decimal field.   In  the  concentration
        dataset for this study, the SAS missing value
        code was used to indicate missing data.

    •   For each monitor a method detection limit
        (MDL) was provided.  The MDL indicates a
        threshold  below which  reported  ozone
        concentrations do not accurately reflect  the
        sample distribution. For  most monitors  the
        MDL is 0.005 ppm.  Because this value is low
        relative  to  typical  ambient  concentration
        levels, observed values below the MDL were
        not reset to the MDL and instead were left
        unchanged.
    Only monitors with "complete" data were used in
the analysis.  For the ozone data, a monitor record
was considered to be complete if data were available
for 50 percent of the days in the peak ozone season
(May-September).  Each of these days in turn had to
have at least 12 hourly observations.  There were 842
ozone monitors with complete data.

Calculation of Percentile-Based
Adjustment Factors

    For each future-year modeling scenario, grid-cell-
specific adjustment factors were calculated using the
hourly simulated ozone concentrations contained in
the UAM-V or  UAM xymap2 output files. Individual
monitoring sites were mapped onto the gridded model
output (to determine  the  grid cell  in which each
monitor was located) and the concentrations for the
corresponding grid cells were used to calculate a set of
ten adjustment factors for each future-year modeling
scenario. The adjustment factors were specified to be
the ratio  of the  percentile concentrations for  the
future- and base-year simulations, where the percentile
concentrations  were calculated using data  for each
hour of each simulation day:
  Adjustment Factor, =—
                   x:thPercentile Concentration
                                          future year
                   x, th Percentile Concentrat ionbase year

        {xi}= {5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, 85, 95}

    For calculation of the percentile concentrations,
the empirical distribution function with averaging was
employed.  Because the concentrations for the lower
percentiles can be rather small, a threshold value of 1
ppb was set to keep the adjustment factors reasonable.
In other words, all concentrations below 1 ppb were
reset to 1 ppb. This percentile-based approach was
selected  due to  the  limitations  of  using a single
adjustment to represent the change in the modeled
ozone concentrations in moving from the base- to the
future-year scenarios. Finally, if either the base-year
      The UAM-V xymap file contains hourly, gridded, surface-
layer ozone concentrations.
                                                C-24

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
or future year percentile concentration was set equal
to 1 ppb, the adjustment factor was set equal to 1.

    A SAS  dataset containing the  monitor-level
adjustment factors was created for each future-year
modeling scenario considered in this study.

Use of Adjustment Factors to Modify
Observed Concentrations

    Using the calculated adjustment factors for each
future-year scenario and the observed monitor- and
pseudo-site-level observations, a dataset containing
modified observed hourly ozone concentrations for
each of the two scenarios was created. Because each
monitor  has  ten adjustment factors per scenario, it
was first necessary to rank order  the  observed
concentrations into 10 decile-based groups with ties
being assigned to the higher group. Once each of the
observed  concentrations  was  identified  with  a
particular decile group,  the  appropriate adjustment
factor was selected and applied:
     AdjustedCom, — ObsCom, * Adj.Factork[ollsCma]

    In  this equation,  {ObsConci}  is  the  set  of
observed hourly ozone concentrations (in ppm) for a
given monitor or pseudo-site. The k[ObsConc] is the
number of the decile group to which ObsConc,belongs.
AdjFactorkpbsCmdj is then the appropriate adjustment
factor for the decile group to which ObsConc, belongs.
The resulting  set  of adjusted hourly concentrations,
{AdjustedCom^, represents the future-year estimates of
the hourly ozone concentrations.

Calculation of Ozone Profiles

    Datasets  containing  the  ozone   air  quality
"profiles" were compiled for the base 1990, 2000 Pre-
CAAA, 2000 Post-CAAA, 2010 Pre-CAAA, and 2010
Post-CAAA simulations.  The profiles used data for
the period May through September.  The databases
contained  the number,  the  arithmetic mean,  the
median, the (seasonal) second highest, and the 2.5 to
97.5 percentiles (in increments of five) of the hourly
concentrations.  The profiles are reported at  the
monitor level and include 842 locations.

    The histograms in Figures  C-lla through 12b
illustrate  the  distribution  of ratios  for  the 95th
percentile   monitor-level  ozone  concentrations
corresponding to the 2000 and 2010 simulations,
respectively.  In this figure, ratios greater than one
indicate that the future-year/scenario concentration is
greater than the base-year (1990) value, whereas ratios
less than one indicate a lower value for the future-
year.

    The  2000  Pre-CAAA  ratios  (Figure  C-lla)
indicate that the 95th percentile ozone concentrations
corresponding to this scenario  are higher in some
areas  and lower in other areas than  the base-year
(1990) values.   The  ratios  generally range from
approximately 0.8 to 1.2, but also include some lower
values. In  contrast, the ratios corresponding to the
2000  Post-CAAA simulation (Figure C-llb)  are
generally less than one. In this case, the ratios range
from approximately 0.75 to 1.1 with only a very small
number of values greater than one.  There are also
some  lower values.

    Figure C-12a and 12b displays the distribution of
ratios of the future-year-scenario to base-year 95th
percentile concentrations for 2010. Compared to the
histogram plots for 2000, the shift in distribution is
such  that the ratios are higher  for  the  Pre-CAAA
scenario and lower for the Post-CAAA scenario. That
is, compared to 2000, concentrations for  2010 are
higher relative to the base year under the Pre-CAAA
scenario and lower relative to the base year under the
Post-CAAA scenario.

    For both future years, the ratios indicate that the
Post-CAAA concentrations (95th percentile level) are
lower than the corresponding Pre-CAAA values (with
a few  exceptions). This is illustrated in Figures C-13a
and C- 13b.  The smaller ratios  for 2010 (Figure C-
13b) reflect the larger differences between the Pre-
and Post-CAAA scenarios for this year.
                                               C-25

-------
                             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
  Time: 0-2400 July 15, 1995
           -94
-89
Deg. Longitude
    -84       -79
                                + MAXIMUM = 31.8 ppb
                                - MINIMUM = -23.0 ppb
          -74
          -69
                                   ,1111111 i | i i i I  I I: i: i:: If  I I fcj; :f t t r» j > IM
           10
20
    30
40
50
60
                                                                    1-026
Figure C-2: Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb) for
the 15 July 1995 OTAG episode day:  2010 pre-CAAA90 minus base 1990.
                                   C-26

-------
                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
  Time: 0-2400 July 15, 1995
-99
-94
-89
Deg. Longitude
    -84       -79
                                         + MAXIMUM =14.1 ppb
                                         - MINIMUM = -47.6 ppb
-74
-69
 Figure C-3. Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb)
 for the 15 July 1995 OTAG episode day:  2010 post-CAAA90 minus base 1990.
                                  C-27

-------
                             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
  Time: 0-2400 July 15, 1995
-99
-94
-89
Deg. Longitude
    -84        -79
                                           + MAXIMUM = 11.8 ppt>
                                           - MINIMUM = -64.0 ppb
-69

  Figure C-4. Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb)
  for the 15 July 1995 OTAG episode day: 2010 post-CAAA90 minus pre-CAAA90.
                                    C-28

-------
  LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
  Time 0-2400 July 8, 1990
-126
-118
-110
  Deg. Longitude
102        -94
                                                               + MAXIMUM - 29 6 ppb
                                                                MINIMUM - -23 -1 ppb
-86
-78
-70
   I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | I I I I I  I I I i I I | I I I I I I I I I I I {! I I I I I I I I I I | I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l_
         Figure C-5. Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb)
         for the 8 July 1990 western U.S. simulation day: 2010 pre-CAAA90 minus base 1990.
                                             C-29

-------
  LEVEL 1  Ozone (ppb)
  Time:  0-2400 July 8,  1990
-126
-118
-110
  Deg.  Longitude
102        -94
                                                      + MAXIMUM
                                                      - MINIMUM
-86
-78
                                                                             9_2 ppb
                                                                             -35.3 ppb
-70
                                                                                               1 49
                                                      .'•"''•, 7 v' i—  jL 
-------
  LEVEL 1  Ozorio  (ppb)
  Tune  0-2400 July 8 1990
  126
-118
-110
  Deg.  Longitude
102         -94
                                                                    4 MAXIMUM   VA 7 ppb
                                                                    -- MINIMUM   -•!•'! 5 ppb
-86
-78
-70
10-
 nn i i * i  i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i  i i i i i i i i ili i i  i i I i i i i i i i i i i i i  i I i i i i i i i i i I i j_i j_i i  i i i I i i	t i i  M i i i i i i rl 24
  0         10        20        30        40         50        60         70        80        9(7
          Figure C-7. Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb)
          for the 8 July 1990 western U.S. simulation day: 2010 post-CAAA90 minus pre-CAAA90.
                                                    C-31

-------
-126
-118
-110
                                          Deg. Longitude
-102
-94
-86
-78
-70
50
40
30
20
10
         : I: I:':;lsisilfiTil' I]liyMiiiiiil a I.:'I.;!• j ;1 j I |jirl:.:;l\n;;i;; 1: I; I,. | :;l':.
                                                                                    49
                                                                                    44
                                                                                    39 jg

                                                                                       0}
                                                                                                    o>
                                                                                                    Q
                                                                                    34
                                                                                    29
 n r°( i I I i ii i i I I i i ii iii	I i n i ill ii I i i i i i i i i i I i li i I I i i i I ii i i  i ii i I I i i i I ii i ill i i i i i i i  i i I i i i i i I I I il 2 4
  0         10        20         30        40        50        60        70         80        9
-------
                              The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
     LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
     Time:  0-1800 August 6, 1990
                                                  + MAXIMUM = 24.6 ppb
                                                  - MINIMUM = -16.5 ppb
. _ _
A vfvf •
     IIIIMii1lLlirillJlklllMI>lhMllllllllJill!l,llllkLII
-------
  LEVEL 1 Ozone (ppb)
  Time:  0-2400 August 28, 1987
                          + MAXIMUM = 7.4 ppb
                          - MINIMUM = -57.6 ppb
     rrnTTTTTTTTTTTnTTTTTTTTTTTT^                                         r~1 '1  ft TTTf	TT~r
10 -
                                                            ,9    '
                                                        / <;:: .-ecr'1
         t  !l  I I  I I I  1 J_LJ_L	'  I:	L::i I -» '  »	'	«	 ' ' '  '
                                                                           ' &
                                                                                - at-.,,'
                                   .?
                                                                                                              ^
                                                                                                              ..
                                                                                                          o
    ?0-
  JLL4 4-JJUl-L-t-L-L-l-l i  \  J-LLlJLLJ-L. \1
40               50              60
               Figure C-10. Difference in daily maximum simulated ozone concentration (ppb)
               for the 28 July 1987 simulated day for Los Angeles: 2010 post-CAAA90 minus pre-CAAA90.
                                                     C-34

-------
                           The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
          Figure C-11a. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentiles Ozone Concentration:
                   2000 Pre-CAAA /1990 Base-Year
^ 60
I
o>
o
c
d>
d>
^c
re
   50 -

   40 -

   30 -

   20 -

   10 -

    0
                                                median: 1.013
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10  1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio
          Figure C-11b. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentiles Ozone Concentration:
                  2000 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
-- 60

e 50-
0)
a.
> 40 H
o
c
§ 30-

£ 20-
Qi
| 10 H
"55
*  0
                                         median: 0.910
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio
                                 C-35

-------
                           The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
          Figure C-12a. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentiles Ozone Concentration:
                  2010 Pre-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
0)
e  50-
   40-
   30-
it  20-
o>
a>
    0
                                                   median: 1.051

                               ft*
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio
          Figure C-12b. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentile Ozone Concentration:
                  2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
0)
£  50 H
o>
a.
> 40 H
o
§  30 H
o-
0)
£  20-

I  10 H
    0
r-t-rn
                                       median: 0.883
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio
                                 C-36

-------
                          The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
           Figure C-13a. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentiles Ozone Concentration:
                  2000 Post-CAAA / 2000 Pre-CAAA
c- 60
"c
S 50 -
o>
Q.
O
C
d>
   30 -
   20 -\
o>
|  10 -\
"55
                                        median: 0.900
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio
          Figure C-13b. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios
              for 95th Percentiles Ozone Concentration:
                  2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA
^ 60
8  50-
o>
Q.
O
C
d>
d>
   30-
   20 -
                                   median: 0.838
      0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                    Ratio

                                 C-37

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Estimating the Effects of the CAAA
on  Participate Matter

    Future-year concentrations of PM10  and PM25
corresponding to the  Post-CAAA and Pre-CAAA
scenarios were estimated through application of the
RADM/RPM and REMSAD modeling systems. The
former was used for the eastern U.S., while the latter
was  applied for the western U.S.  Details of both
RADM/RPM and REMSAD modeling are presented
in this section.  Included is an overview of each
modeling system, and a description of the application
procedures and modeling results. The calculation of
PM air quality profiles using the combined modeling
results from both models is also described.

    For ease of reading, all figures follow the text in
this section.

Overview of the RADM/RPM Modeling
System

    RADM was  developed over a ten-year period,
1984-1993, under the auspices of the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) to help
address policy and technical issues associated with acid
deposition. More recently, EPA created the Regional
Particulate  Model,   expanding   the   Agency's
atmospheric modeling capabilities.    Functioning
together,  RADM and  RPM  help  predict  PM
concentrations by generating estimates  of secondary
paticulates that comprise a significant portion of total
PM.

    RADM, a three-dimensional Eulerian grid-based
model, is  designed to  provide a scientific basis  for
predicting regional air pollution concentrations and
levels of acid deposition resulting from changes in
precursor emissions. The concentration of a specific
pollutant in a grid cell at a specified time is determined
by the following factors:

    •   the emissions rate;
    •   the transport of that species by wind into and
        out of the grid in three dimensions;
    •  movement of the atmosphere via turbulent
       motion;
    •  chemical reactions that either produce or
       deplete the chemical;
    •  the change in concentration due to vertical
       transport by clouds;
    •  aqueous   chemical  transformation  and
       scavenging; and
    •  removal by deposition.3

    RPM is an extension of RADM.  Like RADM,
RPM is  a three-dimensional Eulerian air  quality
model. Functioning in tandem with RADM, RPM
predicts the chemistry, transport, and dynamics of the
secondary aerosols of sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, and
organics.4  For this study, however, RPM organic
aerosol estimates were  not  included  in the final
analysis   because   the    model    significantly
underestimates organics and the reason  for this
systematic  underestimation  has   not yet  been
characterized.  The model's predictions of secondary
sulfate, nitrate, and ammonium concentrations were
used to  develop  particulate matter concentration
estimates.

Application of RADM/RPM for the
Eastern U.S.

    In  this  analysis, the  RADM/RPM  modeling
system was used to estimate  future year nitrate and
sulfate  concentrations,  two major components of
secondary PM. These model results were then used to
generate  adjustment  factors, which in turn aided
development of PM predictions for the eastern half
of the  United States.  A summary of the  model's
application and results follows.

    Modeling  Domain

    The domain of application for both RADM and
RPM is eastern  North  America,  from the Rocky
    A more detailed description of RADM is provided in R.
Dennis, 1995.
    4A more detailed description of the structure and basic
features of RPM is given in F.S. Binkowski and U. Shankar, 1995.
                                              C-38

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Mountains eastward to Newfoundland, Canada and
the Florida Keys.  This expansive model area that
includes    part   of  Southern   Canada   allows
RADM/RPM to accurately reflect the  several-day
residence times of sulfur and nitrogen species in the
atmosphere and the resulting transport distances of
1,000 kilometers (km) or more that may be covered
during that time.  The  2,800  by 3,040 km  model
domain is  divided into  80-km grid cells.   Nested
within this domain are a set of finer resolution 20-km
grid cells,  covering the geographic region extending
eastward from central Illinois to the Atlantic  Ocean
and southward from Sudbury, Ontario to the upper
section of North Carolina (Figure C-14).  The model
also consists of vertical layers that,  in total, stretch 16
km above ground level.


    Simulation Periods

    RADM/RPM model runs were conducted for 30
five-day periods.  The 30  periods, which represent
dominant transport regimes spanning four years, were
randomly selected to develop annual averages. Later,
to develop warm season (May through September)
and cold season (October through April) averages,
they were  divided into these two seasonal groups.
Annual  warm  and  cold  season  averages  were
developed  using a weighting scheme based on  the
frequency of occurrence of transport  regimes.  To
avoid the  influence of the model starting up and
adjusting to a new set of conditions associated with
each period, only results from the last  three days of
each period were used to estimate PM levels.

    Model Inputs

    RADM

    Detailed  emissions and meteorological data are
required to run RADM. The emissions  inventory for
the model must account for both the  timing and
location of emissions.  Accurate model  predictions
also depend on a host of meteorological inputs, most
notably temperature, wind speed, and wind direction.
    Separate emissions inventories were used as input
in this analysis for each of the emissions scenarios:
1990 base year, 2000 Pre-CAAA, 2000 Post-CAAA,
2010  Pre-CAAA, and 2010 Post-CAAA.5  These
scenarios  and   their  accompanying  inventories,
described in more detail in Appendix A, incorporate
emissions from  all  five major  source  categories:
industrial    point    sources,   utilities,    nonroad
engines/vehicles, motor vehicles, and area sources.
This inventory for each scenario contains hourly, day-
specific emissions figures for every source category;
area and mobile source data  are  provided  at the
county level, while utility and industrial point  source
emissions are given  at the source classification code
level.

    Biogenic emissions  were also  included  in the
RADM input. This inventory was developed from
version two  of EPA's Biogenic Emissions Inventory
System  (BIES-2).    BEIS-2  estimates  biogenic
emissions based on a variety  of factors including
biomass and emissions factors.

    The  meteorological inputs  for  RADM were
derived using output from the Pennsylvania State
University/National  Center for Atmospheric Research
(PSU/NCAR) mesoscale model (MM4). Using MM4
results, EPA generated essential grid-specific RADM
input, including wind flow patterns, temperatures, and
water vapor  concentrations.

    RPM

    RPM requires inputs similar to those described
for RADM.  This  model uses a subset of RADM
emissions data and the RADM meteorological fields.
Additional RPM inputs include atmospheric water
data generated by RADM and RADM-predicted levels
of oxidants, nitric acid, and ammonia.
                                                       5See Pechan, June 1998 for a detailed description of the
                                                   emissions scenarios developed for this analysis.
                                               C-39

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    RADM/RPM Simulation Results

    Model Performance

    The  assessment  of model performance  for
particulate models is a difficult task due to a relative
lack of data and information regarding the  spatial
distribution, composition, and size fractionation of
airborne particulates. Development and evaluation of
particulate measurement and modeling techniques are
active  areas of research.   As  a result, there  are
currently  no   standard  approaches  or   model
performance criteria for the evaluation of regional-
scale particulate models.

    Development of RADM began in the mid-1980's.
The evolution of this model, along with its application
and performance evaluation have all been documented
extensively by  NAPAP.6   RADM  continues to
undergo  periodic  peer  review,  evaluations,  and
improvements.7 In addition to the present study and
the section 812 retrospective analysis,  RADM has
been used in other Agency studies of acid deposition8
and  in assessments of deposition of nitrogen to
coastal estuaries.9

    RPM was  evaluated by comparing the model's
1990 base year seasonal nitrate and sulfate estimates
with observed data measured by EPA's Clean Air Act
Status and Trends Network (CASTNet).  CASTNet is
a network of monitors  distributed throughout the
Eastern  U.S.  that measures  dry  deposition  of
atmospheric sulfur and nitrogen compounds.  RPM
predictions for particulate sulfate and CASTNet data
are provided  in Table C-6.  Examination  of these
ambient concentrations shows that RPM predicts the
significant seasonal differences in sulfate production,
although  the model overestimates the annual average
sulfate concentration by approximately 20 percent.
Table C-7  displays RPM and CASTNet  seasonal
average nitrate concentrations and ratios showing the
fraction of total nitrate that is in particulate form.
Comparison of the values in this table indicate that
RPM accurately captures  the ratio of particulate to
total nitrate, but underestimates overall nitrate levels
in the colder months and overestimates them during
the warmer months.  Averaged over the entire year,
however, RPM results and CASTNet data are similar.
 Table C-6
 Comparison of CASTNet and RPM
 Average Concentration of SO4
     Season
CASTNet
  S04
 (M9/m3)
                                       RPM
                                       S04
     Warm
   7.8
9.1
      Cold
   3.7
3.6
     Annual
   5.4
6.6
    6Chang, J. et al. 1987, Chang,], et al. 1990, and Dennis, R. et
al. 1990.
    7Dennis, R. et al. 1993, McHenry J. and Dennis, R. 1994, and
External Review Panel 1994.
    8U.S. EPA, 1995.
    9Dennis, R. 1997 and EPA 1997.
                                               C-40

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
          Table C-7
          Comparison of CASTNet and RPM
          Average Concentrations and Fractions of NO3
Season
Autumn
Winter
Spring
Summer
Annual
CASTNet
NO3
(,ug/m3)
1.39
1.67
0.85
0.42
1.06
RPM
N03
(Mg/m3)
1.25
1.01
1.07
0.57
1.06
CASTNet
NO3/t-NO3
(ratio)
0.42
0.44
0.24
0.14
0.31
RPM
NO3/t-NO3
(ratio)
0.42
0.44
0.24
0.10
0.27
    RADM/RPM Modeling Results

    RADM/RPM generated estimates of nitrate and
sulfate concentrations for the years 2000 and 2010
under both the Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios. These
two constituents are major components of secondary
PM.   As described  in more detail later in this
appendix, these RADM/RPM results were used to
project   1990   observed   nitrate   and   sulfate
concentrations to future  year levels.  From these
future year estimates, monitor-level PM10 and PM25
concentrations were calculated for 2000 and 2010.

    Comparison of 1990  base year PM levels with
future year Pre- and Post-CAAA estimates shows that
under the Pre-CAAA scenario, concentrations of PM10
and PM25 are generally expected to increase from base
year levels.   Under the Post-CAAA scenario, both
PM10 and PM25  concentrations are predicted  to
decrease throughout much of the U.S. in both 2000
and 2010, with  greater decreases expected in 2010.
The histograms in Figures C-21 through C-24 show
the relationship between base year and future year PM
estimates. In these figures, ratios greater than one
indicate that the future year  concentration is greater
than the 1990 base year value, while ratios less than
one indicate a lower value for the future.  Figures C-25
and C-26 show the relationship between Pre- and
Post-CAAA PM estimates.  All of these histograms
present  data  for   the  entire  U.S.,  including
RADM/RPM data for the East and REMSAD data
for the West (see below).
Overview of the REMSAD Modeling
System

    The Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols
and Deposition  (REMSAD) programs  have been
developed to  support a better understanding of the
distributions, sources, and removal processes relevant
to  fine particles and  other airborne  pollutants,
including  soluble acidic  components  and  toxics.
Consideration of the different processes that affect
primary and secondary (i.e., formed by atmospheric
processes) particulate matter at the regional scale in
different places  is  fundamental to advancing this
understanding and to  assessing  the  effects   of
proposed pollution control measures. These same
control measures will, in  most cases, affect  ozone,
particulate matter and deposition of pollutants to the
surface.

    The REMSAD system was initially focused on
atmospheric aerosols and the deposition of toxic
pollutants such as mercury from the air to the surface.
Any modeling system for aerosols  and deposition
must be built on the foundation of an atmospheric
transport and dispersion model.  Many atmospheric
dispersion models have been developed since the late
1970s and applied for various purposes.  Urban and
regional air quality models are generally based on the
Eulerian approach. The REMSAD system is built on
the foundation of  the UAM-V  regional  air  quality
model, which includes  a  number of advantageous
capabilities.   The  REMSAD  aerosol and  toxics
                                              C-41

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
deposition module (ATDM) is capable of "nesting" a
finer-scale subgrid within a coarser overall grid, which
permits high resolution over receptor regions without
an intolerable computing burden.   The  modeling
system may thus be applied at scales ranging from a
single metropolitan region to a continent containing
multiple urban areas.

    The    REMSAD   system   consists   of   a
meteorological data preprocessor, the core aerosol and
toxic deposition model (ATDM), and postprocessing
programs.  The ATDM is a three-dimensional grid
model designed  to calculate  the concentrations of
both  inert  and  chemically  reactive pollutants  by
simulating the physical and chemical processes in the
atmosphere that affect pollutant concentrations. The
basis for the model is the atmospheric diffusion or
species continuity equation. This equation represents
a mass balance in which all of the relevant emissions,
transport, diffusion, chemical reactions, and removal
processes are expressed in mathematical terms. The
model is usually exercised over a multi-day period,
typically a full year.

    Fine particles (or aerosols) are currently thought
to pose one of the greatest problems for human health
impacts from air  pollution.  The major factors that
affect aerosol air quality include:

    •   The spatial and temporal distribution of toxic
        and  particulate  emissions  including sulfur
        dioxide  (SO2), oxides of  nitrogen  (NO).,
        volatile  organic  compounds  (VOC),  and
        ammonium (NH3) (both anthropogenic and
        nonanthropogenic),
    •   The size composition of the emitted PM,
    •   The  spatial and temporal  variations  in the
        wind fields,
    •   The  dynamics   of  the   boundary  layer,
        including stability and the level of mixing,
    •   The chemical reactions involving PM, SO2,
        NOX and other important precursor species,
    •   The diurnal variations of solar insulation and
        temperature,
    •   The loss of primary and secondary aerosols
        and toxics by dry and wet deposition, and
    •   The ambient air quality immediately upwind
        and above the region of study.

    The ATDM module simulates  these processes
when it is used to simulate aerosol  distribution and
toxic  deposition.   The model  solves the  species
continuity equation using the method  of fractional
steps, in which the individual terms in the equation are
solved separately in the following order: emissions are
injected; horizontal advection/diffusion  is  solved;
vertical advection/diffusion and deposition is solved;
and  chemical transformations are  performed for
reactive pollutants.  The model performs this  four-
step solution procedure during  one half  of each
advective (driving) time step, and then reverses the
order for the following half time step. The maximum
advective time step for stability is a function of the
grid size and the maximum wind velocity or horizontal
diffusion coefficient. Vertical diffusion is solved on
fractions of the advective time step to  keep  their
individual numerical schemes stable.  A typical driving
time step for coarse (50-80 km) grid  spacing is 10-15
minutes, whereas time steps for fine  grid spacing
(10—30 km) are on the order  of a few minutes.

    Model inputs are prepared for meteorological and
emissions data for the simulation days.  Once the
model results have been evaluated and determined to
perform within prescribed levels, a projected emission
inventory can be used to simulate  possible policy-
driven emission scenarios.

    REMSAD provides gridded averaged surface and
multi-layer instantaneous concentrations, and surface
deposition output for all species and grids simulated.
The averaged surface concentrations  and depositions
are intended for comparison  with measurements and
ambient standards. The instantaneous concentration
output is primarily used to restart the model, and to
examine  model   results   in  the   upper  levels.
Concentrations of particulates are passed as input to
a module that estimates atmospheric visibility.  Wet
and dry acidic deposition fluxes are calculated hourly
and may be accumulated for  any desired interval.

    The particulate matter species  modeled  by
REMSAD   include  a   primary  coarse  fraction
                                                C-42

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
(corresponding to participates in the 2.5 to 10 micron
size range), a primary fine fraction (corresponding to
participates less  than 2.5 microns in  diameter), and
several secondary particulates (e.g., sulfates, nitrates,
and organics). The sum of the primary fine fraction
and  all  of the secondaries is taken  to be roughly
representative of PM25.  Table C-8 lists the simulated
species written to the REMSAD output files.

    A number of issues are particularly important to
a successful application of REMSAD for evaluating
the  atmospheric   transport and  deposition  of
pollutants. These include the meteorology, accuracy
and  representativeness  of the emission  inventory,
resolution, structure and extent of the modeling grid,
and the treatment of urban areas in both the source
and  receptor  areas  of the  computational  grid.
Accurate representation of the input meteorological
        fields is necessary both  spatially and temporally in
        order to adequately capture the complex effects of
        terrain on airflow and hence transport and deposition
        of pollutants.  In addition the meteorology must be
        sufficiently  resolved  in  order  for the  model  to
        accurately   diagnose    the    appropriate   cloud
        characteristics    required    by    the    various
        parameterizations of the cloud processes  treated by
        the  model.   The required  input  fields include
        temporally varying three dimensional gridded wind
        fields, temperature, humidity and vertical  exchange
        coefficients in addition to the surface pressure and
        precipitation rates.

            Version 4.0 of the REMSAD modeling system
        (with simplified ozone chemistry) was employed for
        this study.
     Table C-8
     REMSAD Output File Species
       REMSAD Species1      Gas/Aerosol
                     Description
     NO
Nitric oxide
     NO9
Nitrogen dioxide
     SO,
Sulfur dioxide
     CO
Carbon monoxide
     NH,
Ammonia
     VOC
Volatile organic compounds
     HNO,
Nitric acid
     PNO,
Particulate nitrate
     GSO4
Particulate sulfate (gas phase production)
     ASO4
Particulate sulfate (aqueous phase production)
     NH4N
Ammonium nitrate
     NH4S
Ammonium sulfate
     SOA
Secondary organic aerosols
     POA
Primary organic aerosols
     PEC
Primary elemental carbon
     Pmfine
Primary fine PM (<2.5 microns)
     Pmcoarse
Primary coarse PM (2.5 to 10 microns)
      Sulfate=GSO4+ASO4+NH4S
      Nitrate=PNO3+NH4N
      Total PM2.5 surrogate=sulfate+nitrate+SOA+POA +Pmfine
      1 These are names used in the model and, for the aerosols, are not necessarily the correct molecular formula (the
      integers are subscripted only when the formula correctly reflects the species).
      2 Note that (for consistency with the REMSAD User's Guide) we are using the terminology "coarse PM" to mean PM in
      the size range of 2.5 to 10 microns, which is not in agreement with general use, which defines coarse PM to be
      particles with size greater than 2.5 microns.
                                                 C-43

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Application ofREMSAD for the
Western U.S.

    For this study, the REMSAD modeling system
was applied for the analysis of PM and visibility in
western U.S. Although the modeling domain includes
the entire U.S. (contiguous 48 states), only the results
for the western U.S. were used to calculate the future-
year PM concentration profiles.  However, the results
for the entire  domain  are presented here.   The
application  procedures  and modeling results  are
summarized in this section.

    Modeling Domain

    The REMSAD modeling domain encompasses
the contiguous 48 states.  The domain extends from
126  degrees west longitude   to  66  degrees  west
longitude, and from 24 degrees north latitude  to 52
degrees north latitude.   A grid  cell size  of 2/3
longitude by 1/2 latitude (approximately 56 by 56 km)
was used across the grid,  resulting in a 90 by 55 grid
(4,950 cells) for each vertical  layer.  Eight vertical
layers were used for the PM modeling and the first
layer results were used to estimate future air quality for
the surface monitoring sites.   Although REMSAD
covers the entire U.S., in this analysis only results for
their 11 westernmost states are  used.
    Simulation Periods

    Four  simulation  periods  or  episodes  were
modeled.  These episodes  correspond to  the  four
seasons of the year and consist of the first ten days of
the months of May (spring), July (summer), October
(fall), and December (winter).

    Model Inputs

    The REMSAD modeling system also requires a
variety  of input  files  that contain  information
pertaining to the modeling domain and simulation
period. These include gridded, day-specific emissions
estimates  and  meteorological  fields;  initial  and
boundary conditions; and land-use information.
    Separate emission inventories were prepared for
the base-year and each of the future-year scenarios.
All other inputs  were specified for the base-year
model application (1990) and remained unchanged for
each future-year modeling scenario.

    Modeling Emission Inventories

    The data and methodologies used to prepare the
REMSAD  modeling emission inventories for this
study were consistent  with those  used for  the
photochemical  modeling,  but  included primary
particulates and other species as required  for  the
particulate  chemistry.   Similar  to UAM/UAM-V,
REMSAD, requires  detailed emission  inventories,
containing  temporally allocated emissions for each
grid cell  in the modeling domain for each species
being simulated. EPS 2.5e was used for the emissions
processing.    Note  that this  system  has  been
specifically designed to accommodate regional-scale
model  applications of particulate matter and toxic
species as well as ozone precursors.

    The emissions scenarios for this study included
1990 base, 2000 Pre-CAAA, 2000 Post-CAAA, 2010
Pre-CAAA, and 2010 Post-CAAA scenarios.  Each
inventory includes typical season weekday area source
emissions,  typical summer  or winter  day utility
emissions (as appropriate), typical season weekday
non-utility point source emissions, and typical season
daybiogenic emissions.

    The anthropogenic input emissions inventory data
were provided by Pechan (1998).  These included area
and point source  emissions data from the National
Particulates Inventory  (by county and for  specific
point sources); county-level vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) estimates; mobile-source emission factors for
VOC, NOx, and CO; and PM emission estimates for
mobile sources.   Note that road dust and other
primary particulates are included in the area-source
emissions file.

    Seasonal  biogenic  emission  estimates  for  the
domain were prepared using version 2 of the EPA's
UAM Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (BEIS-2).
                                               C-44

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
BEIS-2 (which estimates biogenic emissions based on
various biomass, emission, and environmental factors)
utilizes  land-use  information  to  determine  the
distribution of biogenic emissions.

    Preliminary processing of the data prior to the
application of the EPS 2.5e system was necessary.
This consisted of generating  the  on-road mobile
emissions and reformatting all data into AMS and AFS
workfile format.  Particulate matter pollutants from
on-road mobile emissions were provided at county
level and were broken down into 12 different urban
and rural roadway classifications.  To take advantage
of the  temporal information provided in the utility
emissions data, seasonal AFS workfiles were generated
separately for the summer and winter months.

    All anthropogenic emissions inputs to the various
models were preprocessed through  the EPS 2.5e
system.  Point,  area, and  on-road mobile source
emission data were processed separately to  facilitate
both data tracking for quality control and the use of
the data in evaluating the effects  of alternative control
strategies on simulated air pollutant concentrations.
Temporal and spatial  allocation were performed as
described in Section III.

    Primary particulate  and secondary  particulate
precursor  emissions  are  basically  derived  from
particulate matter species, i.e., PM10, PM25, and NH3.
Therefore a chemical speciation scheme that differs
from that for VOC speciation is applied. Table C-9
provides   the  chemical   speciation  applied  for
REMSAD.

  Table C-9
  Chemical Speciation Schemes Applied for
  REMSAD	
  VOC: VOC	
  NH3.  NH3	
  NO,:  NOX, NO, NO2
     X     A'   '    Z.
  PMC: POA, PEC, GSO4, PNO3, PMcoars	
  PM:  POA, PEC,  GSO4, PNO3, Pmfine
    Emission inputs to the REMSAD for selected
species, by component, are provided in Table C-10.
The purpose  of  the  tables  is  to  quantify  the
contribution  of  each  source  category to  total
emissions.   The species  shown include primary
participates and other species that are important to
secondary particulate formation. VOC, NO^ and SO2
emissions are estimated to increase under the Pre-
CAAA  scenario  and to decrease under  the Post-
CAAA scenario.  For SO2, the decreases come from
the utility sector and are  offset by increases in the
other components.  NH3 emissions increase for both
scenarios  and  are  slightly higher under  the Post-
CAAA  scenario  for both years, presumably due to
increased use of natural gas  fuel. PM10 and PM25
emissions (primary  particulates)  are similar for all
scenarios.

    The  primary  chemical  process   for   PM
applications in REMSAD  is  sulfate formation.  In-
cloud processes  can account  for the majority of
atmospheric sulfate  formation,  especially  in  the
wintertime when gas-phase chemistry is slow. The
two most important pathways for in-cloud sulfate
formation are  the  reactions  of aqueous  SO2 with
ozone and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). At cloud pH
below 4.5 (most common in the eastern  U.S.), the
ozone  reaction  is  slow   and the H2O2 reaction
dominates.  Since  the H2O2 is  often present at
ambient concentrations   below  those  of  SO2,
formation of sulfate can be limited by the availability
of  H2O2, and thus can be  quite nonlinear.  The
formation of H2O2 is tied to the overall atmospheric
photochemical system, and responds  to changes in
ambient levels of VOC and NOX. Because of this link,
emission changes for VOC and NOX may have effects
on  ambient sulfate levels.  In short, the emissions of
ozone and PM precursors  (i.e., NOX and VOC) will
affect the oxidizing capacity of the troposphere which
is  represented primarily by  the  concentrations of
radicals  and hydrogen peroxide, and thus  affect the
rate of oxidation of the NOX and SO2 to nitrate and
sulfate.

    In  REMSAD, there is no relationship between
VOC emissions  and the  production  of  secondary
organic  aerosol (SOA).
                                               C-45

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

Table C-10
Emission Totals
by Component for each Scenario for the Entire U.S. (tpd)
voc

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
33,972
18,659
9,503
96
62,229
2000 Pre-
CAAA
39,154
16,454
10,298
85
65,991
2000 Post-
CAAA
27,620
10,683
8,457
85
46,845
2010Pre-
CAAA
43,708
18,776
11,606
134
74,224
2010Post-CAAA
28,575
8,804
9,454
137
46,970
NOx

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
13,766
20,399
7,964
20,188
62,316
2000 Pre-
CAAA
15,659
20,660
8,694
22,787
67,800
2000 Post-
CAAA
15,252
17,421
5,645
11,170
49,487
2010Pre-
CAAA
17,697
24,142
9,803
24,808
76,450
2010Post-CAAA
15,794
14,696
5,985
10,319
46,793
SO2

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
3,517
1,555
12,808
43,380
61,260
2000 Pre-
CAAA
4,174
1,730
14,620
44,261
64,786
2000 Post-
CAAA
4,174
924
14,620
28,742
48,460
2010Pre-
CAAA
4,811
2,109
16,422
48,482
71,823
2010Post-CAAA
4,811
1,121
16,422
27,016
49,369
NH3

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
10,230
544
667
-
11,441
2000 Pre-
CAAA
13,189
957
742
-
14,888
2000 Post-
CAAA
13,189
957
742
91
14,979
2010Pre-
CAAA
15,710
1,191
842
-
17,744
2010Post-CAAA
15,710
1,194
1,015
608
18,527
PM10

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
73,221
972
2,549
764
77,507
2000 Pre-
CAAA
74,431
799
2,891
691
78,812
2000 Post-
CAAA
72,640
706
2,891
697
76,933
2010Pre-
CAAA
74,532
814
3,252
837
79,435
2010Post-CAAA
72,240
563
3,252
758
76,813
PM2.5

Area
Onroad Mobile
Point
Utility
Total
Base 1990
16,717
797
1,625
288
19,427
2000 Pre-
CAAA
17,438
618
1,840
247
20,143
2000 Post-
CAAA
17,147
536
1,840
250
19,773
2010Pre-
CAAA
18,174
640
2,066
332
21,212
2010Post-CAAA
17,637
391
2,066
305
20,398
       C-46

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Air Quality,  Meteorological, and
    Land-Use Inputs

    Initial species concentrations and lateral boundary
conditions were specified to approximate background
concentrations  of  the  species;  for  the  lateral
boundaries  the  concentrations  varied  (decreased
parabolically)   with  height.     The   background
concentrations are listed in Table C-ll.
 Table C-11
 Background Species Concentration used
 for REMSAD Initial and Boundary
 Conditions.
Species
NO
NO2
SO2
NH3
VOC
NHO3
PNO3
GSO4
ASO4
NH4N
NH4S
SOA
POA
PEC
PMFINE
PMCOARS
Concentration
(PPd)
0.0
0.1
0.7
0.5
20.0
0.01
0.01
0.1
0.0
0.01
0.1
1
1
5
1
1
    Meteorological inputs  were derived based  on
output from the Pennsylvania State  University/
National   Center   for   Atmospheric   Research
(PSU/NCAR) mesoscale model (MM4).   Gndded
fields of horizontal wind components, temperature,
water-vapor   concentration,   vertical   exchange
coefficient, precipitation, and pressure were prepared
for input to  REMSAD.  Land-use  information was
obtained  from  the  USGS  database  (at  18 km
resolution).

    REMSAD Simulation  Results

    Model  Performance

    The  assessment of model performance for
participate models is a difficult task due to a relative
lack of data and information regarding the  spatial
distribution,  composition, and size fractionation of
airborne particulates. Development and evaluation of
particulate measurement and modeling techniques are
active  areas  of research.  As a result, there are
currently  no   standard   approaches  or   model
performance criteria for the evaluation of regional-
scale  particulate models.   For this study,  model
performance  for  REMSAD  was examined  by
comparing the simulated values of selected species
with available data. This comparison is intended to
provide an indication as to whether the simulated
values represent the concentration levels and the range
of  concentrations   indicated   by the   available
observations.

    Summaries of model performance were prepared
by  comparing the simulated values  of PM with
observed values  representing  seasonal  averages.
Comparisons were performed for the entire domain
(entire U.S.), the western U.S., and the eastern U.S.
Only  the western U.S.  results  are presented here.
Data  from both  the AIRS  and  IMPROVE PM
monitoring networks were included in the evaluation.
REMSAD-derived sulfate and nitrate concentrations
were also compared to a small number of IMPROVE
measurements.
                                              C-47

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    Scatter plots for PM10 are provided in Figures C-
15 through C-18. For PM10, there is a tendency for
underestimation of  the  seasonal averages  in  the
western U.S.,  in particular for the  fall  and winter
simulation periods.  Similar  plots for PM25, sulfate,
and nitrate are available in  (SAI, 1999) and show
generally good agreement for these species.

    These plots indicate  that model performance
varies throughout the western U.S. and  throughout
the year. A closer look at the comparison between the
simulated  and  observed values  indicates  that  the
agreement is generally better for the IMPROVE sites
and that most of the large underestimation occurs for
the AIRS sites. The IMPROVE sites  tend  to  be
located in rural areas, while the AIRS sites tend to be
located in  urban areas. There are numerous possible
explanations for the  differences.  One possibility is
that one or more components of the urban emissions
may not be accurately represented in the inventory. A
second  possibility   is  that  the  grid  resolution
(approximately 56 km) is not sufficient to resolve the
urban-scale   processes   influencing   particulate
formation and transport.   It is encouraging that
generally good agreement is achieved for the limited
number of sulfate and nitrate  measurements.  Overall,
the model performance  results  suggest  that  the
REMSAD   modeling   system   (including   the
meteorological, air quality, and geographical inputs)
provides a reasonable basis  for the Section 812
prospective modeling.

    REMSAD Modeling Results

    The REMSAD simulation results for the Pre- and
Post-CAAA scenarios were used in this  study  to
calculate factors for adjustment of observed data and
estimation of future-year concentration levels.  These
were  calculated  by  comparing  the   simulated
concentrations   corresponding  to   each  future-
year/scenario simulation with those for the base-year
simulation (1990).  These comparisons indicate that
for both future years and both size categories, the Pre-
CAAA  simulation   results  are  characterized   by
increases in PM, while the Post-CAAA results show
both  increases and  decreases.   Focusing on  the
western U.S., the increases occur over the larger urban
areas and are likely attributable to increases in areas-
source emissions of precursors.

    While there are increases in primary particulate
emissions for some portions of the west, most of the
increases  are  attributable  to  secondary particles.
Isopleth maps  for these comparisons are available in
(SAI, 1999).

    Figures C-19 and C-20 illustrate the differences in
seasonal average simulated PM concentration between
the Pre- and Post-CAAA simulations  for 2010 for the
summer  period.  The differences are calculated as
Post-CAAA minus Pre-CAAA, so that negative values
indicate lower  concentrations  for the Post-CAAA
scenario. The simulated values for the Post-CAAA
scenario are lower than the corresponding Pre-CAAA
values  for both years.  The magnitude and spatial
extent  of the decreases is greater for 2010 than for
2000 (not shown).

Calculation  ofPM Air Quality Profiles

    The calculation of PM profiles for 2000 and 2010
(for assessment of the effects of the  CAAA) include
the use of REMSAD results for the western U.S. and
RADM/RPM  results for the eastern  U.S.   As  for
ozone, this was accomplished using an approach that
combines observed  data and  air quality modeling
results to estimate  the  future-year  concentrations.
While the overall approach is similar to that for ozone
(as described  in  Section  III),  there  are  some
differences.    The  future-year  air  quality  profile
estimation methodology for PM,  as applied to  the
analysis of the  CAAA, is described in this section.

    Overview of the  Methodology

    The   methodology   for  calculation   of  the
adjustment  factors   differed  slightly  for   the
RADM/RPM   and  REMSAD  applications.   For
RADM/RPM  the modeling results were used  to
calculate   adjustment  factors   for  several  PM
component species; for REMSAD adjustment factors
                                               C-48

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
for PM10 and PM2 5 were computed directly from the
model output.  The adjustment  factors  for each
monitoring   site   were   calculated   (using  the
appropriately matched values) for several different
concentration levels  (i.e., the changes in concentration
are dependent upon  concentration level). The species
concentrations for  each monitoring  site  (estimated
using the observations) were then modified using the
site-specific (or grid-cell-specific) adjustment factors.
For  RADM/RPM, PM  concentrations were then
recalculated using the resulting component values.

    For both models, the ratios were  calculated on a
seasonal basis and were used accordingly to adjust the
observed values.   Following  adjustment  of the
observed data, statistical  quantities,  or "profiles",
describing the PM distribution  for each monitoring
site were then calculated.

    Description  of the Observation
    Dataset

    One of the first tasks in calculating the future-year
PM profiles was the creation of a  dataset containing
the observed concentrations for all monitoring sites
located within the modeling domain for the year 1990.

    The  starting point for this analysis is a database
retrieved  from the EPA Aerometric  Information
System (AIRS) of measured ambient concentrations of
TSP, PM10, and PM25 for the year 1990. Due to the
limited number of measurements (usually taken once
every six days), data for 1989 and 1991 were also used
to supplement the 1990 database.  Cross-estimation
was  performed when one of measurements was
missing  (i.e.,  PM10  or PM25). The PM component
species (that make up secondary PM) were estimated
based on a methodology developed by Langstaff and
Woolfolk (1995) for the Section  812 retrospective
modeling analysis. Size fractionation (PM10 fraction of
TSP and PM25 fraction of PM10) and apportionment
of secondary PM  species relied  on  a review  of
previous  studies to provide general relationships used
to estimate these components of particulate matter.
The  relationships used for this study depend only on
broad geographic region (East, Central, West), time of
year (quarter for  PM10 and  season  for PM25), and
whether the monitor is located in an urban or rural
setting.

    The geographical regions used throughout this
analysis are presented in Table C-12.  In addition to
secondary composition fractions, ratios relating PM2 5
to  PM10 were employed.   The literature  review
conducted  for establishing  secondary particulate
matter concentrations for  the 1990 data and  the
sources of ratios and apportionment factors used in
the equations  below is discussed in some detail by
Langstaff and Woofolk (1995).

    It  should  be noted  that there  is considerable
variability in the  size and  species composition  of
particulate  matter,  not only  between  different
locations, but also from day to day in the same
location.  The average size  fractions  and speciation
factors used for this study represent a rather sweeping
simplification of the actual physical phenomena that
are being modeled. However, this may be justified in
the context of this study, due to data limitations and
the fact that the results are aggregated to the annual
level.

    As mentioned earlier, cross-estimation of TSP,
PM10, and  PM25  was used  to estimate values not
present in the original AIRS database. The results of
a linear regression of TSP  versus PM10 by region,
quarter, and land-use were used to fill in either PM10
or TSP,  if the other was missing.  After this, the
results of a linear regression of PM25 versus PM10 by
region, season, and land use were then used to fill in
PM25 values where missing. With both estimated and
observed TSP, PM10, and  PM25,  the coarse PM
concentration  was  calculated  as well  as the PM
concentration greater than 10 microns.
PM>10   =TSP-PM10
PMC    = PM10 - PM2 5
(1)
                                                C-49

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
             TableC-12
             Geographical Regions of the U.S.
Central
Oklahoma
Missouri
Kansas
Nebraska
Iowa
South Dakota
North Dakota
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Illinois

















irse PM were partitioned
rticulate concentrations.
East
Indiana
Kentucky
Ohio
Michigan
Virginia
West Virginia
Pennsylvania
New York
Maryland
New Jersey
Connecticut
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
Vermont
New Hampshire
Maine
Delaware
Washington, DC
Florida
Georgia
Alabama
Mississippi
Louisiana
Arkansas
Tennessee
North Carolina
South Carolina
into O =
As shown P =
West
Nevada
Utah
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Texas
California
Oregon
Washington
Idaho
Wyoming
Montana















organic concentration
other particulate concentratii
below, each equation illustrates how the secondary
particulate concentrations are calculated from coarse
and fine PM.
S
N
O
P
=[PM2.5*rs2.5]
=[PM2.5*rn2.5] + [PMc*rnC]
=[PM2.5*ro2.5]
=[PM
          2.5rp2.5
                                      (3)
                                      (4)
                                      (5)
                                      (6)
where
S     =    sulfate concentration
N    =    nitrate concentration
PM25 =   PM less than or equal to 2.5 microns in
          size
PMC  =   PM between 2.5 and 10 microns in size
          (coarse PM)
rx2.s   =   rati° of <=2.5 micron sulfate (x=s),
          nitrate (x=n), organic (x=o), and other
          particulate (x=P) to PM25
rxC   =   ratio of 2.5-10 micron sulfate  (x=s),
          nitrate (x=n), organic (x=o), and other
          particulate (x=P) to coarse PM

    Note that r^ was based on a review of available
data/literature and depends  on geographic region,
                                               C-50

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
time of year, and land-use characteristics of the
monitoring site location.

    The observed and estimated species concentra-
tions were then input into a single AMP350-format
datafile.  From the information contained in this file,
two SAS datasets were created: a concentration dataset
and a monitor information dataset.  The concentration
dataset  contains the daily concentrations  for each
monitor, with each record in the dataset representing
a single monitor-day.    The  monitor  information
dataset contains monitor-specific information such as
land-use and location.

    Because PM monitors are typically operated on a
one-in-six  day  monitoring  schedule,  calculating
percentiles for the PM profiles using data for a single
year can be very sensitive to the method used in the
percentile calculation. This is  especially true when a
monitor record only needs to be 50 percent complete
(i.e., contain at least 30  values) for a profile to be
generated. To minimize dependence on the form of
the percentile equation,  the  1990 PM data  were
supplemented with that from the years 1989 and 1991.
In using multiple years worth  of monitoring data, it
was discovered that the identifier (ID) corresponding
to a monitor in a given physical location could change
from one year to the next.  Also, a monitor could have
moved  to a nearby location  and been assigned a
different ID.  It was also possible that the monitor ID
for a PM10 monitor might be different from that of a
TSP or PM25 monitor despite the  fact that their
physical separation is zero.  Because much of the
profile work is dependent upon the monitor ID, this
led to  a vast increase in the reported number  of
operating monitors.

    To  accommodate  these possibilities, monitors
with different monitor ID's were considered  the same
monitor if their physical  separation was less than  or
equal to  1  km.   Monitoring data  from  the  two
monitors were combined.  If data existed for both of
the monitors  on the same day, the daily data from the
monitor with the higher ID was removed.
    For  particulate  data,  a monitor record  was
considered to be complete if data were available for 50
percent of the 24-hour observations for a given year
(assuming a one-in-six day  monitoring schedule).
Although three years worth of data were used for the
PM analysis, these data were considered to represent
one   year  with   respect   to   the   completeness
requirement.  There were  2048  PM monitors with
complete data.

    Calculation of Percentile-Based
    Adjustment Factors

    For each future-year modeling scenario, grid-cell-
species-season-specific  adjustment   factors   were
calculated   using  the  speciated,   daily-simulated
concentrations from RADM/RPM and REMSAD.
Because the  species and seasons differed between the
two  models,  the exact calculation  of adjustment
factors  also differed.  Nevertheless,  the  overall
approach was the same. Individual monitoring sites
were mapped onto the gridded output (to determine
the grid cell  in which each monitor was located) and
the concentrations for the corresponding grid  cells
were used to calculate a set of adjustment factors for
each  species,  season,  and  future-year  modeling
scenario.  The adjustment factors were specified to be
the ratio  of the  percentile concentrations for the
future- and base-year simulations of a given species-
season, where the  percentile concentrations  were
calculated using data for  the selected species and
season concentrations:
  Adjustment
  Factor
                    xth Percentile
                    Concentration
            future year, species, season
        i,species,season
xth Percentile
Concentration^
                                 ase vear.svecies.season
             {*,.}= {10, 30, 50, 70, 90}

    For calculation of the percentile concentrations,
the empirical distribution function with averaging was
employed.  Because the concentrations for the lower
percentiles can be rather small, a threshold value of
0.01 microgram/m3 was set to  keep the adjustment
factors reasonable. In other words, all concentrations
below 0.01  microgram/m3 were  reset  to  0.01
                                                C-51

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
microgram/m3.  If either the base year or the future
ear percentile concentration was set to the minimum
value, the adjustment factor was set equal  to one.
This percentile-based approach was selected due to
the limitations  of using  a single  adjustment to
represent the change in the modeled PM species
concentrations  in moving from the base- to  the
future-year scenarios.

    For RADM, adjustment factors were calculated
for  the sum of sulfate, nitrate,  and ammonium.
These were calculated for the entire year (i.e., only one
"season").   For REMSAD, the adjustment factors
were calculated  for PM10 and  PM25.  These were
calculated on a seasonal basis.

    A  SAS  dataset containing the  monitor-level
adjustment factors was created for each future-year
modeling scenario considered in this study  for this
year.

    Use of Adjustment Factors to
    Modify Observed  Concentrations

    Using the calculated adjustment factors for each
future-year   scenario    and   the   monitor-level
observations, a dataset containing modified PM10 and
PM2 5 concentrations for each of the four future-year
scenarios was created.  Because each monitor has five
adjustment factors per scenario, species, and season,
it  was first necessary to rank order the  observed
concentrations into five quintile-based groups (with
ties being assigned to the higher group) with respect
to the  species  and season definitions mentioned
previously.   Thus  for RADM, the quintiles were
calculated for the daily sum of the observed sulfate,
nitrate, and ammonium concentrations over the entire
year (ignoring that the data are actually for the years
1989, 1990, and 1991).  For REMSAD the  quintiles
were calculated for the observed daily PM10 and PM2 5
over each of the four seasons.  Once each of the
observed concentrations  was  identified   with a
particular quintile group, the appropriate adjustment
factor was selected and applied to calculate the future-
year-scenario PM10 and PM25.
    For RADM, the adjustment factor was applied
using the following equations:

AdjNitrateSulfate, = ObsNitrateSulfate,
AdjOrganicst
AdjP,
               — ObsOrganicst * 1
               = ObsP, * 1
    For    example    in    the    first   equation,
{ObsNitrateSulfate^ is the set of observed daily sums of
the   nitrate   and   sulfate  concentrations   (in
micrograms/m3)  for   a   given  monitor.     The
k\ObsNitrateSulfate^  subscript is the number  of the
quintile group  to which  ObsNitrateSulfate1 belongs.
Adj.Factork[0bsNitrateSa,fatei]iNUrateM.fate is then the appropriate
adjustment factor for ObsNitrateSutfatet.  The  resulting
set of adjusted daily  sums  of nitrate and  sulfate
concentrations,  {AdjNitrateSulfate^, represents  the
future year estimates of the daily sum of nitrate and
sulfate concentrations. In this case, P represents other
participate components.  For those monitors  within
the RADM domain, PM10 and PM25 concentrations
were  calculated by summing each  of the  above
components.

    For monitors within the REMSAD domain, the
procedure for calculating the future-year PM10 and
PM25 is more direct.  Future-year concentrations of
these two  PM  species are calculated  using  the
observed/estimated PM10 and PM25 concentrations
and the appropriate adjustment factors:

AdjPMW, = ObsPM10t * AdjFactork[0h!mm]iPM10iSea!m
AdjPM2.5t = ObsPM2.5t *
    In the first equation, {ObsPMW} is the set of
observed   daily   PM10    concentrations    (in
micrograms/m3)   for  a  given  monitor.     The
k[ObsPM10J subscript is the number of the quintile
group (based on season) to which ObsPM10t belongs.
AdjFactork[0bsPUWl]tPMW/xasm is then  the  appropriate
adjustment factor for ObsPM10t. The resulting set of
PM10 and PM25 concentrations,  {ObsPMW}  and
{ObsPM2Ji},  therefore represents the future-year
estimates of these PM species.
                                                C-52

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    Calculation of PM Profiles

    PM10 and PM2 5 air quality profile databases were
compiled for all simulations performed as part of the
Section 812 prospective  analysis.  For each of the
particulate species, these data bases contained the
number, the arithmetic mean, the median, the annual
second highest,  and  the  2.5 to 97.5 percentiles (in
increments  of  five)  of the daily (as  available)
concentrations.   The profiles are  reported at the
monitor level and include 2048 site locations.

    The histograms in Figures C-21a through C-24b
illustrate the distribution of ratios for the annual
average monitor-level PM10 and PM2 5 concentrations
corresponding to the 2000 and 2010 simulations. In
these figures, ratios greater than one indicate that the
future-year/scenario concentration is greater than the
base-year  (1990) value, whereas ratios less than one
indicate a lower value for the future-year.

    The 2000 Pre-CAAA ratios for  PM10 (Figure C-
2 la)  indicate   that   the  annual   average   PM10
concentrations  corresponding to this  scenario are
higher in some areas and lower in other areas than the
base-year  (1990) values.  The ratios generally range
from approximately 0.95 to 1.1, but also include  some
higher values. In contrast, the ratios corresponding to
the 2000 Post-CAAA simulation (Figure C-21b) are
generally less than or equal to one, with most sites
being assigned a ratio consistent with a small decrease
in annual average PM10 concentration. There are also
some lower values.
generally higher than (or equal to )  the  base-year
(1990) values.   The ratios  generally range from
approximately 0.975 to 1.15.  In contrast,  the ratios
corresponding to the 2000 Post-CAAA simulation
(Figure C-23b)  are generally less than one.  In  this
case, the ratios range from approximately 0.925 to
1.075.

    For 2010, the PM25 ratios (Figures C-24a and C-
24b), indicate increases for the Pre-CAAA scenario
and mostly decreases for the Post-CAAA scenario.
Again, compared to 2000, concentrations for 2010 are
higher relative to the base year under the Pre-CAAA
scenario and similar to or slightly lower relative to the
base year under the Post-CAAA scenario.

    For both future years (2000 and 2010), the ratios
indicate that the Post-CAAA concentrations (annual
average) are lower than the corresponding Pre-CAAA
values. This is illustrated in Figures C-25a through C-
26b.  The  smaller  ratios  for 2010  reflect  larger
differences  between the  Pre-  and  Post-CAAA
scenarios.
    Figure C-22a and C-22b display the distribution of
ratios of the future-year-scenario to base-year annual
average PM10 concentrations for 2010. Compared to
the histogram plots for 2000, the ratios are higher for
the Pre-CAAA scenario but similar for the Post-
CAAA scenario.  There is  some indication that, by
2010,  increases  due to growth are  limiting  the
effectiveness of the CAAA measures.

    The 2000 Pre-CAAA ratios for PM25 (Figure C-
23a)  indicate  that  the  annual  average  PM25
concentrations  corresponding to this  scenario  are
                                                C-53

-------
                               The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-14
80-km RADM Domain
Note: Nested 20-km grid estimates were not used to generate final results, but were used in evaluating
the reasonableness of results.
                                       C-54

-------
                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010


1





8
I
:
I
f

1












i
-

i

-
i

-






OprmiM • IWD
00<

1 1

II 1

....
H

'• i
H

1.1
•: '

l.i
",
» 1C ED » 4D -5C BD TO DO BO J<
i i i i i i * i * i * i i ' i ' •
X-


: / :
ff
- /*' -
/
.^
' >X '
;.. " x
**
-
~ **
^. •* j&L'i"' '«•_ v
j JSU^^S^f^
~/^^^^F ' ]
h IO ZQ X> 40 3C GO TO BO 94 1
CiB3EM>-ELi f H1O lui/n-.T-l
•*-i Vuuimffc . 1 VH>
TOO a LD £0 JO rt M «i •» iD >» iflft,,,

DO
H
«

»* - TO
•W _' • , i
a
SD 5 -<1
«D | Jll
5
9(1 1 "
=D «

m "
A
• .


- / '-
"*
/
- ^ -
.' .*" *+*
-
* tv - .^
• ^ *Y •/ *
_
*
**A& -
^Wv^ .*
i^™* B*"-^-" "rf- . *
•ii- .
' * ' J"JMlJ |JT *^W*
: •••aMpt •
•••'. " r*. 	 ...
4 LO*o50wW'W1'*SM*il
O&SCEVID PUlO I.ut/m3f


-.11
HI)

."
.„

-II
III

I.I
ill

..
v.
Figure C-15. Comparison of simulated and Figure C-16. Comparison of simulated and
observed seasonal PM10 concentration (ug/m3) for observed seasonal PM10 concentration (ug/m3) for
REMSAD for the western U.S.: spring 1990 REMSAD for the western U.S.: summer 1990
P*U . lWt» !,_ ..„ .Oift
.11

1 ' ' ' 	 .X
'-
-j» „
- Ad
/ ' W
- : - s «
i. i 00 i
j an
_. i
XWI a
3 OU
s
- *c
•* ---ii' V * \
i.| *** - *i
1 'II
:••, »»*'•' "- W
><*HFd
KtdfXfm^CJ^' -
id- \Q| - i*

jX"ff^W^T^ V , i , 	 '.
"* " OBSEBi's£ PH?» (ue/mar W " '^ ^
LD BO » 40 3O ftO TO flfl H d(
i i | • | i | i | i | | i i | i .
/' m
/
jf
-
- *"* * '"""
^ -•;'
*
•
-
• • •* \ * '_

/ AS^"\ ^^** i
V^» ^f .. •^ ^ rf * •*• **

^^tfitrfrf^l^llVv ^l^fc • ~ ^r fc . r *i

jjjrtprttfSJSBjt^fJ-"-
^^^^ i ". i .* i . i .1 "| ,
ID BO 3C -HO 3D DO 7X1 BD BO Ji
',.
....
1,

...

•-


-..

1
'
••••


1-

a
                                                              otifenvcD rm a inf..-m?i
Figure C-17. Comparison of simulated and
observed seasonal PM10 concentration (ug/m3) for
REMSAD for the western U.S.: fall 1990
Figure C-18. Comparison of simulated and
observed seasonal PM10 concentration (ug/m3) for
REMSAD for the western U.S.: winter 1990
                                           C-55

-------
                           The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   LEVEL 1  PM10 (ug/m3)                + MAXIMUM =
   Time:  100 Jul 1,  1990-100 Jul 11  1990 - MINIMUM =
                               Deg.  Longitude
  126        -118         -110        -102
                            0 0 ug/m3 (30,5)
                            385 ug/m3 (13,20)


                               -94
50
40
30
20
10
   j i i M M i n I |  i ij i i it T i rr i i i r in rn i  i | i M i i  i i n i i JT 11 i_
         j.i i i 1 i i .1.1 i i i i.j.ljj j	j.i..1.1.i  I.LLLIXJ. i LLLJ j.j.i i i i i t i I  11'
                                       49
                                       44
                                           OJ
                                          -d

                                       39
                                                                   ti
                                                                   
-------
                           The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   LEVEL 1 PM25 (ug/m3)                + MAXIMUM =
   Time  100 Jul 1, 1990-100 Jul 11,  1990  - MINIMUM -
                         Deg. Longitude
  126        -118        -110        -102
50
40
30
20
10
 0
    i i i
  0
                                      0.0 ug/m3 (30,5)
                                      120 ug/'m3 (13.20)


                                         -94
                ] i
           I I I I I | I I I  I I I M I i I I I  I I I I I I I If I | I I I l_
            1 I
         I i I 1 I 1
            I 1 1 i 1 j I j 1 1 I I 1 I i I 1 I i I I if
                                                 49
                                                 44
                                                    o>
                                                    T)
                                                    3
                                                 39 g
                                                    
                                                                Q
                                                 34
                                                 29
10
20
30
40
50
                                                 24
   Figure C-20. Difference in seasonal average PM25 concentration
   (ug/m3) for the summer REMSAD simulation period (1-10 July 1990) for
   2010: post-CAAA90 minus pre-CAAA90
                                C-57

-------
                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-21a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and
REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios
F
60 -
> 50-
0
= — 40 -
o> §
£ £ 30 -
"55
* 10 -
o -
c
»Mio Concentration: 2000 Pre-CAAA
for Annual Average
/ 1990 Base-Year
median: 1.017





i i 1 —




i —











50 0 55 0 60 0 65 0 70 0 75 0 80 0 85 0 90 0 95 1 00 1
Ratio







05 1 10 1 15 1 20 1 25 1 30

      Figure C-21b. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and
     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average
       PMio Concentration: 2000 Post-CAAA /1990 Base-Year
     60
>   50
o
I C-40
O" c
0  Q)
i  £ 30
2s
S    20
     10 -
                                            median: 0.976
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                                    Ratio

                              C-58

-------
                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-22a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM-and
REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average
P
60 -i
> 50-
0
§ ~ 40-
o- c
g> o>
ul £ 30-
5 i
~~ 20-
0)
* 10-
0-
0
MIO Concentration: 2010 Pre-CAAA/ 1990 Base-Year
median: 1.040





i— I







.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1
Ratio



	






.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30


      Figure C-22b. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and
     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average
            Concentration: 2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
     60
>    50 H
o

§ ~ 40-I
0)  0)
>  -°:
13
     30 -

     20 -

     10 -

      0
                                           median: 0.981
                                             T-Thn
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                   Ratio
                              C-59

-------
                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Figure C-23a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM-and
     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average
        PM2.s Concentration: 2000 Pre-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
     60
     50-
= ~ 40-1
o>  §
it  e 30-
5  £
;§~20H
a)
*    10-1
                                               median: 1.033
                                                ft*
01	r^
  0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                             Ratio
       Figure C-23b. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and
      REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average
       PM2.s Concentration: 2000 Post-CAAA /1990 Base-Year
     60
 >    50
 o
 I ~  40
 O d)
i ^  30
 0) 0>
 > 3
5    20
      10 -
                                          median: 0.968
            T—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—hrl—I—I—I—I—I—F=l—I  I  I—i—i—T
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30

                                   Ratio
                             C-60

-------
                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Figure C-24a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and

      REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average

        PM2.5 Concentration: 2010 Pre-CAAA /1990 Base-Year
     60
 &   5(H

 0)
 3 53- 40

 ^ §
u- H 30
 o a>
 > 3
ts   20
 0)

tf   10 H
                                                  median: 1.070
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30


                                    Ratio
       Figure C-24b. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and

     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average

       PM2.s Concentration: 2010 Post-CAAA/1990 Base-Year
     60
>   50
o


|- 4°
f S
i  ^ so
0)  CD
>  Q-
5  ^ 20
     10 -
                                             median: 0.976
              T—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—f—\—I—I—I—I—I—I  I  I  I—I—I—F

        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65  0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30
                                    Ratio
                              C-61

-------
                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
      Figure C-25a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and

     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average

            Concentration: 2000 Post-CAAA / 2000 Pre-CAAA
     60
>
o

   50 -


   40 -



   30 -


   20 -


   10 -


    0
                                          median: 0.964
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30


                                   Ratio
        Figure C-25b. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and

     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average

       PMio Concentration: 2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA
     60
o
c
d>

CT

£
LL

d>
d>
o:
     50-
— 40 -
+rf  -rw

d>

^  301
o>
Q.

" 20 1
     10-
                         -n-n-
                                        median: 0.946
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30


                                   Ratio
                              C-62

-------
                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Figure C-26a. Distribution of Combined RADM/RPM- and

     REMSAD-Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average

       PM2.s Concentration: 2000 Post-CAAA / 2000 Pre-CAAA
     60
o
c
d>
3
o-
0)
0)
_>
^5
JS
o>
o:
     50-



  ~ 40-
   £ 30 -
   o>
   Q.

   "" 20 H
     10-



      0
                                         median: 0.946
                                          fl
        0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20 1.25 1.30


                                    Ratio
  Figure C-26b. Description of Combined RADM/RPM- and REMSAD-

     Derived Monitor-Level Ratios for Annual Average PM2.5

         Concentration: 2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA
     60-




>   50-
o




I?401
g>  a)

u.  a 301
Q)  0




"55
                                       median: 0.919
       0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15  1.20 1.25 1.30


                                   Ratio




                               C-63

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Estimating the Effects of the
CAAA on Visibility

    Light  traveling  through  the  atmosphere  is
"absorbed" and "scattered" by gases and suspended
particles.  These distortion processes  contribute to
total atmospheric  light  extinction which, in turn,
causes visibility degradation.   To characterize and
ultimately quantify the effect of changes in emissions
on visibility, an understanding of the concentrations
and types of gaseous participate constituents in the air
is necessary.

    The  influence  of gaseous absorption on light
extinction is almost negligible. Gaseous scattering has
a larger impact, although this impact is generally not as
significant  as  either  particulate  absorption   or
scattering. Together the influence of all four of these
light distortion processes is expressed quantitatively as
the light extinction coefficient, b^,.  In this analysis
RADM/RPM and REMSAD are  both  used  to
calculate bext.

RADM/RPM and Visibility

    RADM/RPM estimates bext in the eastern U.S.,
for each emissions scenario (1990 base year, 2000 Pre-
CAAA, 2000 Post-CAAA, 2010 Pre-CAAA, and 2010
Post-CAAA), by combining the influences of particle
scattering and absorption and incorporating the effect
of scattering caused by water.  The  fine particles
estimated by RADM/RPM (including their associated
water)  are  secondary particulates: sulfates, nitrates,
associated ammonium, and organics. Absorption by
carbon  particles is not  included in the model's
calculations, nor is  extinction resulting from primary
particles.  By not  including these latter influences,
RADM/RPM may underestimate the  effects of air
pollution on visibility.

    RADM/RPM, along with generating atmospheric
light extinction values, calculates "visual  range" and
deciview (dV), both measures that quantify visibility.
The former,  VR, is related to the light extinction
coefficient by the following equation:
VR(meters)  = 3.912/bext,

where bext is in inverse meters. The latter measure of
visibility, dV, and the related DeciView Haze Index
are  improved  indicators  of the  clarity  of  the
atmosphere.  This index more accurately captures the
relationship  between air pollution  and  human's
perception of visibility than does VR or bext (Pitchford
and  Malm,  1994).   A deciview is defined by  the
equation:

dV = lOln (bext/10) ,

where bext is  expressed in inverse megameters.

    The  DeciView  Haze  Index has  a value of
approximately  zero  when  the  light extinction
coefficient is equal  to the scattering  coefficient for
particle-free air.  A roughly 10 percent increase in  bext
translates to a one unit  change  in dV.  Since  the
apparent change in visibility is related to a percent
change in bext, equal changes in  dV  correspond to
approximately equally perceptible changes in visibility.
Research indicates that, for most observers, a "just
noticeable change" in  visibility corresponds to an
increase or decrease of about one to two dV units.
An  increase in  the  deciview  level  translates to
degradation  of visibility, while a decrease represents
and improvement.

RADM/RPM Modeling Results

    For this analysis, under the 1990 base year and
future  year  emissions  scenarios,  the  annual mean
daylight hour bext, VR, and dV were estimated for each
RADM/RPM grid cell. A summary of 1990 and 2010
deciview levels for selected cities, metropolitan areas,
and national parks is provided in Table C-13. These
deciview estimates show  that under the Pre-CAAA
scenario visibility degradation is expected throughout
much of the eastern U.S.  Comparison of 1990 base
year and 2010   Post-CAAA estimates,  however,
indicates  that with the  implementation of CAAA
related measures, a perceptible  improvement in
visibility can be expected.
                                               C-64

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
TableC-13
Comparison of Visibility in Selected Eastern Cities, Metropolitan Areas, and
National Parks
Mean Annual Deciview
Area Name
Acadia NP
Atlanta Metro Area
Boston Metro Area
Chicago Metro Area
Columbus
Detroit Metro Area
Everglades NP
Great Smoky Mtns. NP
Indianapolis
Little Rock
Milwaukee Metro Area
Minn. -St. Paul Metro Area
Nashville
New York City Metro Area
Pittsburgh Metro Area
St. Louis Metro Area
Shenandoah NP
Syracuse
Washington, DC Metro Area
State
ME
GA
MA
IL
OH
Ml
FL
TN
IN
AR
Wl
MN
TN
NY/NJ
PA
MO
VA
NY
DC/VA/MD
1990
Base Year
11.1
20.9
13.2
17.5
16.5
16.0
7.6
20.4
20.1
15.0
15.6
10.1
20.4
15.2
15.8
16.5
16.5
12.4
17.5
2010
Pre-CAAA
12.0
22.8
14.0
19.1
17.7
18.5
9.2
22.3
21.1
17.2
18.4
12.4
21.5
18.0
16.9
17.8
17.8
13.2
19.2
2010
Post-CAAA
10.4
20.0
11.9
17.0
15.1
15.3
6.9
19.6
19.0
15.1
15.3
10.3
19.0
13.9
14.2
16.0
15.2
11.5
16.3
*For cities, metro areas, or national parks not contained by a single RADM/RPM grid cell, the visibility measure
presented in this table is a weighted average of the mean annual deciview level from each of the grid cells that
together completely contain the selected area. Weighting is based upon the spatial distribution of an area over the
various grid cells.
                                                 C-65

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
REMSAD and Visibility

    REMSAD was  used to estimate the effect of
changes in emissions on visibility for the western U.S.
This model calculates  light extinction coefficients
based upon estimates of the gridded ground-level
concentrations  of the  following  species —  sulfate
(NH4S+GSO4+ASO4),  nitrate   (NH4N+PNO3),
NO2, SOA, POA, PEC, PMfine and PMcoarse (refer
to Table  C-8 for a description  of these  species
abbreviations). The contribution from each of these
species is adjusted based on the extinction efficiency
of each and, in the case of sulfate, nitrate and SOA, an
adjustment dependent on the relative humidity.  The
total extinction coefficient is then given by:
CAAA  scenario  visibility is expected  to  remain
unchanged between 1990 and 2010 throughout much
of the West and actually improve in coastal Oregon
and along the western Idaho border.  In the larger
urban   areas,   however,   perceptible  visibility
degradation is predicted.  Visibility improvement in
and around western cities, especially in California, is
predicted under the Post-CAAA scenario. Figure C-
29 captures these changes and  shows that in 2010
improvements in  visibility are not expected to be
restricted to just the larger urban areas; compared to
1990 base year estimates, Post-CAAA deciview levels
are also predicted to be lower throughout much of
Washington,  Oregon,  and  Nevada and in sizeable
sections of Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming.
bext = 10.+ 0.17*NO2 + 4,4(RH)*sulfate + f;o3(RH)*Nitrate
+ fsoa(RH)*SOA +6.2*POA + 10.5*PEC + PMFINE +
0.6*PMCOARSE

where the constant value of 10.0 is the contribution to
the scattering coefficient for particle-free air (Rayleigh
scattering). REMSAD generated bext values are then
converted to deciviews.

REMSAD Modeling Results

    Visibility estimates  and change in visibility were
calculated for each of the future-year scenarios for use
in the effects analysis.  Figure C-27 illustrates 1990
base year deciview levels for the western U.S.  This
map shows that visibility is poorer in the region of
California extending from San Francisco southward to
Los  Angeles,  the Pacific  Northwest, and   larger
metropolitan areas such  as Denver, CO; Albuquerque,
NM;  and Phoenix, AZ.  Most noticeable  is the
comparatively high deciview level in the Los Angeles
region.

    Figures C-28  and C-29 illustrate the difference
between 2010 Pre-CAAA  and 1990  base  year
estimates  and  the difference between  2010  Post-
CAAA  and  1990 base  year  estimates, respectively.
The  first of these maps shows  that under the Pre-
                                               C-66

-------
                              The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    LEVEL 1 DV ( )
    Summer , 1990
-126.00
                      + MAXIMUM = 34.6  (5,51)
                      - MINIMUM = 4.7  (16,32)
          Deg. Longitude
-119.33       -112.67       -106.00
                                                            - 48.0
                                                              24.0
  Figure C-27.  Seasonal Average Deciview for the summer REMSAD
  simulation period (1-10 July 1990): base 1990 (western U.S. only)
                                    C-67

-------
                             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    LEVEL 1 DV ( )
    Summer , 1990
-126.OO
                      + MAXIMUM = 3.6  (15,18)
                      - MINIMUM = -0.4  (4,37)
          Deg. Longitude
-119.33       -112.67       -1O6.OO
                              •9 - 3 - ^
                                                            - 48.0
                                                            J-J24.0
 Figure C-28.  Difference in seasonal average Deciview for the summer REMSAD
 simulation period (1-10 July  1990): 2010 pre-CAAA90 minus base 1990 (western
 United States only)
                                   C-68

-------
                                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Acid  Deposition

    The acid deposition modeling efforts for this
analysis focused on estimating the change in ambient
concentrations of selected pollutants  as  a result  of
changes in emissions.  The need to focus on relative
changes, rather than absolute predictions, is especially
acute when estimating air  quality  outcomes  for
pollutants subject to long-range transport, chemical
transformation, and atmospheric deposition.   The
complexity of the relationships between emissions, air
concentrations, and deposition is well-described in the
following  paragraph   from  the  RADM   report
document developed by Robin Dennis  of U.S. EPA's
National Exposure Research Laboratory:

    "Sulfur,   nitrogen,  and oxidant species  in  the
    atmosphere can be transported hundreds to thousands
    of kilometers  by meteorological forces.   During
    transport the primary emissions, S02,  NOX,  and
    volatile organic compounds (VOC) are  oxidised in
    the  air or in ckud-water to form new, secondary
    compounds, which are acidic, particularly sulfate and
    nitric acid, or which add to  or subtract from the
    ambient  levels of oxidants,  such as o^pne.   The
    oxidi^ers, such  as the hydroxyl radical, hydrogen
    peroxide and o^one  are produced by  reactions of
    VOC and NOX. The sulfur and nitrogen pollutants
    are  deposited to the earth through either wet or dry
    deposition creating a bad of pollutants to the earth's
    surface...  However, the atmosphere is partly cleansed
    of oxidants through a number of physical processes
    including deposition (e.g., o^pne is removed by wet and
    dry deposition). Dry deposition occurs when particles
    settle out of the air onto the earth or when gaseous or
    fine particle species directly impact land, plants, or
    water or when plant stomata take up gaseous species,
    such as  S02.  In wet deposition, pollutants are
    removed from the atmosphere by either rain or snow.
    In addition, fine particles or secondary aerosols formed
    by  the gas- and  aqueous-phase  transformation
    processes scatter  or absorb visible light and thus
    contribute to impairment of visibility. "^
     "' Dennis, R. RADM Report (1995), p. 1.
    The  complexity   and   nonlinearity  of  the
relationships   between   localized   emissions   of
precursors, such as SO2 and VOCs, and subsequent
regional scale air quality and deposition effects are so
substantial that advanced modeling is  required to
accurately estimate the broad-scale impact of changes
in emissions on acid deposition.  For this analysis,
EPA used  the Regional  Acid  Deposition Model
(RADM)  to estimate acid deposition in the eastern
United States.

Overview of the RADM Modeling
System

    RADM, a three-dimensional Eulerian grid-based
model also used in the PM analysis, estimated nitrogen
and sulfur deposition for the 1990 base year and each
of the future  year emissions  scenarios.   Estimates,
expressed in kg/ha, were developed for 2000 and
2010 and calculated for each 80-km RADM grid cell.
It is important  to  note, however,  that  ammonia
deposition, a significant contributor to total nitrogen
deposition, was held constant for each of the model
runs. This was because livestock farming and other
activities  that  drive  ammonia  formation   and
deposition were essentially unaffected by the CAAA-
related control programs. A more detailed description
of RADM,  its domain, and  its  inputs  is provided
earlier in this appendix..

RADM Modeling Results

    Figures  C-30 and C-31 show the 1990 base-year
deposition  estimates   for   sulfur   and   nitrogen
respectively. Predictions for both pollutants under the
Pre-  and Post-CAAA scenarios are displayed in
Figures C-32 through C-35.  Comparison  of the three
maps showing sulfur deposition  and comparison of
the three maps showing nitrogen deposition reveals
that for both pollutants annual deposition under the
Pre-CAAA scenario is  expected to increase between
1990 and 2010.  Year 2010 Post-CAAA sulfur and
nitrogen deposition projections, however, are not only
lower than  2010  Pre-CAAA projections,  but  also
below 1990 base year  levels.  Together, these maps
indicate that between 1990 and 2010 average annual
                                                 C-69

-------
                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
acid deposition is expected to decrease as a result of
the Clean Air Act Amendments.

    Noticeable in each of the figures, especially those
mapping nitrogen, is an area of high deposition along
the Virginia-North Carolina border. This "hot spot"
is above Person County, NC, a region with one large
and one  very large utility plant.11  Emissions from
these plants, particularly NOX, likely are the source of
the high deposition in this area.   Person  County
exhibits the highest base year and future year Pre- and
Post-CAAA acid deposition estimates in the entire
RADM domain.

    Comparison  of 2010 Pre-   and Post-CAAA
emissions  in Person  County  shows  that  NOX
emissions are expected to be lower in 2010 as a result
of the CAAA.  This change in emissions, however,
translates to a change in  acid deposition that is not
captured by the maps provided in this section. 2010
Post-CAAA nitrogen and sulfur deposition estimates
for this county are 27.2 and 78.0 kg/ha respectively.
These figures  represent   a  decrease in  nitrogen
deposition  of 14.0  kg/ha  and a decrease in sulfur
deposition of 4.5 kg/ha from 2010 Pre-CAAA levels.
Compared  to the base year, the  2010 Post-CAAA
nitrogen deposition estimate for Person County is 4.1
kg/ha lower than 1990 levels, the 2010 Post-CAAA
sulfur deposition prediction, however, is 12.9 kg/ha
higher.
    "Under the 2010 Post-CAAA scenario the Mayo (large) and
Roxboro (very large) utility plants are predicted to emit 9,400 and 30,100
tons of NOS per year respectively.


                                                C-70

-------
     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
       Figure C-29
Annual Sulfur Deposition
1990 Base Case Scenario
                        0 - 5 kg/ha
                        5-10 kg/ha
                        10-15 kg/ha
                        15-20 kg/ha
                        20- 100 kg/ha
          C-71

-------
      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        Figure C-30
Annual Nitrogen Deposition
 1990 Base Case Scenario
                         0 - 5 kg/ha
                         5-10 kg/ha
                         10-15 kg/ha
                         15 - 20 kg/ha
                         20- 100 kg/ha
            C-72

-------
              The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                Figure C-31
        Annual Nitrogen Deposition
         2000 Pre CAAA Scenario
100 0 100 200 300400  Miles-*'
                                  0 - 5 kg/ha
                                  5-10 kg/ha
                                  10-15 kg/ha
                                  15-20 kg/ha
                                  20- 100 kg/ha
  H

+
                    C-73

-------
             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
               Figure C-32
        Annual Sulfur Deposition
        2010 Post CAAA Scenario
100 0 100200300400500 Miles
                                 0 - 5 kg/ha
                                 5-10 kg/ha
                                 10-15 kg/ha
                                 15-20 kg/ha
                                 20-100 kg/ha
                   C-74

-------
                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                   Figure C-33
          Annual Nitrogen Deposition
            2010 Pre CAAA Scenario
1DD LI  1DD2DD30D4DD  Miles
                                      0 - 5 kg/ha
                                      5-10 kg/ha
                                      10-15 kg/ha
                                      15-20 kg/ha
                                      20-100 kg/ha
                       C-75

-------
                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                 Figure C-34
         Annual Nitrogen Deposition
          2010 Post CAAA Scenario
                                   0 - 5 kg/ha
                                   5-10 kg/ha
                                   10-15 kg/ha
                                   15-20 kg/ha
                                   20- 100 kg/ha
                              H

                             +
100 0 100200 Miles
                     C-76

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Estimating the Effects of the
CAAA on Sulfur Dioxide, Oxides
of Nitrogen, and  Carbon
Monoxide

    Future-year Pre- and Post-CAAA ambient SO2,
NO, NO2, and CO concentrations were estimated by
adjusting 1990 concentrations using future-year to
base-year emissions  ratios.  The methodology for
calculating and applying these ratios  is described
below.  The resulting future-year concentration also
are discussed in this  section; histograms are used to
illustrate the relationship  between Post- and Pre-
CAAA emissions estimates.

Methodology for Estimating Future-
Year SO2, NO, NO2,  and CO
Concentrations
emissions for each grid cell was prepared.  This was
done for each season for the 1990 base year and 2000
and 2010 Pre- and Post-CAAA scenarios.

    Once the  emissions inventory was prepared,
emission-based ratios for SO2, NO, NO2, and CO
were generated. For each RADM grid cell, adjustment
factors were calculated comparing future-year (2000
and 2010) emissions under each projection scenarios
to base-year (1990) emissions.  Separate sets of ratios
were developed for  each season.

    Following  the  calculation  of  emission-based
ratios, future-year concentrations were then estimated
by applying these ratios to observed 1990  base-year
monitor concentrations.  For REMSAD grid cells
without   1990   monitor   concentration   data
interpolation  was  used  to  estimate   base-year
concentrations.  Adjustment factors for the grid cell
were then applied to the interpolated values.
    To estimate future-year SO2, NO, NO2, and CO
concentrations,  adjustment factors were calculated
using grid  cell  specific REMSAD emissions data
(Douglas  et  al.,  1999).    REMSAD's  domain
encompasses the 48 contiguous states and is divided
into 4,950 grid cells, each measuring approximately 56
km by 56 km. As part of the model's input, gridded
emission inventories  containing  seasonal Pre- and
Post-CAAA SO2, NO, NO2, and  CO emissions
estimates were  prepared.   These same emissions
estimates used as REMSAD input in other parts of
this prospective analysis, were also used to  calculate
SO2, NO, NO2,  and CO adjustment factors.

    Before emission-based ratios (adjustment factors)
were calculated,  two separate inventories maintained
individually for  REMSAD modeling purposes, one
containing elevated point source emissions  data and
the other  containing emissions  data for low-level
sources, were combined.  Each stack corresponding to
an elevated point source was assigned to a grid cell
based on location.  Emissions from elevated point
sources were then added to the low-level emissions
corresponding to the  grid cell in  which the stack is
located.   In  this manner, a file containing total
                                             C-77

-------
The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-35. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer
SO2 Emissions: 2010 Post-CAAA / 201 0 Pre-CAAA
60 -I
f 50-
(5
£ 40-
o
c
§ 30-
cr
^ 20-
0)
1 10-
ct
Q-\


median: 0.892








I —













0 40 0 45 0 50 0 55 0 60 0 65 0 70 0 75 0 80 0 85 0 90 0 95 1 00 1 05 1 10 1 15 1 20
Ratio
Note: 2.4 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.

Figure C-36. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer
NO Emissions: 2010 Post-CAAA / 201 0 Pre-CAAA
60-
53"
§ 50~
(5
B 40-
o
c
§ 30-
cr
£ 20-
0)
^ 10-
0)
£


median: 0.666









I — I — i i — i i — 1 — 1
— i r i— i n L-I n
~K 1 1 -T-TTl l-n-l 1 1 1 r-l 1 „














0.40 0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20
Ratio
Note: 3.3 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.
       C-78

-------
                              The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure C-37. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer
60 -
§ 50-
JU-
o
§ 30 -
cr
i 20 -
0)
« 10-
0)
£
o -I
0
NO2 Emissions: 201 0 Post-CAAA / 201 0 Pre-CAAA
median: 0.575




-H^_ ~hh .-r-LrTL-, r-.
hi— rTn fTli-i n
40 0 45 0 50 0 55 0 60 0 65 0 70 0 75 0 80 0 85 0 90 0 95 1 00 1 05 1 10 115 12
Ratio





D
Note: 2.7 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.
           Figure C-38. Distribution of Monitor-Level Ratios of Summer
                CO Emissions: 2010 Post-CAAA / 2010 Pre-CAAA
      0.40  0.45 0.50 0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00  1.05 1.10 1.15 1.20

                                        Ratio

Note: 15.7 percent of the distribution of ratios is less than 0.40.
                                      C-79

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Emission-Based Ratios for SO2, NO,
NO2, and CO

    Emission-based ratios were calculated for each
grid cell,  regardless of whether  or not  the cell
contained a monitoring site.  The figures included in
this section however, represent the distribution of
ratios for  actual monitoring site locations.  These
distributions reveal the relationship between future-
year and base-year concentrations.  A ratios greater
that  one  indicates  an   increase  in   ambient
concentration from the base-year,  while a ratio less
than one indicates a decrease.

    Our results indicate that compared to the base-
year, future-year concentrations of SO2, NO, NO2,
and  CO tend  to increase  under the  Pre-CAAA
scenario, while Post-CAAA concentrations for all four
pollutants except SO2 tend to decrease. For example,
the median 2010 Pre-CAAA  emission-based ratio for
SO2 is roughly 1.35, indicating an increase in median
2010 Pre-CAAA SO2 concentration of approximately
35 percent from the 1990 base-year.   The median
ratios for NO, NO2, and CO are roughly 1.13, 1.17,
and 1.05 respectively. Under  the Post-CAAA scenario
we estimate  that in 2010 NO,  NO2,  and  CO
concentrations will tend to be  approximately 25 and
30 percent below base-year levels.  The median 2010
Post-CAAA emission-based ratios for these  three
pollutants are roughly 0.74, 0.70, and 0.76 respectively.
We estimate that SO2, concentrations, however, will
increase in many areas of  the U.S.  The median
adjustment ratio for this pollutant is approximately
1.21.

Comparison of the Pre- and Post-
CAAA Ratios
estimate that future-year concentrations of SO2, NO,
NO2, and  CO are lower under  the Post-CAAA
scenario than under the Pre-CAAA scenario.

    Figures C-35 through C-38 show the distribution
of 2010 Post-CAAA to 2010  Pre-CAAA ratios for
summertime SO2, NO, NO2,  and  CO respectively.
These figures illustrate the regional variation in the
influence of the  1990 Amendments on ambient
concentrations of  these pollutants.   Although we
estimate concentrations in some areas will increase
under the Post-CAAA scenario relative to Pre-CAAA
estimates, the median summertime 2010 Post- to Pre-
CAAA ratios for SO2, NO, NO2, and CO are  0.90,
0.67, 0.58, and 0.72 respectively. These values, each
less than one, indicate that the central tendency for
summertime   2010   Post-CAAA   concentration
estimates of these four pollutants is to be lower than
2010 Pre-CAAA estimates.

    Table C-14 displays the  median  values  of the
distribution of Post-  to Pre-CAAA ratios  for the
summer months described above and the remaining
three seasons.  Just  as  for  the  summer; spring,
autumn, and winter median values are less than one.
Averaged over all four seasons, we estimate a median
reduction in SO2, NO, NO2, and CO concentrations
of  approximately   9,  33,  40, and  25  percent
respectively. RACT requirements, tailpipe emissions
standards, and NOX emissions trading account for the
bulk of the reduction in NO and NO2 concentrations.
Title I nonattainment area controls and Title II motor
vehicle provisions are responsible  for much of the
change in CO  concentrations, while regulation  of
utility and  motor  vehicle emissions account for
majority of the decrease in SO2 concentrations.
    Comparison of Pre- and Post-CAAA emission-
based adjustment factors also helps illustrate the effect
of the  1990 Amendments  on ambient  pollution
concentrations.   The ratio  of 2010  Post-CAAA
adjustment factors to 2010 Pre-CAAA adjustment
factors shows the impact of the 1990 Amendments
on ambient concentrations relative to  the baseline
scenario.   Ratios less  than  one  indicate  that we
                                              C-80

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
         Table C-14
         Median Values of the Distribution of Ratios of 2010 Post-CAAA/Pre-CAAA
         Adjustment Factors

Spring
Summer
Autumn
Winter
SO2
0.904
0.892
0.916
0.924
NO
0.669
0.666
0.677
0.686
NO2
0.598
0.575
0.614
0.626
CO
0.790
0.720
0.756
0.692
        Table C-15
        Background Concentrations used to Prepare the SO2, NO, NO2, and CO Profiles
Pollutant
SO2
NO
NO2
CO
Background Concentration
0
0
0
0.2 ppm
Attributes  and  Limitations of the
Modeling Analysis Methodology

    The Section 812 prospective modeling analysis
utilized a set of modeling tools and input databases
that for the most part had been developed, tested, and
evaluated as part other modeling studies (e.g., OTAG,
SIP modeling analyses, etc.).  This provided a cost-
effective  means  of  conducting  a national-scale
modeling exercise. The models used for the study are
among the most widely used and evaluated tools for
ozone and PM  modeling, and have been used for
previous regulatory applications. The modeling was
performed  in  manner  that  is  consistent  with
established practice and EPA guidelines regarding air
quality model applications.

    Although appropriate techniques were used for
the analysis  of each pollutant,  use  of  separate
models/techniques for  the analysis of ozone, PM, and
the other criteria pollutants does not allow a fully
integrated  analysis   of  the   effects   of  each.
Consequently, the results do not reflect all potential
interactions between pollutants (e.g., ozone and PM).
Ongoing research  involving  the  development and
testing of integrated  modeling tools (by EPA and
other organizations) may provide the opportunity for
fully  integrated  future  Section  812  prospective
modeling efforts.

    Analysis of the effects on the national scale (the
CAAA applies to the entire nation)  required the use of
several different domains with varying grid resolution
as well as  the use of  relatively coarse resolution for
many areas of the country for the grid-based modeling
effort.  The use of relatively coarse  grid resolution (12
km and greater) is a potentially important source of
uncertainty with respect to  the  modeling results.
Previous studies have  found that the response of the
UAM-V modeling system to emission reductions is
affected by grid  resolution  (Douglas et  al., 1996).
Thus, the use of grid-cell specific adjustment factors
to modify site-specific data may introduce  some
uncertainty into the future-year estimates.

    There are always uncertainties associated with the
use of modeling results  to estimate future-year air
quality.  These derive  from inaccuracies in the model
inputs   and/or  model   formulation   and  were
manifested in this study  in the  evaluation of model
performance. While  good model performance was
                                              C-81

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
achieved  for  most  model  applications,  ozone
concentrations were underestimated within the Los
Angeles  domain  and  PM  concentrations  were
underestimated during the fall and winter simulation
periods in the REMSAD application. RADM/RPM,
used as part of the PM and visibility analyses, showed
a tendency to overestimate  annual  average  sulfate
concentrations    and    warm   season    nitrate
concentrations.  Annual average nitrate predictions
generated by RADM/RPM, however, matched air
quality monitor data.

    The  acid deposition estimates included  in  the
present analysis are limited to the eastern states within
the RADM domain. Deposition in the western U.S.
was  not modeled for  this study.  Although acid
deposition is a problem primarily for the eastern U.S.,
deposition does occur in states west of the RADM
domain.  The magnitude of the benefits of reducing
acid deposition in these western states is likely to be
small,  however,  relative  to   the overall  benefits
associated with the Clean Air Act Amendments.

    The approach used in this study to estimate future
air quality (the combined use of observed  data and
modeling results) may, compared to a more standard
air quality model application (e.g., a model application
for attainment demonstration  purposes),  tend to
minimize the effects of many  of the uncertainties
mentioned in this section. The reason for this is that
the modeling results are used in a relative sense, rather
than an  absolute  sense.  This may  enhance  the
reliability of the future-year concentration estimates,
especially in the event that the uncertainty inherent in
the absolute concentration values is greater than that
associated with the response of the modeling  system
to changes in emissions.

    The  ratios  for adjusting the observed data  are
calculated using modeling results for a limited number
of simulation days and  it is  assumed, using this
methodology, that the ratios can be used to represent
longer time periods.  This  approach permits  the
estimation  of seasonal  and  annual  concentration
distributions.  Nevertheless,  the use of the model-
based ratios in adjusting data for an entire season or
year may result in some over- or underestimation of
the benefits  of the  simulated  control measures,
depending upon whether the simulation results for the
modeled days  are sufficiently representative of the
meteorological and air quality conditions that occurred
during 1990.

    Finally, there are  numerous ways in which the
adjustment factors could  be calculated and  applied.
The approach used in this study was designed  to make
the best use of the information  and level of detail
present in both the observations and the modeling
results (e.g., use of decile and quintile based ratios for
ozone  and  PM,  respectively).    The   specific
assumptions employed in  the  application  of the
methodology,  however, may affect the resulting air
quality profiles and should be carefully considered in
the subsequent use and interpretation of the  results.


Conclusions and
Recommendations for Further
Research

    The results from the air  quality  modeling
component of the Section  812 prospective  analysis
indicate that for both future years (2000 and 2010),
the measures and programs associated with the CAAA
are expected to result in lower  concentrations of
ozone, PM, and the other criteria pollutants compared
to a future-year scenario without such programs.  The
degree of improvement in  air quality varies among the
criteria pollutants and the  various portions of the
country included in the modeling analysis. The results
also differ between the two future years, such  that the
improvements are greater and more widespread for
2010.

    The modeling analysis relied on a set of modeling
tools and input databases that (for the most part) had
been  developed, tested, and evaluated as part other
modeling studies. It also  made use of several of the
most widely used and comprehensively tested tools
for ozone  and PM modeling. The  modeling  was
performed  in  a manner that  is  consistent   with
established practice and EPA guidelines regarding air
quality model applications. However, as noted in the
                                               C-82

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
previous section  of this report,  there are several
features  of the modeling  analysis  that  could be
improved upon, especially considering recent advances
in the development of integrated modeling tools and
techniques.  Recommendations for future air quality
modeling  efforts  to  support  the  Section  812
prospective analyses include:

    •   Selection of modeling episode periods using
        an integrated episode selection procedure
        (e.g., Deuel and Douglas, 1998) such that the
        modeling periods are representative of the
        historical meteorological and air quality
        conditions  and can be  used to  represent
        seasonal and annual ozone, PM, and visibility
        metrics

    •   Reconfiguration of the modeling domain(s)
        such that a consistent use  of high-resolution
        grids  over  urban  areas  with   complex
        meteorological or emissions-based  features
        are accommodated.

    •   Review and update of the  input data and
        input preparation techniques to include, for
        example,  updated (more  recent)  emissions
        estimates  (anthropogenic  and  biogenic),
        higher-resolution   meteorological  inputs,
        enhanced  estimates  of future  land-use
        patterns (reflecting growth of urban  areas,
        changes  in  the interstate   transportation
        networks, etc.).

    •   Use of an integrated modeling tool for the
        simultaneous  analysis   of the  effects of
        emissions changes on ozone, PM, and other
        pollutants    (several    tools,   including
        MODELS-3 and UAM-VPM, are currently
        undergoing development and testing).   A
        comprehensive   evaluation   of   model
        performance will be required.

    •   Continued  review  and  enhancement  (as
        appropriate) of the methodology  for  the
        combined use of observed data and modeling
        results.
                                               C-83

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

BAAQMD.  1998.  "Bay Area - North Central Coast Photochemical Modeling Investigation of Ozone
        Formation and Transfer" available electronically at:
        http://sparc2.baaqmd.gov/MontereyPri/MontereyPri.html.

Binkowski, F.S. and U. Shankar. 1995. "The Regional Particulate Matter Model 1. Model description and
        preliminary results." /. of Geophysical Research. 100: 26,191-209.

Chang, J.S., R.A.  Brost, I.S.A. Isaksen, S. Madromch, P. Middleton, W.R. Stockwell, and CJ. Walcek. 1987.
        "A Three-Dimensional Eulerian Acid Deposition Model: Physical Concepts and Formulation."  /. of
        Geophysical Research. 92: 14,681-700.

Chang, J.S., P.B. Middleton, W.R. Stockwell, CJ. Walcek, J.E. Pleim, H.H. Lansford, F.S. Binkowski, S.
        Madronich, N.L. Seaman, and D.R. Stauffer. 1990.  "The Regional Acid Deposition Model and
        Engineering Model". NAPAP SOS/T Report 4. In: Acidic Deposition: State of Science and Technology,
        Volume 1. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, Washington D.C., December.

Dennis, R.L., W.R.  Barchet, T.L. Clark, and S.K. Seilkop. 1990.  "Evaluation of Regional Acid Deposition
        Models (Part I)."  NAPAP SOS/T Report 5. In: Acidic Deposition: State of Science and Technology, Volume
        1. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, Washington, D.C., September.

Dennis, R.L., J.N. McHenry, W.R. Barchet, F.S. Binkowski, and  D.W. Byun. 1993. "Correcting RADM's
        sulfate underprediction: Discovery and correction of model errors and testing the corrections
        through comparisons against field data." Atmospheric Environment. 27A(6): 975-997.

Dennis, R. 1995.  "Estimation of Regional Air Quality and Deposition Changes Under Alternative 812
        Emissions  Scenarios Predicted by the Regional Acid Deposition Model, RADM." Draft Report for
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  ORD/NERL. October.

Dennis, R.L. 1997.  "Using the Regional Acid Deposition Model  to Determine the Nitrogen Deposition
        Airshed of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed." Atmospheric Deposition to the Great Lakes and Coastal
        Waters. Ed. J.E. Baker, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Pennsacola, FL: 393-
        413.

Deuel, H. P, N. K. Lolk, and S. G. Douglas. 1996. "Preparation of Air Quality and Other Inputs  for
        Application of the UAM-V Model for the 1-15 July 1988 OTAG Modeling Episode."  Systems
        Applications  International, Inc.,  San Rafael, California (SYSAPP-96/51).

Deuel, H. P, and S. G. Douglas. 1998.  "Episode Selection for the Integrated Analysis of Ozone,  Visibility,
        and Acid Deposition for the Southern Appalachian Mountains." Systems Applications International,
        Inc., San Rafael, California (SYSAPP-98/07rl).

Douglas, S. G., J. L. Fieber, A. B. Hudischewskyj, and J. L. Haney.  1994. "Photochemical Modeling of the
        Maricopa County Ozone Nonattainment Area." Systems Applications International, Inc., San
        Rafael, California (SYSAPP-94/079).

                                              C-84

-------
                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Douglas, S. G., N. K. Lolk, and J. L. Haney. 1996. "Investigation of the Effects of Horizontal Grid
        Resolution on UAM-V Simulation Results for Three Urban Areas."  Systems Application
        International, Inc., San Rafael, California (SYSAPP-96/65).

Douglas, S.G., R. Iwamiya, G. Mansell, H. Tunggal, and C. van Landingham. 1999. "Air Quality Modeling
        to Support the Section 812 Prospective Analysis". ICF Kaiser Consulting Group, Systems
        Applications International, Inc., San Rafael, California (SYSAPP-99/09).

External Review Panel. 1994. "Report on RADM Evaluation for the Eulerian Model Evaluation Field Study
        Program." Ed. Anton Eliassen. Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Norway.

Langstaff, J. E., S. Eberly, and K. A. McAuliffe.  1994. "Retrospective Analysis of SO2, NOX, and CO Air
        Quality in the United States." Systems Application International, Inc., San Rafael, California.

Langstaff,]. E., and M. E. Woolfolk. 1995 "Retrospective Analysis of PM Air Quality in the United States."
        Systems Application International, Inc., San Rafael, California.

McHenry,J.N. and R.L. Dennis.  1994. "The Relative Importance of Oxidation Pathways and Clouds to
        Atmospheric Ambient Sulfate Production as Predicted by the Regional Acid Deposition Model."
        Journal of AppM Meteorology. 33(7): 890-905.

OTAG. 1997. OTAG Regional and Urban Scale Modeling Workgroup. Modeling Report.  Version 1.1."

Pechan. 1998. "Emission Projections for the Clean Air Act Section 812 Prospective Analysis." E. H.
        Pechan and Associates.

Pitchford, M.L. and W.C. Malm.  1994. "Development and applications of a standard visual index."
        Presented at the Conference on Visibility and Fine Particulates, Vienna, Austria. Atmospheric
        Environment. (28):  1055-63.

SAL 1990. "User's Guide for the Urban Airshed Model, Volume I:  User's Manual for UAM (CB-IV).  U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency (SP-450/4-90-007b; NTIS No. PB91-13235).

SAL 1992. "User's Guide for the Urban Airshed Model, Volume IV: User's Manual for the Emissions
        Preprocessor System 2.0".  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA-450/4-90-007D), May 27,
        1992.

SCAQD. 1994. "Ozone Modeling - Performance Evaluation." Draft Technical Report V-B.  South Coast
        Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, California.

SCAQD. 1996. "1997 Air Quality Management Plan." South Coast Air Quality Management District,
        Diamond Bar, California.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. "VOC/PM speciation Data Base Management System
        (SPECIATE), Version 4.1."  Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park,
        North Carolina (EPA-450/4-91-027).


                                               C-85

-------
                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. "Acid Deposition Standard Feasibility Study Report to
       Congress." Office of Air and Radiation, Acid Rain Division, Washington, D.C. (EPA-430/R-95-
       OOla).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. "Deposition of Air Pollutants to the Great Waters." Office of
       Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC (EPA-453/R-97-011).
                                              C-86

-------
Human  Health  Effects
of Criteria  Pollutants
Introduction

   In response to the mandate of section 812 of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA), EPA
identified and  estimated  the  quantifiable  health
benefits Americans should enjoy in 2000 and 2010 due
to improved air quality resulting from the CAAA. The
results suggest that the CAAA will result in significant
reductions in  mortality, respiratory illness,  heart
disease, and other adverse health effects, in addition to
those reported in EPA's (1997) retrospective analysis
of the Clean Air Act. In that analysis,  the Agency
found that significant health benefits accrued between
1970 and 1990, especially as a consequence of the
reductions in ambient particulate matter (PA/1).

   This appendix presents an overview of EPA's
approach for modeling the human health effects of
the CAAA. It outlines the principles used to guide the
human health  benefits analysis,  describes methods
used to  quantify criteria air pollutant  exposure
nationwide, and discusses issues  that arise in using
health effect information.  Following this overview,
the appendix presents the modeling results, reported
as estimates of avoided incidences of adverse health
effects.
Health Effects Modeling
Approach

   In the section 812 retrospective analysis, EPA
(1997) developed an approach for quantifying the
effects  of reduced pollutant exposure in the  48
continental states and the District of Columbia, with
particular focus on those effect categories for which
monetary benefits could be  estimated.  The  study
design adopted for this analysis  follows  a similar
approach, using a sequence of linked analytical models
to estimate benefits. The first step is an analysis of the
likely  implementation  activities  undertaken  in
response to the CAAA. These forecasted activities
provided  a basis for  modeling  criteria  pollutant
emissions under the two scenarios considered (the
Pre-CAAA scenario and the Post-CAAA scenario), as
documented in Appendix A.  The emissions estimates
were input into the air quality models (Appendix C),
and ambient pollutant concentrations estimated by the
air quality models were input into the health benefits
model, the focus of this appendix.

    The health benefits model relies on two inputs:
(1) forecasted changes in pollutant exposures across
the study period, and (2) concentration-response (C-
R) functions that quantify the relationship between
the forecasted changes in exposure and  expected
changes in specific health  effects .We  discuss  the
inputs used for the 48 continental states and  the
District of Columbia below.1

Quantifying Changes in Pollutant
Exposures

    Quantifying changes in pollutant exposures in this
analysis relies on two inputs: (1) forecasts of ambient
pollution levels at the available air quality monitors in
the 48 contiguous states, and (2) extrapolations from
the available  air quality  monitors (which are not
uniformly distributed across the U.S.)  to a population
grid system of eight km by eight km cells that covers
the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia.
    1 These inputs could also be used to estimate exposure in the
border regions of Mexico and Canada that might have improved
air quality in the Post-CAAA scenario.
                                           D-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Forecasting 2000 and 2010
    Pollution Levels at Ambient Air
    Quality Monitors

    When quantifying adverse human health effects,
the section 812 prospective analysis estimated 2000
and 2010 ambient concentrations for both the Pre-
CAAA and Post-CAAA scenarios for the  following
pollutants and air quality parameters:

    •   Particulate matter, less than 10 microns in
        diameter (PM10)
    •   Particulate matter, less  than  2.5 microns in
        diameter (PM25)
    •   Ozone (O3)
    •   Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
    •   Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
    •   Carbon monoxide (CO)

    The sixth criteria pollutant,  lead  (Pb), is not
included in this analysis since airborne emissions of
lead were  virtually eliminated by  pre-1990  CAA
programs.   The  methods used  to estimate the
concentrations  of these pollutants at monitors are
described in Appendix C.

    Extrapolating Forecasts at Air
    Quality Monitors to Population Grid
    Cells

    The next step is to extend forecasts for a limited
number of air quality monitors to estimate population
exposure at all locations in the continental United
States, using the  Criteria  Air  Pollutant  Modeling
System (CAPMS).  CAPMS divides the United States
into eight kilometer by eight kilometer grid cells and
estimates the changes in incidence of adverse health
effects associated with given changes in air quality in
each grid cell. The national incidence change (or the
changes within individual states or counties) is then
calculated as the sum of grid-cell-specific changes. To
calculate changes in population exposure in a grid cell,
CAPMS requires data on the population in the grid-
cell and the change in air quality.
    First, grid-cell-specific population counts for 1990
are derived from  U.S. Census Bureau  block level
population data (Wessex, 1994).  Future year grid-cell
population estimates are then extrapolated from 1990
grid-cell population levels using the ratio of future-
year  and  1990  state-level  population  estimates
provided by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
(1995). CAPMS assumes that all grid cell populations
in a state grow at the same rate as the state population
as a whole (where  a grid cell is defined as being in a
state if the grid  cell centroid is in the state).

    Second, CAPMS  requires estimates of two air
quality regimes  at CAPMS grid  cell centers: baseline
(in  this case, 1990) air quality levels  and regulatory
alternative air quality levels in future years  (in this case,
2000 and 2010). Air quality inputs to CAPMS for pre-
and Post-CAAA scenarios must  use  the  averaging
time required by the C-R functions being used.2  For
example, a C-R function relating mortality to annual
median PM25 concentrations requires that annual
median PM25 concentrations be available at CAPMS
grid cell centers.  Although the input PM25 data must
be in the form  of daily averages, the  monitors need
not be at CAPMS grid cell centers. Given any set of
location-specific air quality data,  CAPMS  interpolates
the corresponding air quality values at each CAPMS
grid cell center.

    To reduce computational time when estimating
the change in  health effects associated with daily
pollution levels, CAPMS approximates  a year's (or
season's) worth of daily pollutant concentrations at
each   monitor   by   20   "bins"   of   pollutant
concentrations.   Each bin represents  five percent of
the daily pollutant concentrations in  the period of
interest, and is  set at the  midpoint of the percentile
range it represents. For n = 20 and a year's worth of
observations, the first bin represents the first (lowest)
five percent  of the distribution  of  365  pollutant
concentrations at the given location, and is set at the
2.5th percentile value; the second  bin represents the
next five percent of the distribution of daily values,
                                                        2The development of C-R functions is discussed later in this
                                                    appendix.
                                                D-2

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
and  is set at the 7.5th percentile value, and so on.
Each of the twenty bins therefore represents 18.25
(=365/20) days.  Interpolation of air quality levels at
CAPMS grid cell centers is  based on these input
location-specific  bins, so that the annual incidence
changes in each  grid  cell are calculated for twenty
pollutant concentrations  (the 20 bins of air quality)
rather than for 365 pollutant concentrations.  The
resulting incidence change is then multiplied by 18.25
to reconstruct an entire years' worth of incidence
change in the CAPMS grid cell.

    As shown in Figure 1, actual ambient pollution
data is only available from limited monitor sites. Data
must be extrapolated  to unmonitored locations, in
order to estimate the impact  of air pollution on the
health and welfare effects considered in this  analysis.
The available air monitoring  data were extrapolated
from all available monitor locations to a grid of eight
km by eight km population grid-cells throughout the
contiguous 48 states, using a Voronoi neighbor
averaging (VNA) spatial interpolation procedure.3

    The  VNA procedure interpolates  air  quality
estimates from the set of surrounding air quality
monitors to the center of each population grid-cell.
The VNA procedure is a generalization of planar
interpolation.  Rather than  arbitrarily limiting the
selection  of monitors,  VNA identifies  the set  of
monitors that  best "surrounds" the center of each
grid-cell by  identifying which  monitor is  closest
(considering both angular direction and horizontal
distance)  in each direction from the grid-cell center.
Each  selected monitor  will  likely  be the  closest
monitor for multiple directions.  The set of monitors
found using this approach forms a polygon around the
grid-cell center.

    For each grid cell, CAPMS calculates the  distance
to each member of a set of monitors surrounding that
grid cell.  Monitors close to the  grid cell are assumed
to yield a more accurate air quality description of that
grid cell, and are given a larger weight when calculating
the average air quality for that grid cell.  Conversely,
monitors that  are further away receive less weight.
After  determining  the  final set  of  surrounding
monitors, the grid cell's air quality level is calculated as
an inverse, distance-weighted average of the air quality
levels at the selected monitors.

    Air quality estimates generated using this VNA
method are likely to be most uncertain at population
grid cell  locations  far  removed from the nearest
monitor.  For example,  if a grid cell encompasses a
relatively unpolluted rural area, but the nearest (albeit
distant)  monitors   are  measuring  air  quality  in
industrialized urban areas, the VNA method described
above will overestimate the pollution level  for that
grid cell.   As a result, this monitor-based  VNA
extrapolation method is used only at grid cells located
within 50 kilometers of an air pollution monitor.

    At distances greater than 50 kilometers from a
monitor, additional information is needed to improve
the estimates of air quality in unmonitored areas. A
modified VNA method  incorporating both  monitor
data and air quality modeling predictions is employed
at these  grid  cell  locations.   In  addition to  the
distance-weighted     averaging     of     monitor
concentrations, this modified extrapolation method
incorporates a spatial adjustment factor that reflects
the ratio of model-derived air quality predictions at
the target and source locations. The addition of the
modeling results helps  account  for  differences in
geography,  meteorology, land use and other factors
affecting air pollution levels between the target and
source  areas.   Additional details  on  both  VNA
extrapolation methods can be found in Abt Associates
(1999).
    3For  locations  within 50  kilometers of a  monitor,  the
interpolation method is the same as that used by Abt Associates
(1998) for the NOX SIP  call analysis; previously termed  the
"convex polygon" method, it is more accurately described as
Voronoi neighbor averaging (VNA) spatial interpolation, which
will be used throughout this document.
                                                  D-3

-------
               841 Ozone Monitors
761 SQ2 Monitors
           Figure D-l
Location of Air Quality Monitors
      Section 812 Analysis
              2048PM Monitors
                                                            348 NO2 Monitors
 494 CO Monitors
                                                          D-4

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Quantifying Human Health Effects of
Exposure

    To  calculate point estimates of the changes  in
incidence of a given selection of adverse health and
welfare effects associated with a given set of air quality
changes, CAPMS performs  the following steps for
each grid cell: (1) Interpolation of the air quality in the
baseline scenario and in the control scenario at each
CAPMS grid  cell center for each pollutant.   (2)
Calculation of the changes in air quality from baseline
to control scenario in the CAPMS grid cell.  The
changes in air quality are calculated as the differences
between the baseline bins and the  corresponding
control scenario bins. (3) Identification of the selected
C-R functions being used, and the required baseline
incidence rates and the relevant grid cell population.
(4)  Calculation of the change in incidence of each
adverse health effect for which a C-R function has
been identified.  The resulting annual incidence change
for each grid cell  is then summed with those of the
other grid cells, to calculate the estimated change  in
incidence nationwide.
Types of Health Studies

    Research on  the health effects of air pollution
strongly suggests  that reductions in the incidence of
adverse health effects are a significant benefit of air
pollution control.  The available human health studies
that could serve  as the basis  of the section  812
prospective assessment  can  be  categorized  into
chamber studies and epidemiology studies.  Chamber
studies  involve examination of human responses to
controlled conditions in a  laboratory setting, while
epidemiological studies investigate the association
between  exposure  to ambient air pollution  and
observed health effects in  a study population.  The
relative advantages of reliance on each type of research
are described below.

Chamber Studies

    Chamber studies of air pollution involve exposing
human subjects to various levels of air pollution in a
carefully  controlled  and   monitored  laboratory
situation. The physical condition of the subjects is
measured before, during and  after the  exposure.
These measurements can include general biomedical
information (e.g.,  pulse  rate and  blood pressure),
physiological effects  specifically  induced by the
pollutant (e.g.,  altered lung function), the onset of
symptoms (e.g., wheezing or chest pain), or the ability
of the individual  to perform  specific physical or
cognitive tasks (e.g., maximum sustainable speed on a
treadmill).  These studies often involve exposing the
individuals  to  pollutants  while exercising,  which
increases respiration and the amount of pollution
introduced into the lungs.

    One advantage of chamber studies is that they can
potentially establish cause-effect relationships between
pollutants  and certain human  health  effects.  In
addition, repeated experiments altering the pollutant
level, exercise regime, and type of participants can
potentially  identify effect thresholds, the impact of
recovery  (rest)  periods, and  the  differences in
response among population groups.  While  cost
considerations   tend  to  limit  the number  of
participants and experimental variants examined in a
single study, chamber  studies can follow  rigorous
laboratory  scientific protocols,  such as  the use of
placebos (clean  air) to establish a baseline level of
effects and precise measurement  of certain  health
effects of concern.

    There are drawbacks to using chamber studies as
the basis  for  a comprehensive  benefits  analysis.
Chamber studies are most appropriate for examining
acute symptoms caused by exposure to a pollutant for
a few hours. While this permits examination of some
important health effects  from air pollution, such as
broncho-constriction in asthmatic individuals caused
by sulfur dioxide, it precludes studying effects caused
by long term exposure.  Another  drawback is that
health  effects  measured  in  some well-designed
chamber studies are selected on the basis of the ability
to measure precisely an  effect, for example forced
expiratory  volume, rather  than a  larger  symptom.
Some of these measurable but relatively minor health
effects, such as reduced lung function, have an unclear
impact on future  medical condition and  lifestyle,
although some research discussed later has addressed
this question.

    Ethical considerations  in experiments  involving
humans also impose important limits on the potential
scope of chamber research.  Chronic effects cannot be
                                                 D-5

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
investigated  because  people  cannot  be  kept in
controlled conditions for an extended period of time,
and because chronic effects are generally irreversible.
Participation is generally restricted to healthy subjects,
or at  least excludes  people  with  existing health
conditions that compromise their safe inclusion in the
study.  This can result in a lack of  direct evidence
about populations of most concern, such as people
who already have serious respiratory diseases.  Ethical
considerations   also  limit  experimental  pollutant
concentrations  to relatively modest  exposure levels,
and  confine studies to examining only mild health
effects that are believed to do no permanent damage.
Obviously, for ethical reasons, evidence from chamber
studies   cannot  be   obtained  on the   possible
relationship between  pollution and  mortality, heart
attack, strokes, or cancer.

    The information derived from chamber research
raises some questions as to how well it applies to the
general population and their  activity patterns  and
pollution exposures. (1) The dose-response functions
developed from chamber research are specific to the
population  participating in  the  study.    Chamber
studies typically study a small population — certainly
much  smaller   than  those  typically  evaluated in
epidemiological  studies (discussed below) — so there
are concerns that the  results may not apply to the
much  larger   and  likely  more  diverse   general
population.  (2) Chamber studies  evaluate only a
certain number of activity patterns (e.g., exercise), and
cannot replicate the diverse pattern of activity seen in
the course of a day.  (3) Chamber studies  cannot easily
replicate the varied pollution levels to which people
are exposed during the course of their day at work, on
the freeway, at home, and other places.

    As  discussed  below in  the  section  on health
effects study selection, the generalizability of results is
an important factor in this analysis. Studies that use a
large, diverse group of subjects are easier to apply to
the general population than studies using smaller,
narrowly defined group of subjects.  This does  not,
however, rule out studies that  focus on asthmatics,
children, or the elderly, since these groups may be
particularly sensitive to air pollution. Similarly, studies
that use exposure regimes and exercise levels similar to
what large  groups of the population experience are
easier  to apply in  a benefits  model than are  less
representative studies.
Epidemiological Studies

    Epidemiological studies present the results of a
statistical analysis of the relationship between ambient
pollution exposure and adverse health effects. The
data for these studies includes ambient  air quality
monitoring data and adverse health effects data such
as mortality incidence  (e.g.,  National Center for
Health  Statistics,  1994),  hospital admissions  (e.g.,
Graves and Gillum, 1997), questionnaires (e.g., Adams
and Marano, 1995), and diaries that are kept by study
participants over a period of time (e.g., Ostro et al.,
1991).

    At  least  to  some  extent,  these  estimated
relationships implicitly take into account complex real-
world human activity patterns  (including actions to
avoid air pollution), spatial and temporal differences
in air pollution distributions, and possible  synergistic
effects of multiple pollutants. Epidemiological studies
typically involve a large number of people and may
not suffer as much from the extrapolation problems
common to chamber studies,  which often have a
limited number of subjects. In addition, observable
health endpoints  are measured, unlike  chamber
studies, which often monitor endpoints that do not
result  in  observable  health   effects   (e.g.  forced
expiratory volume).

    Two   types  of  epidemiological   studies  are
considered for inclusion in this analysis: individual-
level cohort studies  and population-level ecological
studies.  Cohort-based studies track individuals over
a certain period of time, with periodic evaluation of
the individuals' exposure and health status.  Cohort
studies can either follow a group of initially disease-
free individuals forward in time (a prospective cohort)
or gather historical data on exposure and disease for
a given group (a retrospective cohort). Studies about
relatively  rare events such as  cancer incidence or
mortality can require tracking the  individuals over a
long period of time, while more common events (e.g.,
respiratory symptoms) occur with sufficient frequency
to evaluate the relationship over a shorter time period.
An  important feature  of cohort studies is that
information is collected about each individual that
may include other variables that could be correlated
with both the exposure and the disease outcome, such
as smoking or income. If investigators do not identify
and control for these variables, called confounders, in
                                                 D-6

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
a study, they may produce  a spurious  association
between air pollution and adverse health effects.

    A second type of study used in this analysis is a
population-level ecological study. These studies assess
the  relationship  between  population-wide  health
information  (such as counts for daily mortality,
hospital admissions, or emergency room visits)  and
ambient levels of air pollution.  There are two types of
such studies: cross-sectional and time-series studies.
Using data at a point in  time  from a variety of
locations,  cross-sectional   studies   examine  the
relationship between pollution exposure and adverse
health effects, while trying to  control confounding
variables.  Cross-sectional studies are not  as desirable
as prospective cohort studies, in part, because of their
failure to control for important  covariates such as
smoking.4  Rather than look at variety of locations at
one point in time, a time series analysis  studies a single
location  and typically examines the  relationship
between daily changes in  ambient pollution level and
daily changes  in adverse health effects.  An important
advantage of the time-series design is that it allows the
population to serve as its own control with regard to
certain factors such as race and gender,  and  is thus
similar to a cohort study (Schwartz, 1997, p.  372).
Other factors that change  over time can also affect
health (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, access to
health care, employment, and nutrition).  However,
since such potential confounding factors  are unlikely
to vary from  day to day in the same manner as air
pollution levels, these factors are unlikely to affect the
magnitude of the association between air  pollution
and daily variations in human health responses.

    Drawbacks to epidemiological studies include
difficulties associated with  adequately characterizing
exposure  to   individuals (that tends  to lead to  a
downward bias in the estimated pollution-health effect
relationship),  and  uncontrolled confounding variables,
that can potentially lead to  spurious conclusions.  In
particular, air pollutants are often highly correlated, so
it is  difficult  to determine  which may be associated
with an adverse effect. In  addition, epidemiological
studies, by design, are unable to definitively prove a
causal relationship between an exposure  and a given
    4Criticisms of cross-sectional studies are considered in Evans
et al. (1984), Lipfert and Wyzga (1995), and others.
health effect; they can only identify associations or
correlations  between  exposure  and  the  health
outcome.  However, given the major advantage of
epidemiological  studies  — relatively severe health
effects   may  be   observed  in   a large,  more
heterogeneous population — epidemiological studies
are used as the basis for determining the majority of
health effects and  C-R  functions  in this analysis.
Chamber studies are used if there are health effects
observed  in  chamber  studies  not observed  in
epidemiological studies, such as shortness of breath in
young asthmatics induced by SO2  (e.g., Linn  et al.,
1987).
Selection of C-R  Functions

    This section describes the methods used to derive
the C-R functions used in this analysis to quantify the
effect of CO, NO2, SO2, O3, and PM on people's
health.  It discusses the general issues that arise with
the choice and use of C-R functions, and the issues
specific  to C-R functions for mortality and morbidity.

C-R Function General Issues

    Derivation of C-R Functions

    For expository simplicity, the following discussion
focuses on PM C-R functions, although it applies to
all of the health effects and pollutants considered in
the 812  prospective analysis.  In what follows, the
health effect estimated is simply denoted as y, and is
estimated at a single location (population cell), where
a change in PM air quality (APM) corresponds to a
change in the health endpoint (Ay). The calculation of
Ay depends on a C-R function, derived typically from
an epidemiological study.

    There  are a variety of epidemiological studies in
the  science  literature,  making  it  important  to
understand the  nuances  of  each  study before
developing a C-R function.  Different epidemiological
studies may have estimated the relationship between
PM and a particular health endpoint in different
locations.  The  C-R functions estimated by  these
studies may differ from each other in  several  ways.
They may have different functional forms; they may
have measured PM concentrations in different ways;
                                                 D-7

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
they may have characterized the health endpoint, y, in
slightly different ways; or they may have considered
different  types  of populations.  Some studies have
assumed that the relationship between y and PM is
best described by a linear form, where the relationship
between y and PM is estimated by a linear regression
in which y is the dependent variable and PM is one of
several independent variables, while other studies have
assumed that the relationship is best described by a
log-linear form  (i.e.,  the relationship  between  the
natural logarithm of y and PM  is estimated by a linear
regression).5 Some studies of the relationship between
ambient  PM  concentrations  and  mortality have
excluded  accidental  deaths  from  their  mortality
counts; others have included  all deaths.  One study
may have  measured  daily  (24-hour)  average  PM
concentrations, while another study may have used
two-day averages.   Finally,  one study may have
considered changes in the health endpoint only among
members of a particular subgroup of the population
(e.g., individuals 65 and older), while other  studies may
have considered the entire  population in the study
location.

    Estimating the relationship between PM and a
health endpoint, y, consists of two steps: (1)  choosing
a  functional form  of the  relationship,  and   (2)
estimating the values of the parameters in the function
assumed.  The two most common functional forms in
the epidemiological literature on health effects are the
log-linear and the linear relationship. The log-linear
relationship is of the form:
                                                (1)
or, equivalently,
                                                (2)
where the parameter B is the incidence of y when the
concentration of PM is zero, the parameter [3 is the
coefficient of PM, ln(y) is the natural logarithm of y,
and a = ln(B).6  If the functional form of the C-R
relationship  is log-linear, the relationship  between
APM (= PMbasdme - PMafteIchmg?!)  and Ay is:
Ay = y - ya
                                (3)
where y is the baseline incidence of the health effect
(i.e., the incidence before the change in PM).  For a
log-linear  C-R  function, the  relative  risk  (RR)
associated with the change in PM is:

            J after change
 RR
     APM
                y
                                (4)
    Epidemiological studies often report a relative risk
for a given APM, rather than the C-R coefficient, [3.
The coefficient can  be derived  from the  reported
relative risk and APM, however, by solving for [3 in
equation (4):
ln(M)
 APM
                                                (5)
    The linear relationship is of the form:

       y = a + j8 • PM ,                      (6)
    5The log-linear form used in the epidemiological literature on
ozone-  and PM-related health effects is often referred to as
"Poisson regression" because the underlying dependent variable is
a count (e.g., number  of  deaths), believed  to be  Poisson
distributed.  The model may be estimated by regression techniques
but is often estimated by maximum likelihood techniques.  The
form of the model, however, is still log-linear.
     Other covariates besides pollution clearly affect mortality.
The parameter B might be thought of as containing these other
covariates, for example, evaluated at their means.  That is, B =
B0exp{(3jXj + ... + |3nxn}, where B0 is the incidence of y when all
covariates in the model are zero, and xb  ... , x,, are the other
covariates evaluated at their mean values. The parameter B drops
out of the model, however, when changes in y are calculated, and
is therefore not important.
                                                   D-8

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
where a  incorporates  all  the  other independent
variables in the  regression (evaluated at  their mean
values, for example) times their respective coefficients.
When the C-R  function  is linear, the relationship
between a relative risk and the coefficient, [3, is not
quite as straightforward as it is when the function is
log-linear. Studies using linear functions usually report
the coefficient directly.

    If the functional form of the C-R relationship is
linear, the relationship between APM and Ay is simply:
       Aj; = /3 • APM .
(7)
    If the C-R function is linear, equation (7) may be
used to estimate Ay associated with APM, assuming
the measurement of APM is consistent with the PM
measurement used in the health effects study from
which the C-R function was derived. If the function
is  log-linear, the  baseline  incidence  for  y and  an
appropriate  measure  for  APM may be  used  in
equation (3).

    A few  epidemiological studies, estimating the
relationship between certain morbidity endpoints and
air pollution, have used functional forms other than
linear  or  log-linear  forms.    Of these,  logistic
regressions are the most common.  The details of the
models used in these studies are given in the papers
reporting the methods and results of the studies.

    Thresholds

    When conducting chamber and epidemiological
studies, C-R functions may be  estimated with and
without explicit thresholds.  Air pollution levels below
the threshold are assumed to have  no associated
adverse health effects.  When  a threshold is not
assumed, as is often the case in epidemiological work,
any exposure level is assumed to pose a non-zero risk
of response to at least one segment of the population.

    Thresholds may also  be incorporated by a policy
analyst using a C-R function derived from the original
study, even if the original study did not assume a
threshold.   A threshold may be  set at any point,
although  some  points may  be considered  more
obvious  candidates than  others.    One  possible
assumption is that there is a threshold at  the non-
anthropogenic background  level of the  pollutant.
Another possibility is there is a threshold at the lowest
observed level in the study that estimated the C-R
function.  Another might be a relevant standard for
the pollutant.

    One method to conduct policy analysis assuming
a threshold model is  to simply truncate  the C-R
function at the threshold (i.e., to exclude any physical
effect changes associated with, say, PM levels below
the designated threshold).  This method  uses  the
original C-R function, but calculates the change in PM
as  [max(T,  baseline  PM)  -  max(T,  regulatory
alternative  PM)], where  T  denotes  the  designated
threshold.  An alternative method is to replace the
original C-R function with a "hockey stick" model
that best approximates the original function that was
estimated using actual data. A typical  hockey stick C-
R function is horizontal up to a designated threshold
PM level, T, and  is linear with a positive slope for PM
concentrations greater than T.   This is  just  the
following variation on equation (2) above:


   ln(j;) = a  for PM  < T ,                (8)

  = a + /3-PM   forPM > T,  wherefi>0. (9)

    The specification of such a 'hockey stick' model,
while theoretically preferable to  a simple truncation
model, requires re-analysis of the underlying data from
the original health effect study.  Such primary re-
analysis is beyond the  scope of the section 812
analysis. Alternatively, if a simple truncation model is
used, application of the resulting C-R  function would
likely result in a significant underestimate of the health
effects avoided by reductions in  pollutant exposures
above the assumed threshold.

    The possible existence of an effect threshold is a
very important scientific question and issue for policy
analyses such as the section 812 analysis. However,
there is currently no scientific basis for selecting a
particular threshold for the effects considered in this
                                                 D-9

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
analysis,  if  a threshold  is  defined  as  a  level
characterized by  an absence of observable effects.
Therefore,  this  analysis  assumes  there  are no
thresholds for modeling health effects. However, the
potential impact of alternative threshold assumptions
for PM-related premature mortality is explored as a
key sensitivity analysis.

    Pooling  Studies

    When only a single study has estimated the C-R
relationship between a pollutant and a given health
endpoint, the estimation  of a population cell-specific
incidence change is  straightforward.    For  some
endpoints,  however,  C-R  functions  have   been
estimated by several studies, often in several locations.
 In this case, if the input components  (e.g., functional
forms, pollutant averaging times, study populations)
are all the same (or very similar), a pooled, "central
tendency" C-R function can be  derived from the
multiple study-specific C-R functions.

    One potential method of pooled analysis is simply
averaging the coefficients from all the studies.  This
has the  advantage of simplicity, but the disadvantage
of not taking into  account the measured uncertainty of
each  of the  estimates.   Estimates  with  great
uncertainty  surrounding them  are given the same
weight as estimates with very little uncertainty.

    An  alternative approach to pooling the estimates
from different studies is  to give more  weight to
estimates from studies with little reported uncertainty
than to estimates with a great deal of uncertainty. The
exact way in which weights are assigned to estimates
of PM coefficients from different studies in a pooled
analysis  depends on the underlying assumption about
how the different estimates are related to each other.
If, for example, there is actually a distribution of true
effect coefficients,  or [3's, that differ  by  location
(referred  to  as  the  random  effects  model),  the
different coefficients reported by different studies may
be estimates of different underlying coefficients, rather
than just different estimates of the same coefficient.
In contrast to the  fixed effects model  (which assumes
that there is only  one [3 everywhere), the random-
effects model allows the possibility that  different
studies are estimating different parameters.

    A third approach to pooling studies is to apply
subjective  weights  to  the  studies,  rather than
conducting a random effects pooling analysis.  If the
analyst is aware of specific strengths and weaknesses
of the studies involved, this prior information may be
used  as input to the calculation of weights which
reflect the relative reliability of the estimates  from the
studies.

    In some cases, studies reported several estimates
of the  C-R  coefficient, each  corresponding to  a
particular year or particular study area.  For example,
Ostro and Rothschild  (1989b)  report six separate
regression coefficients that correspond to regression
models run  for six separate years.  This  analysis
combined  the  individual estimates  using a  meta-
analysis on the six years of data.

    Pollution Exposure Measure

    The study on which an acute exposure C-R
function  is   based  may  have  used  pollution
concentrations  averaged over several days.  Those
studies that use multi-day averages are in effect using
a smoothed data set, comparing each day's adverse
health effects to recent average exposure rather than
simply exposure on the same day.  This does not have
much effect on the estimated adverse health effects,
especially when the C-R function has a linear or nearly
linear functional form.  For example, if the functional
form were linear and based on a five-day pollution
average, then the estimated effects over the course of
the year would be essentially the same between using
daily pollution observations in the C-R function or a
two-day average. This is analogous to summing up
five numbers (6,4,8,4,8=30) or taking their average
and multiplying by five (6*5=30); in each case  the
answer is 30. This analysis uses daily pollution levels
in cases where there are multi-day averaging times.
                                                D-10

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Regional Variation

    Whether the C-R relationship between a pollutant
and a given health endpoint is estimated by a single
function from a single study or by a pooled function
of C-R functions from several studies, that same C-R
relationship is  applied  everywhere in  the current
benefits analysis. Although the C-R relationship may
in fact vary somewhat from one location to another
(for  example,  due  to  differences  in population
susceptibilities or differences in  the composition of
PM), location-specific C-R functions are available only
for those locations in which studies were conducted.
A single function applied  everywhere may result in
overestimates of incidence changes in some locations
and underestimates of  incidence changes in other
locations.  It is not possible, however, to  know the
extent or direction of the overall bias in the total
incidence change introduced by application of a single
C-R function everywhere.

    PM Size  and Composition

    Current research suggests that particle size, and
perhaps particle composition, matters when  estimating
the health impacts  of PM.   Particulate matter is a
heterogeneous mix  that varies over time and  space,
and may include solid or  liquid compounds, including
organic aerosols, sulfates, nitrates,  metals, elemental
carbon, and other  material.  Fine PM is generally
viewed as having a more harmful impact than coarse
PM, although it is not clear to what extent this may
differ by the type of health effect or the exposed
population.  While one cannot necessarily assume that
coarse PM has no adverse impact on health, it seems
reasonable to prefer the use of PM2 5 as a proxy for
the impact of PM. Due  to the relative abundance of
studies using PM10, however, and the reasonably good
correlation between PM25 and PM10 in urban areas, in
many cases this analysis also uses PM10  studies to
estimate the impact of PM. Similarly, at this stage of
knowledge, it is  not  clear   what   composition
distinctions to  make, if any, when  estimating the
impact of PM.  The C-R functions used in this analysis
relate adverse health effects  to  an undifferentiated
mass of particles (e.g., PM10); they do not relate effects
to individual PM components.
    Baseline Incidence Rate

    Some C-R functions (those expressed as a change
relative  to  baseline  conditions)  require  baseline
incidence data associated  with ambient  levels of
pollutants. Baseline incidence data necessary for the
calculation of risk and benefits were obtained from
national  sources whenever possible, because  these
data are most applicable to a national assessment of
benefits.    County-specific  estimates  of baseline
mortality  incidences  used  in this  analysis  were
obtained  from  the  National  Center for  Health
Statistics  (1994).  The National Center for Health
Statistics also provided much of the information on
national incidence rates. However, for some studies,
the only  available baseline incidence information
comes from the studies themselves; in these cases, the
baseline incidence in the study population is assumed
to represent the baseline incidence nationally.

    Population

    Many studies focus on a particular age cohort.
The  age  group  chosen  is  often  a matter  of
convenience  (e.g., extensive Medicare  data may be
available  for the elderly population) and not because
the effects are necessarily restricted to the specific age
group,  even  though  their  incidence may  vary
considerably   over   an   individual's   life   span.
Nevertheless, to avoid overestimating the benefits of
reduced pollution levels, this analysis applies the given
C-R  relationships   only  to   those  age  groups
corresponding to the cohorts studied.  Likewise, some
studies were performed on individuals  with specific
occupations, activity patterns, or medical conditions
because these traits relate to the likelihood of effect,
such as in the estimation  of worker productivity. In
these cases, application of dose-response  functions
has been restricted to populations of individuals with
these same characteristics. As discussed in more detail
below,  however,  by  assuming  that   the  C-R
relationships  should  only  be applied   to   those
subpopulations   matching   the   original    study
population, the present analysis may be significantly
underestimating the  whole  population benefits of
reductions in pollutant exposures.
                                                D-11

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
C-R Function Selection Criteria

    A number of considerations arose in selecting and
applying concentration-response (C-R) functions for
the  section  812 prospective  assessment.   These
considerations are summarized in Table D-l below.
Because  concentration-response  functions  are the
means  of  relating  changes in  pollutant levels  to
changes  in health endpoints,  they are a  critical
component of a benefits analysis.  While a study may
be superior with regard to one consideration  (e.g.,
number of pollutants considered), it may be inferior
with regard to another consideration (e.g., number of
observations). The selection of C-R functions for the
benefits analysis  was guided by the goal of achieving
a balance between comprehensiveness and scientific
defensibility.  The  issues  considered are discussed
below in some detail.
                                                D-12

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table D-1
Summary of Considerations Used in Selecting C-R Functions
   Consideration
                                   Comments
Peer reviewed
research
Peer reviewed research is preferred to research that has not undergone the peer review
process.
Study type             Among studies that consider chronic exposure (e.g., over a year or longer) prospective
                       cohort studies are preferred over cross-sectional studies (a.k.a. "ecological studies")
                       because they control for important confounding variables that cannot be controlled for in
                       cross-sectional studies.  If the chronic effects of a pollutant are considered more
                       important than its acute effects, prospective cohort studies may also be preferable to
                       longitudinal time series studies because the latter type of study is typically designed to
                       detect the effects of short-term (e.g. daily) exposures, rather than chronic exposures.

Study period            Studies examining  a relatively longer period of time (and therefore having more data)
                       are preferred, because they have greater statistical power to detect effects.  More
                       recent studies are also preferred because of possible changes in pollution mixes,
                       medical care, and life style overtime.

Study population        Studies examining  a relatively large sample are preferred.  Studies of narrow population
                       groups are generally disfavored, although this does not exclude the possibility of
                       studying populations that are potentially more sensitive to pollutants (e.g., asthmatics,
                       children, elderly). However, there are tradeoffs to comprehensiveness of study
                       population. Selecting a C-R function from a study that considered all ages will  avoid
                       omitting the benefits associated with any population age category. However, if the age
                       distribution of a study population from an "all population" study is different from the age
                       distribution in the assessment population, and if pollutant effects vary by age, then bias
                       can be introduced into the benefits analysis.

Study location          U.S. studies are  more desirable than non-U.S. studies because of potential differences
                       in pollution characteristics, exposure patterns, medical care system, and life style.
Pollutants included in
model
Models with more pollutants are generally preferred to models with fewer pollutants,
though careful attention must be paid to potential collinearity between pollutants.
Because PM has been acknowledged to be an important and pervasive pollutant,
models that include some measure of PM are highly preferred to those that do not.
Measure of PM         PM25 and PM10 are preferred to other measures of particulate matter, such as total
                       suspended particulate matter (TSP), coefficient of haze (COH), or black smoke (BS)
                       based on evidence that PM25 and PM10 are more directly correlated with adverse health
                       effects than are these more general measures of PM.

Economically
valuable health
effects
Some health effects, such as forced expiratory volume and other technical
measurements of lung functioning, are difficult to value in monetary terms.  These health
effects are not quantified in this analysis.
Non-overlapping
endpoints
Although the benefits associated with each individual health endpoint may be analyzed
separately, care must be exercised in selecting health endpoints to include in the overall
benefits analysis because of the possibility of double counting of benefits. Including
emergency room visits in a benefits analysis that already considers hospital admissions,
for example, will result in double counting of some benefits if the category "hospital
admissions" includes emergency room visits.	
                                                 D-13

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Peer-Review of Research

    Whenever possible, peer-reviewed research rather
than  unpublished  information  has  been  used.
Research that has been  reviewed by the EPA's own
peer review processes, such as review by the Clean Air
Scientific  Advisory  Committee  (CASAC)  of  the
Science Advisory Board  (SAB),  has been  used
whenever possible. Research reviewed by other public
scientific peer review processes, such as the National
Academy of Science, the National Acidic Precipitation
Assessment Program, and the Health Effects Institute
is also included in this category.

    Studies published (or accepted for publication) in
peer reviewed journals but not reviewed by CASAC
have also been considered for use in the section 812
prospective assessment, and have been used if they are
determined  to be the  most appropriate available
studies.  Indications  that EPA intends to  submit
research to the CASAC (such as inclusion in a draft
Criteria Document or Staff Paper) are considered
further  evidence  that   specific  journal-published
research is acceptable for use in this analysis.

    Air pollution health  research is a very active field
of  scientific   inquiry, and  new  results are  being
produced regularly. Many research  findings are first
released in university working papers,  dissertations,
government  reports, non-reviewed  journals  and
conference proceedings.  Some  research  is  often
published in abstract form in  journals, which does not
require  peer review. In  order to use the most recent
research findings and be as comprehensive as possible,
unpublished research was examined for possible use.

    Study Type and Quality

    Epidemiological  studies  of  the   relationship
between air  pollutants  and health endpoints can
generally be  categorized as   (1)  "ecological" cross-
sectional, (2)  prospective cohort, or (3) longitudinal
time series  studies.  The first two types of study are
concerned with longer exposure periods,  such as a
year or over  several years,  while the  third type is
concerned  with short-term  exposures  over one  or
more days.   Among studies that  consider longer
exposure periods, or chronic exposure, prospective
cohort studies are preferable to "ecological" cross-
sectional studies, because they control for important
confounding variables which cannot be controlled for
in "ecological" cross-sectional studies.  If the effects
of chronic exposures are considered more significant
than acute effects, prospective cohort studies may also
be  preferable to  longitudinal  time  series studies
because the latter type of study is typically designed to
detect the effects only of daily exposures, rather than
chronic exposures.

    Studies  that control for a broad range of likely
confounders can offer a more robust conclusion
about an individual pollutant, even if the statistical
confidence interval is larger due to the inclusion of
more variables in the analysis. For example, a study
that considers  only air  pollution, omitting  other
variables associated with  a health outcome,  could
incorrectly conclude that a reduction in air pollution
is exclusively responsible for a reduction in the health
outcome.  Potential confounders  include  weather-
related variables (e.g.,  temperature)  and  ambient
pollutants other than those being studied.

    Study Population

    Many of the studies relevant to quantifying the
benefits of air pollution reductions have focused on
subpopulations that may or may not be representative
of the general population. Extrapolating results from
studies on nonrepresentative subpopulations to  the
general population introduces uncertainties into  the
analysis, but the magnitude of the uncertainty and its
direction  are often unknown.   Because  of  these
uncertainties,  benefit  analyses  often  limit  the
application  of  the C-R  functions  only  to  those
subpopulations with the characteristics of the  study
population.   While this  approach  has  merit in
minimizing  uncertainty, it can  result in  a  severe
underestimate of benefits if similar effects are likely to
occur in the rest of the population. For these reasons,
studies that examine broad, representative populations
may be preferable to studies with narrower scope,
because they allow application  of the functions to
larger numbers  of persons.  There  are,  however,
tradeoffs to  comprehensiveness of study population.
                                                D-14

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Selecting a C-R function from a study that considered
all ages will avoid omitting the benefits associated with
any population age category.  However, if the age
distribution  of the study population from an "all
population"  study  is  different  from   the  age
distribution  in the assessment  population, and  if
pollutant  effects  vary by age,  then bias  can  be
introduced into the benefits analysis.

    Study Period

    Studies  examining a relatively longer period of
time are preferable because they have more data and
therefore have greater statistical power  to detect
effects. In addition, more recent studies are preferable
to older  studies  because  of possible  changes in
pollution mixes, medical care, and life style over time.
This latter issue is effectively a benefits transfer issue.
Differences across time between the study period and
the assessment period introduce uncertainties into the
benefits  analysis,  because it is not known to what
extent the C-R relationship estimated during the study
period will be the same  during the assessment period.

    Study Location

    Studies conducted in locations that are  different
from the assessment location  are generally  less
desirable because  of the introduction  of possible
benefits transfer problems.  The characteristics of a
population (e.g., the proportion of the population that
is particularly susceptible to pollution, or the  behavior
patterns of the population) and/or the pollution mix
to which it is exposed may differ notably between the
study location and the  assessment location.  As with
differences  in  time periods,  these differences in
location  introduce  uncertainties  into  the  benefits
analysis, because it is not known to what extent the C-
R  relationship estimated  in the study location is the
same in  the assessment location.  For that reason,
studies conducted in the United States or Canada are
preferable  for this  benefits analysis   to  studies
conducted, for example, in Europe or in developing
countries.  In addition, studies that include a wide
range of areas are preferred.  Studies  focusing on a
single city are not as desirable as studies that  focus on
multiple cities.
    The preference for studies that focus on a range
of areas,  in the  U.S. and Canada, is driven by a
concern  that  there  may be  significant  regional
variation in the estimated C-R functions. There has
not, however, been enough research to establish
regional specific values.

    Pollutants Included in  the Model

    In many cases,  several pollutants in a "pollutant
mix"  are correlated with each other — that is, their
concentrations tend to change together. Although
there may be an association between an adverse health
effect and this mix, it may not be clear which pollutant
is causally related to the  health effect — or whether
more than one pollutant is causally related.  Using
separate regressions  (from single pollutant models) for
each  pollutant may overstate the effect  of each
pollutant  alone.  Models that consider pollutants
simultaneously are therefore preferred, though careful
attention  must  be  paid to  potential  collinearity
between   pollutants.     Because  PM   has   been
acknowledged to  be an important pollutant, models
that include some  measure of PM are highly preferred
to those that do not.

    Measure of  Particulate Matter

    Different epidemiological studies examining the
health effects associated with particulate matter (PM)
have used different measures of PM.  Some have used
PM10 while others have used  PM2 5.  The number of
studies  using PM25  as   the  indicator of  PM  is
substantially more  limited than the number using
PM10 because of the relative sparseness of  PM25
monitor data.  A  number of  studies have used total
suspended particulate matter (TSP), British Smoke,
coefficient of haze (COPT) and other measures of
particulate matter.  There is some evidence that the
relationship between fine particulates (PM25)  and
health effects may be stronger than that between other
measures  of PM  and health effects. If this is true,
then  studies that use measures  of PM  that more
closely approximate the fine fraction of PM (such as
PM10) are preferable to those that use other measures.
                                                D-15

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    Economically Valuable Health Effects

    A number of the health endpoints examined in
the literature are difficult to value in monetary terms.
These effects include forced expiratory volume and
other technical measurements of lung functioning. It
is not clear how to assign an economic value to such
effects,  as their  impact on future medical condition
and lifestyle are not well understood. One method to
value these "clinical" measures is to estimate their
association with adverse health effects that are valued.

    Ostro et al. (1989a)  reanalyzed data from four
controlled  ozone exposure studies,  and  found a
statistically significant relationship between  forced
expiratory  volume  in one second (FEVj) and  the
probability that  an individual  will  report  a mild,
moderate or severe respiratory symptom. In this case,
one could estimate ozone benefits by first calculating
the change in FEVj  associated with a given change in
ozone concentration, converting this to a change in
respiratory symptoms, and then valuing the respiratory
symptom change.  In a separate study, Neas and
Schwartz  (1998) found  that  certain  measures  of
reduced  pulmonary functioning  are  significant
predictors of mortality.  This result, however, would
be difficult to use to calculate air pollution benefits,
because they  looked at the relationship  between
declines in lung function and mortality, and they did
not  estimate the impact of air  pollution  on this
decline; separate work would be required to estimate
the impact of air pollution on lung function.

    The main  concern when translating a clinical
measure such  as FEVj to an economically valuable
one  such  as  acute respiratory symptoms is  that
epidemiological work may already be available from
which one  can directly estimate a C-R function.  To
estimate acute respiratory symptoms directly (from an
epidemiological  study) and indirectly through  the
clinical  measure, would  double-count the  effect.
Another concern is that using  the indirect method
adds a layer of uncertainty because  one must first
translate the  estimated  clinical  measure  to  the
estimated economically valuable measure.
    Non-Overlapping Health Effects

    Several endpoints reported in the health effects
literature overlap with each other.  For example, the
literature reports relationships for hospital admissions
for single respiratory ailments (e.g.  pneumonia or
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) as well as for
all respiratory ailments combined.  Similarly, several
studies  quantify  the   occurrence  of respiratory
symptoms where the definitions of symptoms are not
unique (e.g., shortness of breath or upper respiratory
symptoms). Measures of restricted activity provide a
final  example of overlapping health  endpoints.
Estimates are available for pollution-related restricted
activity days, mild restricted activity days, and activity
restriction resulting in work loss. While the benefits
analysis  estimates the  benefits  associated  with
individual endpoints, it takes care in deciding which
endpoints to  include in an estimate of total benefits,
in order to avoid double-counting of benefits from
overlapping endpoints.

Mortality

    Health researchers have consistently linked air
pollution with excess mortality.  Prospective cohort
and cross-sectional studies have found a relationship
between mortality  over the course of a year or more
with pollution levels measured over the course of a
year or several years.  In addition, a number of so-
called "short-term" mortality studies have linked daily
variations in mortality with daily pollution levels.

    The EPA Clean Air Council  (U.S.  EPA, 1999, p.
11) recommends using the prospective cohort study
by Pope et al. (1995), rather than short-term mortality
studies.  Although short-term studies lend substantial
support to the hypothesis  that there is a relationship
between PM  and mortality, they focus only on the
acute effects associated with daily peak  exposures. In
contrast, the Pope et al. study was designed to capture
the effect of exposure over many years, however it
may be less able to capture the short-term impact of
peak exposures. This creates an overlap of unknown
size between  the mortality estimates based on short-
term studies  and Pope et  al.  Capturing the chronic
impact, however,  is judged more  important than
                                                D-16

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
missing the impact of an unknown number of deaths
occurring  shortly after short-term peak exposures.
For this reason, the Pope et al. study is preferred. A
second prospective cohort  study by Dockery et al.
(1993) is also used to estimate the impact of PM on
mortality. However, the Dockery et al. study used a
smaller sample of individuals from fewer cities than
the study by Pope et al., and is  therefore presented
only as an illustrative calculation that is consistent with
Pope  et al. (1995); the Pope et al. estimate is used in
the primary analysis.7

    The total mortality effect estimated by the Pope et
al. (1995) and the Dockery et al (1993) studies does
not necessarily occur in the same year as the estimated
exposure.  However, the exact relationship between
the time of exposure and mortality is not well known.
In the primary analysis, we assume that mortality
occurs over a five year period, with 25 percent of the
deaths occurring  in the first year, 25 percent in the
second year, and 16.7 percent in each of the third,
fourth, and fifth years. We also perform an analysis of
the sensitivity of benefits  valuation to  the  lag
structure by considering a range of assumptions about
the timing of mortality (see Appendix H).   It is
important to keep in mind that changes  in  the  lag
assumptions  do  not  change the  total number of
estimated deaths, but rather the  timing of those
deaths.

    At least some evidence has  been found  linking
each of the criteria pollutants with mortality.  This
raises concerns that the mortality-related benefits of
air pollution reduction may be overstated if separate
pollutant-specific estimates, some of which may have
been  obtained from models excluding  the other
pollutants, are aggregated. In addition, there may be
important interactions between pollutants and their
effect on mortality.
    7The Pope et al., 1995 study estimated a C-R coefficient using
median PM  concentration data; however, mean pollutant
concentration is the measure of central tendency commonly used
in other health studies.  We will explore the possibility of re-
estimating  the PM  mortality  C-R function  using  mean
concentration data in future 812 prospective analyses.
    The Pope et al. (1995) study included only PM, so
it is unclear to what extent it may be including the
impacts of ozone or other gaseous pollutants. Because
of concern about overstating of benefits and because
the evidence associating mortality with exposure to
participate matter is currently stronger than for other
pollutants, only the benefits of PM-related mortality
avoided are included in the total benefits estimate.
The benefits  associated with ozone reductions are
estimated but are not included in the estimate of total
benefits. The relationship between CO and mortality
is briefly considered, but the evidence reviewed does
not point to a clear link between the two.

    Statistical  Lives Saved Versus
    Statistical  Life-Years  Saved

    Considerable attention has been paid to using life-
years lost as an alternative to lives lost as a measure of
pollution-related premature mortality.  This analysis
uses both approaches to estimating pollution-related
premature mortality.

    The  actual number  of years any particular
individual is going to live cannot be known.  Instead,
one estimates the  expected,  or  statistical  average,
number of 'life-years lost". The number of life-years
lost may be expressed as the average number of life-
years lost for all of the people who are exposed (the ex
ante measure), or as the average number of life-years
lost for the people who died from exposure (the ex
post measure).

    The ex ante estimate of life-years lost depends on
the individual having been exposed to a pollutant, not
on the individual having died prematurely from that
exposure.  Suppose, for example, that a 25 year old
has a life expectancy of 50 more years in the absence
of PM exposure  and  only  48 more years  in the
presence  of exposure.   The exposed 25 year old
would, on average, have her life expectancy shortened
by two  years.  That is, two expected life-years would
be lost by every exposed individual.

    The ex post estimate of life-years lost depends on
the individual actually having died from exposure to
pollution.  When  an individual dies of exposure to
                                                 D-17

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
PM, he is said to have lost the number of years he
would have been expected  to live;  this  can be
calculated   from   age-   and  gender-specific  life
expectancy tables.  Suppose that the life expectancy of
25 year olds  is 75 — a 25 year old can expect to live 50
more years.  A 25 year old who dies from exposure to
PM has therefore lost 50 expected years of life. This
is  the life-years lost that can be expected by every
affected 25 year old (i.e., every 25 year old who actually
dies from exposure to PM).

    Estimates  of  the  total  life-years  lost by  a
population exposed to PM depend on several factors,
including the age distribution and  the  size of the
exposed population, the magnitude of the PM change,
the relative  risk assumed to be associated with the
change in  PM, and the  length  of exposure.   A
population chronically exposed to a given increase in
PM  will lose  more life-years  than  a population
exposed to the same increase in PM for only a year or
two.8  A population that is generally older will lose
fewer life-years, all  else  equal, than  one  that  is
generally younger, because older individuals  have
fewer (expected) years  of life left to lose.  And  a
population exposed to a greater increase in PM will
lose  more life-years than one exposed to  a smaller
increase  in  PM.   Finally, the life-years  lost by the
population will increase as the relative risk associated
with the increase in PM increases.

    Life-years lost are  usually reported as  averages
over a population of individuals.  The population over
which the average is calculated, however, can make a
crucial difference  in the  reported average life-years
lost.  The average life-years lost per exposed individual
(the ex ante estimate) is just the total life-years lost by
the population of exposed  individuals  who  died
divided  by   the  number of exposed  individuals.
Although those individuals who  do  die prematurely
from exposure to PM may lose several expected years
    8  Even in the absence of cumulative effects of exposure,
exposure of a population for many years will result in a greater
total number of pollution-related deaths than exposure for only a
year or two, because the same relative risk is applied repeatedly,
year after year, to the population, rather than for only a year or
two.
of life, most exposed individuals do not actually die
from exposure  to PM  and therefore lose zero life-
years.    The  average  life-years lost per  exposed
individual in a population, alternatively referred to as
the average decrease in life expectancy of the exposed
population, is therefore heavily weighted towards
zero.

    The ex ante and ex post measures of life-years lost
take the same total  number of life-years lost by the
exposed population and divide them by different
denominators. The ex  ante measure divides the total
life-years lost  by the total population exposed; the ex
post measure divides the same total life-years lost by
only a small subset of the total population exposed,
namely,  those who died from PM. The average per
exposed individual is therefore much smaller than the
average per affected individual.  Because both types of
average  may  be  reported, and  both are  valid
measurements,  it is  important to  understand that,
although the numbers will be very dissimilar, they are
consistent with each other  and are  simply different
measures of the estimated mortality impact of PM.

    To illustrate the different measures of life-years
lost and the effects of various input assumptions on
these  measures, death rates  from the  1992  U.S.
Statistical Abstract were used to follow a cohort of
100,000  U.S. males from birth to age 90 in a "dirty"
scenario  and  a "clean"  scenario,  under  various
assumptions.  Death rates were available for ages less
than  1,  ages  1-4,  and for  ten-year age  groups
thereafter. The ten-year age groups were divided into
five-year age groups, applying the death rate for the
ten-year  group to each of the corresponding five-year
age groups.  Ex ante and ex post measures of life-years
lost among those individuals who survive to the 25-29
year  old category  (96,947  individuals)  were  first
calculated under the assumptions in the World Health
Organization    (WHO)  1996  report.      These
assumptions were that the relative risk of mortality in
the "dirty" scenario versus the "clean" scenario is  1.1;
that exposure does  not begin until  age 25; that the
effect of exposure effects observed throughout the
fifteen year exposure  period can be summed and
attributed (for mathematical convenience) to the 15th
year of exposure; that individuals at the beginning of
                                                 D-18

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
each age  grouping either  survive to  the  next age
grouping  or  live zero  more  years;  and  that  all
individuals age 85 live exactly five more years. Under
these assumptions, the expected life-years  lost per
exposed individual in the 25-29 year old cohort is 1.32
years, while the expected life-years lost per affected
individual (i.e., for each  of the 7,646 expected PM-
related deaths) is 16.44 years.

    Ozone and Mortality

    The   literature  investigating  the  relationship
between   ozone  and  mortality  has  been rapidly
evolving over the last several years.  Of the 31 time-
series epidemiology studies  identified in the literature
that report  quantitative  results  on a  possible
association between daily ozone concentrations and
daily mortality, 25 were published or presented since
1995. These studies were conducted in various  urban
areas throughout the world: sixteen in the United
States or  Canada, nine in Europe, two in Australia,
and four in Latin America. Seventeen of the studies
report  a statistically significant relationship between
ozone  and mortality, with the  more recent studies
tending to find statistical significance more often than
the earlier studies.

    While the  growing body  of  epidemiological
studies  suggests that  there may  be  a  positive
relationship between ozone and premature mortality,
there  is  still  substantial  uncertainty about this
relationship. Because the evidence linking premature
mortality and particulate matter is currently stronger
than the evidence linking  premature mortality and
ozone, it is important that models of the relationship
between ozone  and mortality include  a measure of
particulate matter as well.   Because of the lack of
monitoring  data  on   fine  participates  or   its
components, however, the measure of particulate
matter used in most studies  was generally either PM10
or  TSP or,  in  some cases, Black Smoke.   If a
component of PM, such  as PM2 5 or sulfates, is more
highly correlated with ozone than with PM10 or TSP,
and if this component is also related  to premature
mortality, then the apparent ozone effects on mortality
could be at least partially spurious.
    Even if there is a true relationship between ozone
and  premature  mortality, after taking particulate
matter into  account,  there  would  be a  potential
problem of double counting in this  analysis if the
ozone effects on premature mortality were added to
the PM effects estimated by Pope et al., 1995, because,
as noted above, the Pope study does not include
ozone in its  model.  Because of this, the  potential
ozone-mortality relationship  is not included in the
primary analysis. Instead the benefits associated with
ozone reductions are estimated in a sensitivity analysis.
The  results  of this sensitivity  analysis should  be
reviewed with the appropriate caution, however, in
view of the above-noted uncertainties surrounding a
potential ozone-mortality relationship.

    To synthesize the  results of multiple studies  on
the  relationship  between  ozone  and premature
mortality, a modified meta-analysis method was used.
Because of differences  in the averaging times used in
the underlying studies (some use daily average ozone
levels, while others use 1-hour daily maximum values),
the  meta-analysis approach  was  applied to  the
predicted mortality incidence changes estimated  by
each of the studies rather than to the coefficients of
ozone in the  C-R functions.

    A study was included in the meta-analysis if it  (1)
is  in or has been  accepted by a  peer-reviewed
publication; (2) reports quantitative results for  daily
mortality and ozone  (rather than for other measures
such  as  total  oxidants); (3) considers the entire
population  (rather  than  only  a  subset  of the
population) in the study location; (4) considers the
whole year  (rather than only a season or seasons);  (5)
considers all non-accidental  or  total mortality;  (6)
considers only one location (rather than a pooling of
results across multiple locations);  and (7) reports
results from a copollutant model, that includes PM or
some proxy for PM in the model with ozone, as well
as some  measure  of temperature and season.  The
selection of a single result from among multiple ozone
results reported in the  same study was facilitated by
the following three additional selection criteria: (8) PM
(PM10 or PM25) is preferable to other  measures of
particulate matter; (9) more pollutants in the model is
preferable  to fewer pollutants; and  (10) Poisson
                                                 D-19

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
regression is preferred to other specifications.9 Nine
studies were chosen using these criteria. To minimize
benefits transfer problems,  the meta-analysis was
limited to the four of these  nine studies  that were
conducted in the United States.   Table D-2a briefly
describes  the four  studies  included  in the meta-
analysis.
      Almost all the  models in the literature used Poisson
regression.  This final criterion was therefore included to impose
consistency, if there was no other means by which to select a
model from among several models in a study.
                                                    D-20

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table D-2a
  Studies and Results Selected for Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Daily Mortality
 and Exposure to Ambient Ozone  in the United States
Study
Ito and Thurston
(1996)a
Kinney et al. (1995)
Study Location/
Duration
Cook County,
Illinois
1985-1990
Los Angeles
County
1985-1990
The following studies were
Moolgavkar et al.
(1995)
Sametetal. (1997)
Philadelphia
1973-1988
Philadelphia
1974-1988
Copollutants
in model
PM10
PM10
used to generate a
TSP, SO2
TSP, SO2, NO2,
Lagged CO
O3 Concentration
Measure
(PPb)
average of same day
and previous day 1-hr
maxima
daily 1-hr max
single distribution for
daily avg
2-day avg
Relative Risk and
95% Cl for a 25 ppb
Increase in O3
1.016
(1.004 — 1.029)
1.000
(0.989 — 1.010)
Philadelphia:
1.015
(1.004 — 1.026)
1.024
(1.008 — 1.039)
a  Relative risks derived from the ozone coefficient and standard error from the copollutant model were provided by personal
communication with Dr. Kazuhiko Ito.
    Carbon Monoxide and Mortality

    Research work presents some evidence that CO
may be significantly linked to mortality, although it is
not clear to what extent CO may  have an effect
independent of PM.  Burnett et al. (1998) studied
mortality in association with  CO, NO2, O3,  SO2,
coefficient of haze, TSP, sulfates and estimated PM25
and PM10 from 1980-1994 in metropolitan Toronto.
In models that included the day of the week, weather,
CO and  one of the other pollutants, they found that
daily  average CO  and  all  of  the  PM measures
contributed a significant fraction of the daily number
of non-accidental deaths. The measure for coefficient
of haze had the strongest impact on the relative risk
for CO.  The relative risk associated with a 1.4  ppm
change (i.e., 95th to the 5th CO percentile) was 1.070 in
the single pollutant model; with the addition of COH,
it  fell to  1.043  (Burnett et  al.,  1998, Table 2).
Nevertheless, the impact of CO is still quite large, and
it is reported to occur in all seasons, age, and disease
groupings. The model with the best fit included CO
and TSP. With both CO and TSP in the model and
using the mean levels of the pollutants reported for
Toronto, CO contributed, on average, 4.7% of daily
non-accidental  deaths  and  TSP  contributed  1%
(Burnett et al., 1998, p. 689).
    A review of three articles suggests that Burnett et
al.'s   results  may  not  be  consistent  with  other
published results (Table D-2b).10 In a model with CO
and PM10, Kinney et al. (1995, Figure 3) reported a
relative risk of 1.05 for a 10 ppm CO increase (with a
95%  confidence interval of 0.98-1.12).  This is not
statistically significant at the usual significance level of
5%, and the implied relative risk (1.007) for a 1.4 ppm
change is about six times smaller than that reported by
in Burnett et  al's  two-pollutant  model.11   Saldiva
(1995, Table 4)  reported a positive and significant CO
regression coefficient  in  a model with  just  CO.
Estimated at the mean, this suggests a relative risk of
1.039 per 1.4 ppm of CO, or about half the size of
that reported in Burnett et al.'s single pollutant model
(RR = 1.070).12 Saldiva et al. also reported a model
with  CO  along with all of the  other measured
    10A fourth study, by Gwynn, Burnett, and Thurston, cited as
being submitted for publication, was not considered here.

    "The underlying coefficient equals the logarithm  of the
relative risk divided by the change in pollution.

    12The regression coefficient, |3,  = 1.69  (Saldiva et al., 1995,
Table 4) and the mean mortality rate per day = 62.6 (1995, Table
1). Estimated mortality after reducing CO by 1.4 ppm = 60.23
deaths per day. The relative risk = (62.9/60.23) = 1.039.
                                                 D-21

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
pollutants: PM10, SO2, NOX, and O3.  In this model,
the  PM10  coefficient  remained  significant  and
unchanged from its single-pollutant model value, but
the CO coefficient dropped substantially and became
insignificant (1995, Table 4). Touloumi et al. (1996,
Table  4) estimated a single pollutant model with a
reported relative risk of 1.05 for a 7.6 mg/m3 rise in
CO.   Assuming a conversion  of 1  ppm  =  1.145
mg/m3 (U.S. EPA, 1991, Table 3-1), this suggests a
relative risk (1.015)  that is  about five times smaller
than the relative risk (1.070) in Burnett et al.'s single
pollutant model value.

    In 1991, the EPA (1991, p.  1-12)  concluded that
the results of CO epidemiological work "is suggestive,
but not conclusive evidence" that CO may lead to
sudden death in persons with coronary artery disease.
Since that time, studies by Morris  et al. (1995) and
Schwartz and Morris (1995) reported that ambient CO
concentrations    increase   the   likelihood   of
hospitalization for cardiovascular disease.   It is not
unlikely that a certain fraction of these admittances
will die, and thus  indirectly one might estimate the
impact of CO on mortality. However, there  does not
appear to be a study from which one  may develop
with confidence a C-R function to directly estimate
CO-related mortality.13 The results from Burnett et al.
(1998)  suggest  that  CO  may  have an effect on
mortality independent of other pollutants,  but it is
premature to base an estimate of CO-related mortality
with the relative risk published in their study.
    13This difficulty may be related in part to the highly variable
CO concentrations that are typically found in an urban area.
                                                 D-22

-------
Table D-2b
Selected Studies and Results for Carbon Monoxide and Mortality
Study
Burnett et
al. (1998)
Kinney et al.
(1995)
Saldiva et
al. (1995)
Touloumi et
al. (1996)
Location and
Period
Toronto, Canada
1980-1994
Los Angeles
County
1985-1990
Sao Paulo, Brazil
1990 to 1991
Athens, Greece
1987-1991
Population
All ages,
metropolita
n Toronto
All ages
Elderly
(+65 years)
All ages
Endpoint
non-
accidental
mortality
non-
accidental
mortality
mortality
from
natural
causes
total
mortality
Pollutants
CO,NO2,
SO2, O3,
SO4, TSP,
COM,
PM10,
PM25
CO, O3,
PM10
CO, O3,
PM10, S02,
NOX
CO, SO2,
black
smoke
Main Findings
Significant CO effect found in all two
pollutant models. Controlling for CO,
significant effect found for SO4, TSP, COM,
PM10, and PM25.
In single pollutant models, CO significant,
and PM10 and O3 are marginally significant.
In model with CO and PM10, both CO and
PM10 are not significant.
CO significant in single pollutant model.
CO not significant in model with all other
pollutants.
CO, SO2, and black smoke significant in
single pollutant models.
Comment
Association with cardiac-
related mortality is stronger,
but CO is also significantly
related to non-cardiac
mortality. PM10 and PM25
estimated from SO4, TSP,
and COM.
Magnitude of single pollutant
CO relationship drops
modestly with inclusion of
PM10.

Deaths during a one month
summertime heat wave were
excluded from analysis
D-23

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Post-Neonatal Mortality

    In a recent study of four million infants in 86 U.S.
metropolitan areas, Woodruff et al. (1997) linked PM10
exposure in the first two months  of an infant's life
with the probability of dying between the ages of 28
days and  364  days.  In addition to the work by
Woodruff et al., recent work in Mexico City (Loomis
et al., 1999), the Czech  Republic (Bobak and  Leon,
1992), Sao Paulo (Pereira et al., 1998; Saldiva et al.,
1994), and Beijing  (Wang et al.,  1997) provides
additional   evidence  that  particulate   levels  are
significantly related to infant or child mortality, low
birth weight or intrauterine mortality (Table D-3).

    Conceptually, neonatal or child  mortality could be
added to the premature mortality predicted by Pope et
al. (1995), because  the Pope function covers only the
population over 30  years  old.  Predicted neonatal
mortality  could not  be added to  the  premature
mortality predicted by the daily (short-term exposure)
mortality  studies,  however,  because these  studies
cover all ages.  The EPA Clean Air Council  recently
advised the Agency  not  to include post-neonatal
mortality in this analysis because the study is of a new
endpoint and the results have not been replicated in
other studies (U.S. EPA, 1999, p. 12). The estimated
avoided incidences  of neonatal mortality are estimated
and presented as a sensitivity analysis, but  are not
included in the aggregate benefits analysis results.
                                                D-24

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table D-3
Studies and Results Selected for Adverse Effects in
Study
Bobakand
Leon
(1992)
Loomis et
al. (1999)
Pereira et
al. (1998)
Ritz and
Yu(1999)
Saldiva et
al. (1994)
Wang et al.
(1997)
Woodruff
etal.
(1997)
Xu et al.
(1995a)
Location and
Period
45 of 86
administrative
districts in the
Czech Republic
1986-1988
southwestern
Mexico City
1/93-7/95
Sao Paulo,
Brazil
1/91-12/92
Los Angeles,
CA
1989-1993
Sao Paulo,
Brazil
5/90-4/91
Beijing, China
1988-1991
86 metropolitan
areas in the
U.S.
1989-1991
Beijing, China
1988
Population
neonates (0-
1 month);
post-
neonates (1-
12 months)
infants <1
year old
fetuses over
28 weeks of
pregnancy
age
gestational
age 37-44
weeks
children <5
gestational
age 37-44
weeks
post-
neonates (1-
12 months)
25,370
pregnant
women
Endpoint
all-cause
mortality;
respiratory
mortality
all cause
mortality
intrauterine
mortality
low birth
weight
respiratory
mortality
low birth
weight
all-cause
mortality;
respiratory
mortality
p re-term
delivery
Fetuses, Infants, and Young Children
Pollutants
TSP, SO2,
NOX
PM25, 03,
NO2, SO2
PM10, 03,
NO2, SO2,
CO
CO
PM10, 03,
NOX, S02,
CO
TSP, SO2
PM10
TSP, SO2
Main Findings
Controlling for SO2 and NO,, TSP
linked to all-cause and respiratory
post-neonatal mortality; weaker,
insignificant effect found for
neonatal. Controlling for TSP and
SO2, NOX marginally significant for
all-cause and respiratory post-
neonatal mortality; no effect for
neonatal mortality. No effect found
for SO2.
PM25 and NO2 significant in single
pollutant models. PM25 and NO2
both not significant in two pollutant
model; PM25 coefficient changed
little from single pollutant; NO2
coefficient dropped substantially. O3
not significant. SO2 not analyzed
since ambient levels were negligible.
In single pollutant models, NO2, SO2,
and CO significantly related to
intrauterine mortality. PM10 and O3
not significant. Considering all
pollutants simultaneously, NO2 is the
only significant pollutant.
Average CO exposure in the last
trimester associated with low birth
weight.
NOX significantly related to
respiratory mortality. No effect found
for the other pollutants.
TSP and SO2 exposure in the final
trimester significantly related to low
birth weight. Both pollutants highly
correlated (r=0.92).
PM10 exposure in the first two months
of life significant for all-cause
mortality. PM10 significant for
respiratory mortality in average birth-
weight infants, but not low birth-
weight infants.
TSP and SO2 exposure significant for
pre-term delivery.
D-25

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Chronic Illness

    There are a limited number of studies that have
estimated the  impact of air  pollution on  chronic
bronchitis (Table D-4). An important hindrance is the
lack of health  data and the associated air pollution
levels over a number of years.  Schwartz (1993) and
Abbey et al. (1995; 1993) provide  evidence that PM
exposure over a number of years gives rise to  the
development of chronic bronchitis in the U.S., and a
recent study by McDonnell et al. (1999) provides
evidence  that ozone  exposure  is  linked  to  the
development of asthma in adults.  These results are
consistent with  research  that has  found  chronic
exposure to  pollutants leads to declining pulmonary
functioning (Abbey et al., 1998; Ackermann-Liebrich
etal, 1997; Betels et al, 1991).

    Schwartz (1993) examined survey data collected
from 3,874 adults ranging in age from 30 to 74, and
living in 53 urban areas in the U.S. The survey was
conducted between 1974 and  1975, as part of the
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,
and is representative of the non-institutionalized U.S.
population.   Schwartz (1993,  Table  3) reported
chronic bronchitis  prevalence rates in the study
population by age, race, and gender. Non-white males
under 52 years old  had the lowest rate (1.7%) and
white males  52 years and older had the highest rate
(9.3%). The study examined the relationship between
the prevalence of reported chronic bronchitis and
annual levels of TSP, collected in the year prior to the
survey.

    Abbey et al. (1995; 1993) are part of a series of
studies of an ongoing prospective cohort tracking
research  project that began in 1977.  These  two
studies on the development of chronic respiratory
illness are based on a ten year follow-up examination
of adult Seventh-Day Adventists living in California.
Abbey et al.  (1993)  examined  3,914  adults,  and
estimated the  relationship between annual mean
ambient TSP, ozone and SO2 and the  presence of
certain  chronic  respiratory symptoms  (including
airway obstructive disease (AOD), chronic bronchitis,
and asthma) that were not present at the beginning of
the study. TSP was significantly linked to new cases
of AOD and chronic bronchitis, but not to asthma or
the severity of asthma.  Ozone was not linked to the
incidence of new cases of any endpoint, but ozone
was linked to the severity of asthma.  No effect was
found  for SO2.  Abbey et al. (1995) examined  the
relationship between estimated PM25 (annual mean
from 1966 to 1977), PM10 (annual mean from 1973 to
1977) and TSP (annual mean from 1973 to 1977) and
the same chronic respiratory symptoms in a sample
population   of   1,868  Californian   Seventh-Day
Adventists.  In this single-pollutant study, there was a
statistically   significant  PM25   relationship  with
development of chronic bronchitis, but not for AOD
or asthma; PM10 was  significantly associated with
chronic  bronchitis  and  AOD;  and  TSP  was
significantly  associated with all  cases of all  three
chronic symptoms.

    The McDonnell et al. (1999) study used the same
cohort of Seventh-Day Adventists, and examined the
association  between air pollution and the onset of
asthma in adults between 1977 and 1992.  Males who
did not report doctor-diagnosed asthma in 1977, but
reported it in 1987 or 1992, had significantly higher
ozone exposures, controlling for other covariates; no
significant effect was found between ozone exposure
and asthma in females.  No  significant effect was
reported for females or males due to exposure to PM,
NO2, SO2, or SO4.

    We estimate  the changes in the new cases of
chronic bronchitis using  the studies  by Schwartz
(1993), Abbey et al. (1993), and Abbey et al. (1995);
also, we estimate the onset of asthma in adult males
using the work by McDonnell  et al. (1999).   The
Schwartz study is somewhat older and uses a cross-
sectional design; however, it is based on a national
sample, unlike the Abbey et al. studies which are based
on a sample of California  residents who were non-
smokers. We first pool the estimates from the two
studies by Abbey et al. — since they are based on the
same  sample population and simply use different
measures of PM - and  then pool this estimate with
that from Schwartz.

    The Abbey et al. (1995; 1993) studies are based on
the incidence of new cases  of chronic  bronchitis,
                                               D-26

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
however, Schwartz (1993)  is based on tine prevalence of
chronic bronchitis, not its incidence. To use Schwartz's
study and still estimate the change in incidence, there
are at least two possible approaches. The first is to
simply assume that it is appropriate to use the baseline
incidence of chronic bronchitis in a C-R function with
the estimated coefficient from Schwartz's study, to
directly estimate the change in incidence. The second
is to estimate the percentage change in the prevalence
rate for chronic  bronchitis  using the  estimated
coefficient from Schwartz's study in a C-R function,
and then to assume that this percentage change applies
to a baseline incidence rate obtained from  another
source.  (That is, if the prevalence declines  by 25
percent with a given  decrease in PM, then  baseline
incidence drops by 25 percent with the same drop in
PM).  This analysis uses  the  latter approach,  and
estimates the change in incidence by first estimating
the percentage change in prevalence.
                                                 D-27

-------
Table D-4
Summary of Selected Studies
Study
Abbey et al.
(1993)
Abbey et al.
(1995)
Chapman et
al. (1985)
McDonnell
etal. (1999)
Portney and
Mullahy
(1990)
Location and
Period
California
initial survey: 1977
final survey: 1987
California
initial survey: 1977
final survey: 1987
4 Utah
communities
1976
California
initial survey: 1977
final survey: 1992
Nationwide sample
from the 1979 U.S.
National Health
Interview Survey
for Chronic Illness
Population
3,914
Seventh
Day
Adventists
1,868
Seventh
Day
Adventists
5,623
young
adults
3,091
Seventh
Day
Adventists
1,318
persons
age 17-93
Endpoint
AOD; chronic
bronchitis;
asthma
AOD; chronic
bronchitis;
asthma
persistent
cough and
phlegm
asthma
sinusitis, hay
fever, AOD
Pollutants Main Findings
TSP, O3, TSP linked to new cases of AOD and
SO2 chronic bronchitis, but not to asthma or
the severity of asthma. O3 not linked to
the incidence of new cases of any
endpoint, but O3 was linked only to the
severity of asthma. No effect found for
SO2.
PM25 PM25 related to new cases of chronic
bronchitis, but not to new cases of
AOD or asthma.
SO2, SO4, Persistent cough and phlegm is higher
NO3, TSP in the community with higher SO2, SO4,
and TSP concentrations.
O3, PM10,, Single pollutant models: O3
SO4, SO2, significantly linked to new asthma
NO2 cases in males, but not in females;
other pollutants not significantly linked
to new asthma cases in males or
females. Two pollutant models
estimated for ozone with another
pollutant; little impact found on size of
ozone coefficient.
O3, TSP Controlling for TSP, O3 significantly
related to the initiation (or
exacerbation) of sinusitis and hay
fever; no effect on AOD. TSP not
significantly related to any endpoint,
although it is marginally significant for
AOD.
Comment
Emphysema, chronic
bronchitis, and asthma
comprise AOD.
PM25 estimated from visibility
data.

Average pollution level from
1973-1992 used. Prior to
1987, PM10 estimated from
TSP.

D-28

-------
Study
Schwartz
(1993)
Xu et al.
(1993)
Zemp et al.
(1999)
Location and
Period
Nationwide sample
from the National
Health and
Nutrition
Examination
Survey
1974-1975
Beijing, China
Survey conducted
August-September
1986
Eight sites in
Switzerland
1991
Population
6,138
individuals
ages 30-74
1,576
never
smokers
9,651
individuals
ages 18-60
Endpoint Pollutants
chronic TSP
bronchitis;
asthma;
shortness of
breath
(dyspnea);
respiratory
illness
chronic TSP; SO2
bronchitis;
asthma
chronic TSP, PM10,
phlegm, NO2, O3
chronic cough,
breathlessness
, asthma,
dyspnea on
exertion
Main Findings
TSP significantly related to the
prevalence of chronic bronchitis, and
marginally significant for respiratory
illness. No effect on asthma or
dyspnea.
Chronic bronchitis significantly higher
in the community with the highest TSP
level. TSP not linked to the prevalence
of asthma.
Single pollutant models: PM10 and NO2
significantly associated with chronic
phlegm, chronic cough or phlegm,
breathlessness and dyspnea. Similar
though less significant associations
found for TSP. No significant effect
found for O,.
Comment
Respiratory illness defined as
a significant condition, coded
by an examining physician as
ICD8 code (460-51 9)


D-29

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Hospital Admissions

    There is a wealth of epidemiological information
on the relationship between air pollution and hospital
admissions for various respiratory and cardiovascular
diseases; in addition, some studies have examined the
relationship  between  air  pollution and emergency
room (ER) visits.  Because most emergency room
visits do not result in an admission to the hospital —
the majority of people going to the ER are treated and
return home — we treat hospital admissions and ER
visits separately, taking account of the  fraction of ER
visits that do get admitted to the hospital, as discussed
below.

    Hospital  admissions  require the  patient to be
examined by  a  physician,  and on  average  may
represent  more  serious  incidents  than ER visits
(Lipfert, 1993, p. 230).   The two  main groups of
hospital admissions estimated in this  analysis are
respiratory admissions and cardiovascular admissions.
There is not much evidence linking air pollution with
other types of hospital admissions. The only types of
ER visits that have been linked to air pollution in the
U.S.  or Canada are asthma-related visits.

    To  estimate the number of hospital admissions
for respiratory illness, we pool the incidence estimates
from a variety of U.S. and Canadian studies,  using a
random effects weighting procedure.  These  studies
differ from each other in two important ways: (1)
Some studies considered people of  all ages while
others considered only people ages 65  and older; and
(2) The  International Classification of Diseases - 9th
revision (ICD-9) codes   included  in  studies of
respiratory hospital admissions and air pollution vary
substantially.

    The broadest classification used (for example, in
Schwartz, 1996)  includes ICD-9  codes  460-519.
Other studies,  however, considered only subsets of
the broader classification. For example, Burnett et al.
(1997b)  consider ICD-9 codes 466,480-486, 490-494,
and 496. The correct set of ICD codes for this study
is difficult to  determine.   If the broadest category
(460-519) is too broad, including respiratory illnesses
that  are not linked to air pollution, we would expect
the estimated  pollutant coefficients to be  biased
downward;  however,  they  would be  used  in
combination with  a larger baseline  incidence  in
estimating changes in respiratory hospital admissions
associated with changes in pollutant concentrations.
If the broadest category is  correct (i.e., if  all the
respiratory illnesses included are actually associated
with air pollution), then studies using only subsets of
ICD codes  within that  category would presumably
understate   the  change  in  respiratory  hospital
admissions.  It is likely, however, that all the  studies
have included the most important respiratory illnesses,
and that the  impact of differences in the definition of
"all respiratory illnesses" may be less than that of
other study design characteristics.  We therefore treat
each study  equally, at least initially, in the pooling
process, assuming that each study gives a reasonable
estimate of the impact of air pollution on respiratory
hospital admissions.

    There are several steps in our estimation process:

    •  Develop   study-specific   estimates    of
       respiratory admissions incidence change;

    •  Develop C-R functions for each pollutant in
       a model from a given study: e.g., Burnett et
       al. (1997b) included PM25_10, O3, NO2, and
       SO2 in their final model  for  respiratory
       admissions (ICD-9 codes 464-466, 480-486,
       490-494, 496);

    •  Estimate the  change in incidence associated
       with  the change  in each air  pollutant
       considered in the model, and aggregate these
       incidence changes across the pollutants in the
       model: e.g., for Burnett et al.  (1997b) we sum
       the  incidence changes associated with PM25_
       10, 03, N02, and SO2;

    •  If a study estimated separate models for non-
       overlapping respiratory illness categories, sum
       the  estimated incidence changes across these
       non-overlapping categories: e.g., Delfino et
       al. (1994) estimated two separate models: one
       for  asthma (ICD code 493) and one for all
       respiratory non-asthma (ICD codes 462-466,
                                                D-30

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
        480-487,  490-492,  494,  and  496);  we
        estimated and summed incidences for these
        two categories.

Aggregate  estimates  across non-overlapping  age
categories:

    •   Seven studies estimated C-R functions  for
        respiratory admissions for people ages 65 and
        older.  One  study, Sheppard et al. (1999),
        estimated a C-R function for asthma only for
        people under 65.   Using a Monte  Carlo
        procedure, we aggregate the results from the
        Sheppard study with those from each of the
        over-65 respiratory admissions studies.

Pool  estimates of respiratory hospital admissions
changes:

    •   Four  studies estimated  C-R functions  for
        respiratory admissions for people of all ages.
        With the seven "all ages" estimates developed
        in step 2, there are  eleven separate estimates
        of  the  change   in  respiratory  hospital
        admissions associated with a change in air
        pollutant concentrations. Using Monte Carlo
        procedures, the results of these eleven studies
        are pooled.

    Table  D-5  summarizes the  studies  used  in
estimating respiratory admissions; Table D-6 provides
more detailed information on these studies, and other
studies that were not chosen for this analysis.

    Similar issues of definition arise for cardiovascular
hospital admissions.   The broadest classification we
have seen in the epidemiological literature includes
ICD  codes 390-429  (see,  for example, Schwartz,
1999).  Some studies, however, use a much  more
narrow definition, including only subsets of the larger
group of ICD codes.   We use a similar procedure for
cardiovascular admissions as we used for respiratory
hospital admissions.   Table D-7 summarizes  the
studies used in estimating cardiovascular admissions;
Table D-8 provides  more  detailed information on
these studies, and other studies that were not chosen
this analysis.
    Because we are estimating ER visits as well as
hospital  admissions  for  asthma, we must avoid
counting twice the ER visits for asthma that are
subsequently admitted to the hospital.  To avoid
double-counting,  the  baseline incidence  rate for
emergency room visits  is adjusted by subtracting the
percentage of patients that are  admitted  into the
hospital.  Three studies provide some information to
do this: Richards et al. (1981, p.  350) reported that
13% of children's ER visits ended up as hospital
admissions; Lipfert (1993, p. 230) reported that ER
visits (for all  causes)  are two to five times more
frequent than hospital admissions; Smith et al. (1997,
p. 789) reported  445,000 asthma-related  hospital
admissions in 1987 and 1.2 million asthma ER visits.
The  study by  Smith et al. seems  the most relevant
since it is a national study and looks at all age groups.
Assuming   that   air-pollution   related   hospital
admissions first pass through  the ER, the  reported
incidence      rates     suggest     that     37%
(=445,000/1,200,000) of ER visits are subsequently
admitted to the hospital, or that ER visits for asthma
occur 2.7 times as frequently as hospital admissions
for asthma.  The baseline incidence of asthma ER
visits is therefore taken to be 2.7  times the baseline
incidence  of hospital  admissions for  asthma.  To
avoid double-counting, however, only 63%  of the
resulting change in asthma ER visits associated with a
given change in pollutant concentrations is counted in
the ER visit incidence change.

    Table D-9  summarizes  the  studies  used in
estimating ER visits for asthma; Tables D-10 and D-
11 provide more detailed information on these studies
and  other ER studies that were not used  in the
analysis.
                                                D-31

-------
Table D-5
Studies Used to Develop Respiratory Admissions Estimates
Location
Toronto, Canada
Toronto, Canada
Toronto, Canada
Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN
Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN
Birmingham, AL
Detroit, Ml
Spokane, WA
New Haven, CT
Tacoma, WA
Seattle, WA
Study
Burnett et al. (1997b)
Burnett et al. (1999)
Thurston et al. (1994)
Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
Schwartz (1994c)
Schwartz (1994a)
Schwartz (1994b)
Schwartz (1996)
Schwartz (1995)
Schwartz (1995)
Sheppard et al. (1999)
Endpoints Estimated a
(ICD code)
all respiratory (464-466, 480-486,
490-494, 496)
asthma (493); respiratory infection
(464, 466, 480-487, 494); non-
asthma COPD (490-492, 496)
all respiratory (466, 480-482, 485,
490-493)
pneumonia (480-487); COPD
(490-496)
pneumonia (480-486); COPD (490-
496)
pneumonia (480-487); COPD
(490-496)
pneumonia (480-486); non-asthma
COPD (491 -492, 494-496)
all respiratory (460-519)
all respiratory (460-519)
all respiratory (460-519)
asthma (493)
Pollutants Used in Final Model
PM25.10, O3, NO2, SO2
O3, CO, PM2 wo (asthma); O3, NO2, PM25
(respiratory infection); O3, CO, PM2510
(COPD).
03, PM25
O3, SO2, NO2, PM10 (pneumonia); O3, CO,
PM10(COPD)
O3, PM10 (pneumonia); PM10 (COPD)
PMn
03, PM10
PM10
03, PM10
03, PM10
CO, PM25
Study
Population
all ages
all ages
all ages
>64
>64
>64
>64
>64
>64
>64
<65
a Monetized benefits of non-overlapping endpoints within each study are aggregated.  Monetized benefits for asthma among people age <65 (Sheppard et al., 1999) are aggregated with
the benefits in studies of people age >64.
                                                                               D-32

-------
Table D-6
Summary of Hospital Admissions Studies - Respiratory Illnesses

Study
Anderson et
al. (1997)





Burnett et
al. (1995)






Burnett et
al. (1997b)







Burnett et
al. (1997a)







Location and
Period
Barcelona, Paris
Amsterdam,
Rotterdam,
Milano
Period varies by
city from 5-13
years
southern
Ontario, Canada
1/83-12/88





Toronto,
Canada
summers in
1992-1994





16 Canadian
cities
3/81-12/91







Population Endpoint
all ages; COPD
>64 (490-492,
496)




<65; >64 all
respiratory
(466, 480-
486, 490-
494, 496)



all ages all
respiratory
(464-466,
480-486,
490-494,
496)



<65; >64 all
respiratory
(466, 480-
486, 490-
494, 496)





Pollutants a
NO2, BS
(black
smoke),
TSP, SO2,
03


S04, 03







O3, CO, NO2,
SO2, COM
(coefficient
of haze), H+,
S04, PM25,
PM25.10,
PM10,


O3, CO, SO2,
NO2, COM








Main Findings
COPD: Single pollutant models: meta-analysis
of city specific results found significant effect
for BS, NO2, O3, and SO2 in the all age group;
similar results reported for ages >64.
Strongest effect found for O3. TSP not
significant in meta-analysis. For a given
pollutant, results varied considerably by city.
All respiratory: SO4 significantly related to
respiratory admissions in ages <65 and >64.
O3 significant impact from May-September; no
effect the rest of the year.




All respiratory: COM and O3 linked to
respiratory admissions; other PM measures
less strongly linked. Two pollutant models:
CO, NO2, and SO2 not significant, controlling
for COM; O3 significant, controlling for COM.
Four pollutant models: COM and O3
significant; no effect for NO2 and SO2; other
PM measures not significant, controlling for
O3, NO2, and SO2.
All respiratory: Multiple pollutant models: O,
significantly related to admissions, controlling
for CO and COM; significant effect also
reported for CO and COM; no significant effect
found for NO2 and SO2 after controlling for O3
and CO. Montreal and Vancouver decreased
the size of the effect of O3 substantially. O3
significant with and without these cites in the
model.

Comment
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.




May-September results
also discussed in Burnett
etal. (1994). Study not
used to estimate incidence:
no study specific
conversion available
between SO4 and PM2S or
PM10.
Four pollutant model
(PM2S_m O3, NO2, and SO2)
used to estimate all
respiratory incidence.





Study not used to estimate
incidence: no study specific
conversion available
between COM and PM2S or
PM10.




D-33

-------
Study
Burnett et
al. (1999)
Delfino et
al. (1994)
Lipfert and
Hammerstro
m(1992)
Location and
Period
Toronto,
Canada
1980-1994
Montreal,
Canada
May-October in
1984-1988.
July-August
subset used to
examine all
respiratory
admissions.
Southern
Ontario, Canada
January-
February and
July-August in
4/79-3/85
Population Endpoint
all ages asthma
(493);
respiratory
infection
(464, 466,
480-487,
494);
COPD
(490-492,
496)
all ages asthma
(493); all
respiratory
(462-466,
480-487,
490-494,
496); all
respiratory
non-asthma
all ages all
respiratory
(466, 480-
482, 485,
490-493)
Pollutants a
O3, CO, NO2,
SO2, PM25,
PM25.10,
PM10,
03, S04,
PM10
03, S04,
N04, S04,
COM, TSP
Main Findings
Multiple pollutant models estimated, where
pollutants for best fitting model chosen using
stepwise regression based on AIC criterion.
Asthma: O3, CO, PM25_10 significantly related
to asthma admissions; other pollutants not
chosen in stepwise regression. Respiratory
infection: O,, NO,, and PM,K chosen in
stepwise regression COPD: O3 and PM25_10
chosen in stepwise regression.
Asthma: Two pollutant model: marqinallv
significant effect for PM10, controlling for O3.
No effect for O, and SO,,. All respiratory and
all respiratory non-asthma: PM10 suggestive
but not significant, after controlling for
temperature. Significant link between all
respiratory non-asthma and SO4. No effect for
o3.
All respiratory: SO2, SO4, and O3 found to be
significant predictors of respiratory admissions
in July-August.
Comment
PM25, PM2WO, and PM10
estimated from TSP, COM,
and SO4 data. Multiple
pollutant models used to
estimate incidence of:
asthma (O3, CO, PM2 wo/),
respiratory infection (O3,
NO2, PM25;, and COPD
(03, CO, PM25.10/
SO4 and PM10were both
estimated from COM and
other variables. Study not
used to estimate incidence
Study not used to estimate
incidence: estimated
coefficients not reported.
D-34

-------

Study
Moolgavkar
etal. (1997)














Morgan et
al. (1998)





Pantazopol
ou et al.
(1995)


Ponce de
Leon et al.
(1996)
Ponka and
Virtanen
(1994)

Location and
Period
Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN;
Birmingham, AL
1/86-12/91












Sydney,
Australia
1/90-12/94




Athens, Greece
1988



London,
England
4/87-2/92
Helsinki, Finland
1/87-12/89



Population Endpoint
>64 pneumonia
(480-487);
COPD
(490-496);
all
respiratory
(480-487,
490-496)








1-14; 15- asthma;
64; >64 COPD
(490-
492,494
496)


all ages all
respiratory
(not defined
by ICD
code)
0-14; 15- all
64; >64 respiratory
(460-519)
<65; >64 COPD
(491-492)



Pollutants a
O3, CO, SO2,
N02, PM10














O3, NO2,
bscat
(measure of
light
scattering)


BS, CO, NO2




BS, SO2, O3,
NO2

NO2, SO2,
O3, TSP



Main Findings
Pneumonia: Four pollutant model: O,
significant (NO2, SO2, and PM10 not significant)
in Minneapolis-St. Paul; no significant effect
found for any pollutant in Birmingham. COPD:
No significant effect found in Birmingham or
Minneapolis-St. Paul for any pollutant. AN
respiratory: Single pollutant models: O3, NO2,
and PM10 significant in Minneapolis-St. Paul.
Multiple pollutant models (results presented in
graph): O3 significant, controlling for other
pollutants; PM10 significant controlling for O3,
but not significant controlling for O3, SO2, and
NO2 together. No significant effect found in
Birmingham for admissions with O3, CO, or
PM10; NO2 and SO2 data not available for
Birmingham.
Asthma: Sinqle pollutant models: NO,
significant for ages 1-14 but not other age
groups. O3 and bscat not significant for any
age group. Three pollutant model: NO2
remains significantly related to asthma
admission in ages 1-14. COPD: No pollutant
significantly related to COPD admissions.
All respiratory: Single-pollutant models: BS,
CO, NO2 significantly related to respiratory
admissions in the wintertime. No significant
effect found any pollutant in the summer.

All respiratory: O, significantly related to
admissions in ages >14. No significant effect
found for SO2, O3, and NO2.
COPD: Single pollutant models: SO2 linked to
(491-492) admissions in ages <65; NO2 linked
to admissions in ages >64; no significant
effect seen for O3 and TSP.

Comment
Multiple pollutant models
used to estimate
pneumonia incidence (O3,
SO2, NO2, PM10) and
COPD incidence (O3, CO,
PM10) in Minneapolis-St.
Paul. No model estimated
for Birmingham:
coefficients and standard
errors not reported.






Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U.S. and Canada.




Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.


Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U.S. and Canada.

D-35

-------
Study
Schwartz
(1994a)
Schwartz
(1994b)
Schwartz
(1996)
Schwartz
(1994c)
Schwartz
(1995)
Location and
Period
Birmingham, AL
1/86-12/89
Detroit, Ml
1/86-12/89
Spokane, WA
1/88-12/90
Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN
1/86-12/89
New Haven, CT;
Tacoma, WA
1/88-12/90
Population Endpoint Pollutants a
>64 pneumonia PM10, O3
(480-487);
COPD
(490-496)
>64 asthma PM10, O3
(493);
pneumonia
(480-486);
non-asthma
COPD
(491-492,
494-496)
>64 pneumonia PM10, O3
(480-487);
COPD
(490-496);
all
respiratory
(460-519)
>64 pneumonia PM10, O3
(480-486);
COPD
(490-496)
>64 all PM10, O3,
respiratory SO2
(460-519)
Main Findings
Pneumonia: PM1P siqnificant and O, not
significant in single pollutant models. COPD:
PM10 significant and O3 not significant in single
pollutant models.
Asthma: admissions not associated with either
pollutant; coefficients and standard errors not
reported. Pneumonia: Two pollutant model:
PM10 and O3 both significant for pneumonia.
Non-asthma COPD: Two pollutant model:
PM10 and O3 both significant.
Pneumonia: PM1P marqinallv siqnificant and
O3 not significant for pneumonia in single
pollutant models. COPD: PM1P siqnificant and
O3 not significant in single pollutant models.
All respiratory: Sinqle pollutant models: PM1P
and O3 both significant. Two pollutant model
not estimated because of limited overlap
between PM10 and O3 data.
Pneumonia: Two pollutant model: PM1P
significantly related to pneumonia; O3 weakly
linked to pneumonia. COPD: Sinqle pollutant
models: PM10 significant and O3 not
significant.
All respiratory: Sinqle pollutant models: PM1P,
O3, SO2 significant, except O3 in New Haven.
Two pollutant model results varied by city: O3
significant (3 of 4 models) and stable
coefficient estimates PM10 significant (3 of 4
models), but less stable estimates. SO2
significant (1of 4 models).
Comment
Single pollutant models
(PMW) used to estimate
pneumonia incidence and
COPD incidence.
Two pollutant models (PM10
and O3) used to estimate
pneumonia incidence and
non-asthma COPD
incidence.
Single pollutant model
(PMW) used to estimate all-
respiratory incidence.
Two pollutant model (PM10,
O3) used to estimate
pneumonia incidence;
single pollutant model
(PM10) used to estimate
COPD incidence.
Two pollutant model (PM10,
O3) used to estimate all
respiratory incidence.
D-36

-------
Study
Sheppard et
al. (1999)
Spix et al.
(1998)
Sunyer et
al. (1997)
Tenias et al.
(1998)
Thurston et
al. (1994)
Location and
Period Population
Seattle, WA <65
1/87-12/94
London, 15-64; >64
Amsterdam,
Rotterdam,
Paris, Milano
Period varies by
city from 5-13
years
Barcelona, 0-14; 15-64
Helsinki,
London, Paris
Period varies by
city from 3-6
years
Valencia, Spain >14
1/93-12/95
Toronto, all ages
Canada
six weeks in July
and August
1986-1988
Endpoint
asthma
(493)
all
respiratory
(460-519)
asthma
asthma
asthma
(493); all
respiratory
(466, 480-
482, 485,
490-493)
Pollutants a Main Findings
CO, SO,, O,, Asthma: Sinqle pollutant models: each
PM25, PM25_ pollutant significantly related to asthma,
10, PM10 except SO2. Multiple pollutant models: PM25
and CO reported to have best fit in models
without O3. Both PM25 and CO are significant
when included together in a model.
NO,, SO,, All respiratory: Sinqle pollutant models: O,
O3, TSP, BS significantly related to admissions in ages 15-
64 and >64. BS significantly related to
admissions in ages 15-64. SO2 significantly
related to admissions in ages >64.
NO2, SO2, Asthma: Two pollutant models: NO2 significant
O3, BS in ages 15-64, controlling for BS; NO2 had no
effect on ages 0-14. SO2 significant in ages 0-
14, controlling for either BS or NO2; SO2 had
no effect on ages 15-64.
NO2, SO2, Asthma: Two pollutant models: O3 and NO2
O3, BS both significant. No significant effect found for
SO2 and BS.
H+, SO,,, O,, Asthma: Sinqle pollutant models: O,, H+, SO,,,
PM25, PM25_ O3, and TSP linked to all respiratory
10, PM10, TSP admissions; PM25, PM2 wo, PM10 not
significant. Two pollutant models: O3
significant, but PM measures no longer
significant. Best fitting PM measure is H+. AN
respiratory: Single pollutant models: O3 and
various measures of PM linked to all
respiratory admissions. Two pollutant models:
with O3 and PM together, O3 still significant,
but PM often not significant (only H+
significant).
Comment
In most years, O3 data was
available only from April
through October. O3
reported to have the best
fit, but authors did not
consider O3 further
because of limited data.
Two pollutant model (CO,
PM2S) used to estimate
asthma incidence.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.
Two pollutant model (O3,
PM2S) used to estimate all
respiratory incidence.
D-37

-------
Study
Thurston et
al. (1992)
Vigotti et al.
(1996)
Location and
Period
Buffalo, NY;
New York City
June-August in
1988-1989
Milan, Italy
1/89-12/89
Population Endpoint
all ages all
respiratory
(466, 480-
486, 490-
493)
15-64;>64 all
respiratory
(460-519)
Pollutants a Main Findings
H+, SO,,, O, All respiratory: Three pollutant model: H+, SO,,,
and O3 are all significant. This result is found
in both Buffalo and New York City.
TSP, SO, All respiratory: Sinqle pollutant models: TSP
and SO2 linked to admissions.
Comment
Study not used to estimate
incidence: no study specific
conversion available
between study pollutants
(7-f and SO4) and PM25 or
PM10.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U. S. and Canada.
' Not all pollutants considered in a study are necessarily included in the model used to develop C-R functions.
                                                                               D-38

-------
Table D-7
Studies Used to Develop Cardiovascular Admissions Estimates
     Location
Study
Endpoints Estimated
(ICD code)
Pollutants Used in Final Model
Study
Population
Toronto, Canada
Burnett et al. (1997b)
cardiac (410-414, 427-428)
O, PM,
all ages
Toronto, Canada
Burnett et al. (1999)
ischemic heart disease (410-414);
dysrhythmias (427); congestive heart
failure (428)
NO2, SO2 (ischemic heart disease); PM25, CO,
O3 (dysrhythmias); CO, NO2 (heart failure
incidence)
all ages
Detroit, Ml
Schwartz and Morris
(1995)
ischemic heart disease (410-414);
congestive heart failure (428)
CO, PM,
>64
Eight U.S. counties
1/88-12/90
Schwartz (1999)
cardiovascular disease (390-429)
CO, PM.,
>64
Tucson, AZ
1/88-12/90
Schwartz (1999)
cardiovascular disease (390-429)
CO, PM.,
>64
                                                                 D-39

-------
Table D-8
Summary of Hospital Admissions Studies - Cardiovascular Illnesses
Study
Burnett et al.
(1995)
Burnett et al.
(1997b)
Burnett et al.
(1997c)
Burnett et al.
(1999)
Location and
Period
southern and
central
Ontario,
Canada
1/83-12/88
Toronto,
Canada
summers
1992-1994
10 Canadian
cities
1/81-12/91
Toronto,
Canada
1980-1994
Endpoint
Population (ICD code)
all ages cardiac
(410,413,
427-428)
all ages cardiac
(410-414,427-
428)
>64 congestive
heart failure
(428)
all ages ischemic
heart disease
(410-414);
dysrhythmias
(427);
congestive
heart failure
(428)
Pollutants
S04, 03
O3, CO,
NO2, SO2,
COM
(coefficient
of haze),
H+, S04,
PMZ5,
PM2.WO,
PM10,
O3, CO,
NO2, SO2,
COM
O3, CO,
NO2, SO2,
PM2.5,
PM2.WO,
PM10,
Main Findings
Cardiac: Two pollutant model: SO4
significantly related to cardiac admissions;
O3 not significant, in any season or over
the whole year.
Cardiac: COM and O, linked to cardiac
admissions; other PM measures less
strongly linked. Two pollutant models: CO,
NO2, and SO2 not significant, controlling for
COM. O3 significant, controlling for COM.
Four pollutant models: COM and O3
significant; no effect for NO2 and SO2.
Other PM measures not significant,
controlling for O3, NO2, and SO2.
Congestive heart failure: Single pollutant
models: CO, NO2, SO2, COM are
significant; no effect for O3. CO and NO2
have the best fit. Two pollutant models:
Controlling for NO2, CO significant, with
only small reduction in coefficient size;
NO2 insignificant in this model.
Multiple pollutant model, where pollutants
for best fitting model chosen using
stepwise regression based on AIC
criterion. Ischemic heart disease: NO2 and
SO2, chosen by stepwise regression.
Other pollutants not chosen.
Dvsrhythmias: polluO3, CO, and PM25
chosen by stepwise regression. Other
pollutants not chosen. Conqestive heart
failure: NO2 and CO chosen by stepwise
regression procedure, other pollutants not
chosen in stepwise regression.
Comment
Study not used to
estimate incidence: no
study specific conversion
available between SO4
and PM2Sor PMW.
Two pollutant model (O3,
PM25_10) used to estimate
cardiac incidence.
Study not used to
estimate incidence:
limited endpoint.
PM25, PM25.10, and PM10
estimated from TSP,
COM, and sulfate (SO4)
data. Multiple pollutant
models used to estimate
ischemic heart disease
(NO2, SO2), dysrhythmias
(PM2S, CO, O3), and
congestive heart failure
incidence (CO, NO2).
D-40

-------
Study
Morgan et al.
(1998)
Morris et al.
(1995)
Morris and
Naumova (1998)
Pantazopolou et
al. (1995)
Schwartz and
Morris (1995)
Location and
Period
Sydney,
Australia
1/90-12/94
seven U.S.
cities
1/86-12/89
Chicago, IL
1/86-12/89
Athens,
Greece
1988
Detroit, Ml
1/86-12/89
Endpoint
Population (ICD code)
0-64; >64 heart disease
(410,413,427-
428)
>64 congestive
heart failure
(428)
>64 congestive
heart failure
(428)
all ages cardiac
(not defined by
ICD code)
>64 ischemic heart
disease (410-
414);
dysrhythmias
(427);
congestive
heart failure
(428)
Pollutants
O3, NO2,
bscat
(measure
of light
scattering)
O3, CO,
NO2, SO2
O3, CO,
NO2, SO2,
PM10
BS (black
smoke),
CO, NO2
O3, CO,
S02, PM10
Main Findings
Single pollutant models: bscat significant
for ages >64; NO2 significant in ages 0-64
and >64. Three pollutant model: NO2
significant in ages >64; O3 and bscat not
significant.
Single pollutant models: CO, NO2, and SO2
significant in single pollutant models. Four
pollutant model: CO is significant in five of
the seven cities; NO2 is significant in one
city; SO2 and O3 are not significant in any
cities.
Single pollutant models: CO, NO2, SO2,
and PM10 significant. Five pollutant model:
CO significant (Cl for RR=1.03-1.12); PM10
borderline significant (Cl for RR=0.99-
1.06); other pollutants not significant.
Single pollutant models: BS, CO, NO2
significantly related to cardiac admissions
in the winter. No significant effect found
for any pollutant in the summer.
Ischemic heart disease: Two pollutant
models: PM10and CO both significant; no
effect seen for SO2 and O3. Dvsrhythmias:
Air pollutants did not have a significant
effect. Congestive heart failure: Single
pollutant models: PM10 and CO significant;
SO2 and O3 not significant. Two pollutant
models: PM10 significant, controlling for CO
and SO2. Controlling for PM10, CO
significant.
Comment
Results from three
pollutant model for ages
0-64 not presented. Study
not used to estimate
incidence: study outside
U.S. and Canada.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: no PM
measure used in the
study, plus limited
endpoint.
Study not used to
estimate incidence:
limited endpoint.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
Two pollutant models
(PM10, CO) used to
estimate ischemic heart
disease and congestive
heart failure incidence.
D-41

-------
Location and
Study Period Population
Schwartz (1999) Eight U.S. >64
counties
1/88-12/90
Schwartz (1997) Tucson, AZ >64
1/88-12/90
Yang et al. Reno/Sparks, all ages
(1998) NV
1/89-12/94
Endpoint
(ICD code) Pollutants
cardiovascular CO, PM10
disease (390-
429)
cardiovascular O3, CO,
disease (390- SO2, NO2,
429) PM10
cardiovascular CO
illness (390-
459)
Main Findings
Two pollutant model: CO and PM10 both
significant.
In a model with the two pollutants, CO and
PM10 were both significant. No effect seen
for O3, SO2, and NO2.
Reported significant relationship between
CO and admissions.
Comment
Two pollutant model
(PM10, CO) used to
estimate incidence of
cardiovascular
admissions.
Two pollutant model
(PM10, CO) used to
estimate incidence of
cardiovascular
admissions.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: no PM
measure used in the
study.

Table D-9
Studies Used to Develop Asthma Emergency Room Visits
Location Study
central and northern NJ Cody et al. (1992)
central and northern NJ Weisel et al. (1995)
Seattle, WA Schwartz et al. (1993)
St. John, New Stieb et al. (1996)
Brunswick, Canada
Endpoints Estimated
asthma
asthma
asthma
asthma
Pollutants Used in Final
Model
03
03
PM10
03
Study Population
all ages
all ages
<65
all ages
D-42

-------
Table D-10
Summary of Selected Studies for Emergency Room Visits - Asthma
Study
Atkinson et
al. (1999)
Bates et al.
(1990)
Buchdahl et
al. (1996)
Castellsagu
e et al.
(1995)
Cody et al.
(1992)
Goldstein
and
Weinstein
(1986)
Location and
Period Population Endpoint
London, England 0-14; 15- asthma
1/92-12/94 64; >64; all
ages
Vancouver, 1-14; 15- asthma
Canada 60; >60
7/84-10/86
London, England <17 acute
3/92-2/93 wheezing
Barcelona, Spain >14 asthma
January-March and
July-September in
1985-1989
central and all ages asthma
northern NJ
May-August in
1988-1989
New York City alleges asthma
1/69-2/72
Pollutants
NO2, BS
(black
smoke),
PM10, S02,
CO, O3
NO2, SO2,
S04, 03
NO2, SO2,
03
NO2, BS,
S02, 03
PM10, S02,
03
SO2
and Acute Wheezing
Main Findings
Single pollutant models: PM10 and NO2
significantly related to asthma visits in all age
groups. SO2 significant in ages 0-14. BS is
significant for ages 15-64. No effect seen for
O3. Two pollutant results only for ages 0-14:
NO2 and SO2 significant; other pollutants not
significant.
SO4 correlated with asthma in all age groups
with some variation by season. SO2
correlated with asthma visits in ages 15 and
up. No effect found for NO2 and O3.
SO2 significantly related to acute wheezing.
O3 has a significant, U-shaped result,
suggesting that the optimal level of ozone is
not zero. NO2 not significant.
Single pollutant models: NO2 significant in
both July-September and January-March. BS
linked to asthma ER visits in July-September.
No significant effect found for SO2 and O3.
Two pollutant model: O3 linked to asthma
visits; SO2 not significant. No significant effect
seen for PM10; PM10 considered in separate
analysis, because of limited (every sixth day)
sampling.
No significant correlation found between SO2
and asthma ER visits.

Comment
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to
estimate incidence:
correlations only
presented.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
Single pollutant model
(O3) used to estimate
incidence of asthma
visits.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: only
SO2 in the analysis.
D-43

-------
Study
Lipsett et al.
(1997)
Richards et
al. (1981)
Romieu et
al. (1995)
Rosas et al.
(1998)
Schwartz et
al. (1993)
Stieb et al.
(1996)
Weisel et al.
(1995)
Location and
Period
Santa Clara
County, CA
November-January
in 1988-1992
Los Angeles, CA
8/79-1/80
Mexico City,
Mexico
1/90-6/90
Mexico City,
Mexico
1991
Seattle, WA
9/89-9/90
St. John, New
Brunswick, Canada
May-September in
1984-1992
central and
northern NJ
May-August in
1986-1990
Population
all ages
children
(median
age =6)
<16
<15; 16-59;
>59
<65; >64
0-15; >15;
all ages
all ages
Endpoint
asthma
asthma and
bronchiolitis
(92%
asthma
only)
asthma
asthma
asthma
asthma
asthma
Pollutants
PM10, COM
(coefficient
of haze),
03, N02
COM, HC
(hydrocar-
bons), NO,
NO2, O3,
SO2, SO4,
TSP
S02, 03
03, S02,
N02, PM10,
TSP
S02, PM10,
03
NO2, TSP,
SO2, SO4,
03
03
Main Findings
Single pollutant models: NO2, PM10, and COM
significant; O3 not significant. Two pollutant
models: PM10 and COM linked to ER visits
controlling for NO2; NO2 not significant. PM10
reported to provide a slightly better fit than
COM
COM, HC, NO, and NO2 have positive and
significant correlation with ER visits; O3 and
SO2 have negative significant correlation; SO4
and TSP have insignificant correlation.
Two pollutant model: O3 significant and SO2
marginally significant.
Little effect found for air pollutants. Strong
effect found for aeroallergens, such as grass
pollen.
Single pollutant models: PM10 linked to ER
visits in ages <65, with no effect in ages >64.
No effect for SO2 and O3 on ER visits in either
age group.
O3 linked to ER visits in ages >15, especially
when O3 levels exceed 75 ppb; O3 not
significant in ages 0-15. No significant effect
seen for the other pollutants.
O3 linked to ER visits.
Comment
PM10 estimated from COM
observations. Study not
used to estimate
incidence: results depend
on temperature
interaction that we cannot
model.
13% of reported visits
subsequently admitted to
the hospital. Study not
used to estimate
incidence: correlations
only presented.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
Study not used to
estimate incidence: study
outside U. S. and Canada.
O3 only available May-
September. Single
pollutant model (PMW)
used to estimate
incidence of asthma
visits.
TSP and SO4 gathered
every sixth day. Single
pollutant model (O3) used
to estimate incidence of
asthma visits.
Single pollutant model
used.
D-44

-------
                Location and
   Study           Period         Population    Endpoint    Pollutants                 Main Findings                        Comment

White etal.    Atlanta, GA          1-16          asthma and   O3, SO2,      O3 linked to ER visits when O3 levels            PM10 estimated from
(1994)        6/90-8/90                         restrictive     PM10         exceeded 110 ppb. No significant effect         visibility levels.  Study not
                                               airway                     reported for SO2 or PM10.                      used to estimate
                                               disease                                                                incidence: limited study
                                                                                                                     data.
                                                                    D-45

-------
Table D-1 1
Summary of Selected Studies for Emergency Room Visits -All-Cause, All-Respiratory, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
(COPD), and Bronchitis
Study
Atkinson et al.
(1999)
Bates et al.
(1990)
Cody et al.
(1992)
Delfino et al.
(1997)
Delfino et al.
(1998)
Samet et al.
(1981)
Location and
Period
London,
England
1/92-12/94
Vancouver,
Canada
7/84-10/86
central and
northern New
Jersey
May-August
1988-1989
Montreal,
Canada
June-
September
1992-1993
Montreal,
Canada
June-August
1989-1990
Steubenville,
Ohio
March-April
and October-
November
1974-1977
Endpoint
Population (ICD code)
0-14; 15-64; all
>64; all respiratory
ages (not defined
by ICD code)
1-14; 15-60; all
>60 respiratory
(466, 480-
486, 491-
493, 496)
all ages bronchitis
(466, 490,
491,496)
<2; 2-64; all
>64 respiratory
(not defined
by ICD code)
>64 all
respiratory
(not defined
by ICD code)
all ages all
respiratory
(not defined
by ICD code)
Pollutants
NO2, BS
(black
smoke),
PM10, S02,
CO, O3
NO2, SO2,
S04, 03
PM10,
SO2, O3
03, PM10,
PM2.5,
S04, H+
PM25, O3
NO2, TSP,
SO2, CO,
03
Main Findings
Single pollutant models: PM10 significant in
ages 0-14 and 15-64. BS and SO2
significant in ages 0-14. CO and NO2
significant in ages >64. O3 not significant.
SO2 correlated with respiratory visits in all
age groups. SO4 correlated in ages >14.
NO2 correlated in ages 15-60. O3 not
significant.
No significant effect seen for PM10, O3, or
SO2 on bronchitis admissions.
Single pollutant models: H+ and SO4
significant in ages <2; no effect in ages 2-
64 for any pollutants; O3, PM10, PM25, and
SO4 significant in ages >64. Two pollutant
model: O3 significant and PM25 not
significant in ages >64.
Two pollutant model: O3 significant; PM25
has consistent link but not significant.
Single pollutant models: TSP and SO2
significant; NO2,, CO, or O3 were not
significant.
Comment
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside U.S.
and Canada.
Results varied somewhat by
season. Study not used to
estimate incidence:
correlations only presented.
PM10 sampled every sixth
day, so limited dataset. PM10
considered in separate
analysis. Study not used to
estimate incidence.
Limited number of results
presented for two pollutant
models. Study not used to
estimate incidence: all
respiratory not defined by
ICD code.
PM25 measured every sixth
day, with rest of daily
observations estimated from
visibility and other data.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: all respiratory not
defined by ICD code.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: all respiratory not
defined by ICD code.
D-46

-------
                Location and                   Endpoint
    Study          Period       Population    (ICD code)   Pollutants                Main Findings                        Comment
Pantazopolou
etal. (1995)
Athens,
Greece
1988
all ages all outpatient
visits
BS, CO,
NO2
Single-pollutant models: NO2 significant in
the winter. No effects found for any
pollutant in the summer.
Study not used to estimate
incidence: study outside U.S.
and Canada.
Sunyeretal.    Barcelona,       >14          COPD (not     SO2, BS     SO2 correlated with ER visits in the summer    Study not used to estimate
(1993)         Spain                        defined by                 and winter.  BS significant in the winter only    incidence: study outside U.S.
               1985-1989                    ICD code)                                                          and Canada.
Xu et al.        Beijing, China    all ages       all causes     SO2, TSP    SO2 and TSP both linked to ER visits.         Study not used to estimate
(1995b)        1990                                                                                            incidence: study outside U.S.
                                                                                                               and Canada.
                                                                  D-47

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Minor Illness

    In addition to chronic  illnesses and  hospital
admissions, there is a considerable body of scientific
research  that has estimated significant relationships
between  elevated air  pollution  levels and other
morbidity health effects.  Chamber study research has
established relationships between specific air pollution
chemicals and symptoms such as coughing, pain on
deep   inspiration,  wheezing,  eye  irritation  and
headaches. In addition, epidemiological research has
found air pollution relationships with acute infectious
diseases  (e.g.,  bronchitis, sinusitis) and a variety of
"symptom-day" categories.  Some "symptom-days"
studies  examine  excess incidences  of days with
identified symptoms such as wheezing, coughing, or
other specific upper or lower respiratory symptoms.
Other studies  estimate relationships for days with a
more general descriptions of days with adverse health
impacts,  such as "respiratory restricted activity days"
or work loss days.

    A major challenge in preparing an analysis of the
minor morbidity effects is identifying a set of effect
estimates that  reflects the full range of identified
adverse health effects but avoids  double counting.
From the  definitions  of the  specific health effects
examined in each research project, it is possible to
identify a set of effects that are non-overlapping, and
can be ultimately treated as additive in the monetary
benefits analysis.  This section primarily focuses on
the set of effect relationships that have been identified
that  make up a non-overlapping set.  Table D-12
summarizes the studies  used in  estimating minor
illnesses; Tables D-13 and D-14 provide more detailed
information on these  studies  and other studies  that
were not used in the analysis.

    Acute Bronchitis

    Dockery et al. (1996) examined the relationship
between  PM and other pollutants on the reported
rates of asthma, persistent wheeze, chronic cough, and
bronchitis, in  a study of 13,369 children ages 8-12
living in  24 communities in U.S. and Canada. Health
data were  collected in 1988-1991.  Single-pollutant
models were used in  the analysis.  Annual levels of
sulfates and particle acidity were significantly related
to bronchitis, and PM25 and PM10 were marginally
significant. Earlier work, based on six U.S. cities, by
Dockery et al. (1989) found  acute bronchitis  and
chronic cough significantly related to PM15.  Because
it is based on a larger sample, the Dockery et al. (1996)
study is used to develop a C-R function linking PM2 5
with acute bronchitis.

    Upper Respiratory Symptoms (URS)

    Using  logistic regression,  Pope  et  al. (1991)
estimated the  impact of PM10 on the incidence of a
variety of minor symptoms in 55 subjects (34 "school-
based" and 21 "patient-based") living in the Utah
Valley  from December  1989 through March 1990.
The children in the Pope et al. study were asked to
record respiratory symptoms in a daily diary, and the
daily occurrences  of upper respiratory  symptoms
(URS)  and lower  respiratory  symptoms (LRS), as
defined  above,  were    related  to   daily  PM10
concentrations. Pope et al. describe URS as consisting
of one  or more of the following symptoms: runny or
stuffy  nose; wet cough;  and burning, aching, or red
eyes. Levels of ozone, NO2, and SO2 were reported
low during this period, and were not included in the
analysis.  The  sample in this study is relatively small
and is  most  representative  of  the  asthmatic
population, rather than the general population.  The
school-based subjects (ranging in age from 9 to 11)
were chosen based on "a positive response to one or
more of three questions: ever wheezed without a cold,
wheezed for 3 days or more out of the week for a
month or longer, and/or had a doctor say the 'child
has asthma' (Pope et al., 1991, p. 669)." The patient-
based  subjects (ranging in age  from 8 to 72) were
receiving treatment for asthma and were referred by
local physicians.  Regression results for the school-
based sample (Pope et al., 1991, Table  5) show PM10
significantly associated with both upper and lower
respiratory symptoms. The patient-based sample did
not find a significant PM10 effect. The results from
the school-based sample are used here.
                                                D-48

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Lower Respiratory Symptoms (LRS)

    Schwartz et al. (1994) used logistic regression to
link lower respiratory symptoms in children with SO2,
NO2, ozone, PM10, PM25, sulfate and H+ (hydrogen
ion). Children were selected for the study if they were
exposed to indoor sources of air pollution: gas stoves
and  parental  smoking.   The study enrolled  1,844
children into a year-long study that was conducted in
different years  (1984 to 1988) in six  cities.   The
students were in grades two through five at the time
of enrollment in 1984.  By the completion of the final
study, the cohort would then be  in the  eighth grade
(ages 13-14); this suggests an age range of 7 to  14.

    Respiratory Illness

    Several epidemiological studies report that NO2
exposure  increases risk of  respiratory  illness  in
children. The results of many of the studies are not
statistically significant.  In addition, many of the
studies do not provide ambient NO2 measurements,
having focused on the presence or absence of gas
stoves as surrogates for exposure.  However, there are
data available  from  a well-designed  study  with
adequate ambient exposure measurements. Based on
work by Melia et al. (1980; 1982),  Hasselblad et al.
(1992) examined data from 103  children in homes
where gas stoves were present and where bedroom
NO2 measurements were taken. A significant increase
in respiratory illness was found to be a function of
bedroom NO2 levels, independent of social class, age,
gender, or the presence of a smoker in the house.
Hasselblad et al. used a multiple logistic model fitted
to the Melia  data with a linear slope for NO2 and
separate intercepts for boys and girls.  This analysis
uses the average slope of these two estimates.

    Work Loss Days (WLD)

    Ostro (1987) estimated  the impact of PM on the
incidence  of  work-loss  days  (WLD) in a national
sample of the adult working population, ages 18 to 65,
living in metropolitan areas.   Separate coefficients
were developed  for each year in  the analysis (1976-
1981); we then combined these coefficients for  use in
this analysis using a weighted average based on the
inverse of the variances.

    Minor Restricted Activity Days (MRAD) /
    Any of 19 Respiratory Symptoms

    Two studies by Ostro and Rothschild (1989b) and
Krupnick et al. (1990) cover a  variety  of minor
respiratory symptoms.  To avoid double counting, we
treat these two studies as alternative measures of the
same health effect, and pool the incidence estimates.

    Ostro  and Rothschild (1989b)  estimated  the
impact of ozone and PM25 on the incidence of minor
restricted activity days (MRAD) in a national sample
of the adult working population, ages 18 to 65, living
in metropolitan  areas.   We developed separate
coefficients for each year in the analysis (1976-1981),
which were then combined for use in this analysis.
The  coefficient used in this analysis is a weighted
average  of the coefficients using the  inverse of the
variance as the weight.

    Krupnick et al.  (1990) estimated the  impact of
coefficient of haze (COH, a measure of particulate
matter concentrations), ozone  and SO2  on  the
incidence of any of  19 respiratory  symptoms  or
conditions.14 They used a logistic regression model
that takes into account whether a respondent was well
or not the previous  day. A key difference between
this and the usual logistic model is that the model they
used includes a lagged value of the dependent variable.

    Moderate or Worse Asthma

    This health endpoint  comes from  Ostro et al.
(1991), a study in which asthmatics, ages 18 to 70,
were asked to record daily a subjective rating of their
overall asthma  status  each day  (0=none,  l=mild,
2=moderate, 3=severe, 4=incapacitating).  Ostro et al.
    14Krupnick et  al. (1990) list 13 specific "symptoms or
conditions": head cold, chest cold, sinus trouble, croup, cough
with phlegm, sore throat, asthma, hay fever, doctor-diagnosed ear
infection, flu, pneumonia, bronchitis, and bronchiolitis. The other
six symptoms or conditions are not specified.
                                               D-49

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
then examined the relationship between moderate (or
worse) asthma and H+, sulfate, SO2, PM25, estimated
PM25, PM10, nitrate, and nitric acid.  The published
results used in the prospective analysis are from a
single-pollutant linear regression model where the log
of the pollutant is used.

    Asthma "attacks" associated with ozone  are
estimated using the study by Whittemore and Korn
(1980).  Symptoms in asthmatic children associated
with SO2 are from Linn et al. (1987; 1988; 1990) and
Roger etal. (1985).

    Shortness of Breath

    Using a logistic regression estimation, Ostro et al.
(1995) estimated the impact of PM10, ozone, NO2, and
SO2 on  the  incidence  of  coughing, shortness  of
breath,  and   wheezing  in  83  African-American
asthmatic children ages 7-12  living in  Los  Angeles
from August through September 1992.  Regression
results show both PM10 and ozone significantly linked
to shortness of breath; the beginning of an asthma
episode was also significantly linked to  ozone. Results
for single-pollutant models only were presented in the
published paper.

    Restricted Activity Days (RADs)

    Ostro  (1987)  used a  log-linear regression  to
estimate  the impact  of PM25 on the  incidence  of
restricted activity days  (RAD) in a national sample of
the  adult population,  ages  18 to  65, living  in
metropolitan   areas.    Separate  coefficients  were
developed for each year in the analysis  (1976-1981);
these coefficients were pooled. The coefficient used
in the concentration-response function used here is a
weighted average of the coefficients in  Ostro (1987,
Table III) using the  inverse of the variance as  the
weight.
                                               D-50

-------
TableD-12
Studies Used to Develop Minor Illness
Endpoints Estimated
acute bronchitis
upper respiratory symptoms
lower respiratory symptoms
respiratory illness
any of 19 respiratory symptoms
moderate or worse asthma
asthma attacks
Estimates
Study Population Age
8-12
9-11
7-14
6-7
18-65
all ages (asthmatics)
all ages (asthmatics)
chest tightness, shortness of breath, or wheeze all ages (asthmatics)
shortness of breath
work loss days
minor restricted activity days
restricted activity days
7-12 (African-American asthmatics)
18-65
18-65
18-65

Study
Dockery et al. (1996)
Popeetal. (1991)
Schwartz et al. (1994)
Hasselblad et al. (1992)
Krupnick et al. (1990)
Ostroetal. (1991)
Whittemore and Korn (1980)
Linnetal. (1987; 1988; 1990)
and Roger et al. (1985)
Ostroetal. (1995)
Ostro(1987)
Ostro and Rothschild (1989b)
Ostro(1987)

Pollutants Used in Final
Model
PM25
PM10
PM25
NO2
Ps, PMio
PM25
03, PM10
SO2
PM10
PM25
PM25, O3
PM25
D-51

-------
TableD-13
Summary of Selected Studies for Minor Illness
Study
Dockery et
al. (1996)
Dockery et
al. (1989)
Hasselblad
etal. (1992)
Hoek and
Brunekreef
(1995)
Krupnick et
al. (1990)
Ostro
(1987)
Location and
Period
24 communities
in U.S. and
Canada
1988-1991
Six U.S. cities
1980-1981
Meta-analysis of
11 studies from
the U.S. and
Europe
Two rural towns
in the
Netherlands.
Spring-Summer
1989
Three
communities in
Los Angeles
County,
California
9/78-3/79
Nationwide
sample from U.S.
Health Interview
Survey
1976-1981
Population
13,369
children
ages 8-12
5,422
children
ages 10-12
children
ages 5-12
300 children
ages 7-11
570 adults
and 756
children
Adults ages
18-65
Endpoint
asthma, persistent
wheeze, chronic
cough, bronchitis
bronchitis, chest
illness, cough,
wheeze, asthma
lower respiratory tract
illness
symptoms including:
cough, phlegm,
wheeze, runny nose,
throat pain,
headache, eye
irritation, physician
visit
any of 19 respiratory
symptoms including
cough with phlegm
work-loss days
restricted activity
days (RADs),
respiratory-related
RADs
Pollutants
particle
acidity,
S04, PM21,
PM10,
HNO2,
HNO3, O3
SO2, NO2,
03, PM25,
PM15, TSP,
S04
NO2
SO2, NO2,
03, PM25,
PM10,
PM25.10,
SO4, NO3
O3, COM
(coefficient
of haze),
SO2, NO2
PM25
Main Findings Comment
Annual level of sulfates and particle Study examined annual
acidity related to bronchitis. HNO2 pollution exposures, and
and HNO3 linked to asthma. SO2 the authors did not rule out
linked to chronic phlegm. that acute (daily)
exposures could be related
to asthma attacks and
other acute episodes.
Annual level of PM15 significantly
related to bronchitis and chronic
cough. Annual O3 significantly
related to asthma.
Annual NO2 change of 30 ug/m3
associated with lower respiratory
tract illness.
Daily pollutant levels not associated
with any of the symptoms studied.
In single pollutant models, daily O3,
COM, and SO2 related to respiratory
symptoms in adults. O3 significant
controlling for other pollutants.
Results more variable for COM and
SO2, perhaps due to collinearity.
NO2 had no significant effect. No
effect seen in children for any
pollutant.
Two-week average PM25 levels PM25 estimated from
significantly linked to work-loss days, visibility data.
RADs, and respiratory-related RADs.
Some year-to-year variability in
results.
D-52

-------
Study
Ostro et al.
(1993)
Ostro and
Rothschild
(1989b)
Peters et al.
(1999)
Pope and
Dockery
(1992)
Pope et al.
(1991)
Location and
Period
Three
communities in
Los Angeles
County,
California
9/78-3/79
Nationwide
sample from U.S.
Health Interview
Survey
1976-1981
Twelve
communities in
southern
California
1994
Utah Valley
12/90-3/91
Utah Valley
12/89-3/90
Population
321 non-
smoking
adults
Adults ages
18-65
3,676 fourth,
seventh,
tenth grade
students
79 children
ages 10-12
34 children
ages 9-11,
and 21
asthmatics
ages 8-72
Endpoint
lower respiratory
symptoms, upper
respiratory
symptoms, eye
irritation
respiratory-related
RADs, minor RADs.
asthma, wheeze,
bronchitis, cough
upper respiratory
symptoms, lower
respiratory
symptoms, cough
upper respiratory
symptoms, lower
respiratory
symptoms, took
asthma medication
Pollutants
O3, COM,
SO4, SO2,
NO2
03, PM25
SO2, NO2,
03, PM25,
PM10,
PM25.10,
SO4, NO3,
NH4,
gaseous
acids
PM10
PM10
Main Findings
In single pollutant model, daily O3
linked to lower and upper respiratory
symptoms. SO4 linked to lower
respiratory symptoms. No significant
effects seen for COM, SO2, and NO2
Controlling for PM25, two-week
average O3 has highly variable
association with respiratory-related
and minor RADs. Controlling for O3,
two-week average PM25 significantly
linked to both health endpoints in
most years.
Wheeze in males, linked to annual
average NO2 and acid in 1994
(similar link for exposure averaged
over 1 986-1 990). Peak ozone
reported associated with decreased
asthma prevalence in females. No
other reported effects.
PM10 linked to daily reported
incidences of upper and lower
respiratory symptoms and cough.
Effect seen in symptomatic sample.
Only cough in symptomatic sample
linked to PM10.
PM10 significantly linked to upper and
lower respiratory symptoms in
sample of 34 children. PM10 linked
only to increased asthma medication
use in the asthmatic sample.
Comment

PM25 estimated from
visibility data.

Of the 79 children in the
sample, 39 were
symptomatic, and the other
40 were asymptomatic.

D-53

-------
Study
Schwartz et
al. (1994)
Schwartz
and Zeger
(1990)
von Mutius
etal. (1995)
Location and
Period
Six U.S. cities
April-August in
one year
between 1984
and 1988 (year
varies by city)
Los Angeles, CA
1961-1964
Leipzig,
Germany
10/91-7/92
Population
1,844
children
110 student
nurses
1,500
children
ages 9-11
Endpoint
upper respiratory
symptoms, lower
respiratory
symptoms, cough
cough, phlegm, sore
throat, headache,
chest discomfort, eye
irritation
upper respiratory
symptoms
Pollutants
SO2, NO2,
O3, PM25,
PM10, S04,
H+
CO, SO2,
N02, Ox
S02, NOX,
PM
Main Findings
In single pollutant models SO2, NO2,
PM25, and PM10 significantly linked to
cough. In two-pollutant models, PM10
has most consistent effect; other
pollutants not significant, controlling
for PM10. In single pollutant models,
SO2, O3, PM25, PM10, SO4, and H+
linked to lower respiratory symptoms.
No effect seen for upper respiratory
symptoms.
NO2 linked to sore throat, phlegm,
and eye irritation. Oxidants (Ox)
linked to chest discomfort and eye
irritation. CO linked to headache.
In single pollutant models, SO2, NOX,
and PM linked to upper respiratory
symptoms in winter (high pollution
season). In the summer, only NOX
linked to respiratory symptoms.
Comment

Results presented as a mix
of single pollutant and dual
pollutant models. Stepwise
selection used to pick
significant covariates.
PM measured by beta-
absorption. The limited
modeling results presented
for models with more than
one pollutant were similar
to single pollutant results.
D-54

-------
TableD-14
Summary of Selected Studies for Asthmatics
Study
Forsberg et
al. (1993)
Gielen et
al. (1997)
Hiltermann
etal.
(1998)
Linn et al.
(1987;
1988;
1990) and
Roger et al.
(1985)
Location and
Period
Pitea, Sweden
about sixty days
Amsterdam,
Netherlands
summer
1995
Leiden
University,
Netherlands
7/3/95-10/6/95
Chamber
studies.
Population
31 persons
ages 9-71
61 children
ages 7-13
60 adults
ages 18-55
Exercising,
young
asthmatics
Endpoint
shortness of
breath,
wheeze, cough,
phlegm
upper
respiratory
symptoms,
lower
respiratory
symptoms,
medication use
symptoms
include:
shortness of
breath, cough,
phlegm,
wheeze, runny
nose, throat
pain,
headache, eye
irritation,
physician visit
chest tightness,
shortness of
breath, or
wheeze
Pollutants Main Findings
BS (black Controlling for other pollutants, daily levels
smoke), of BS linked to shortness of breath. No link
SO2, NO2 between pollutants and wheeze, cough, and
phlegm.
O3, PM10, In single pollutant model, daily levels of BS
BS significantly linked to lower and upper
respiratory symptoms and medication use.
PM10 linked to lower respiratory symptoms
and medication use. O3 linked to upper
respiratory symptoms.
O3, PM10, In single pollutant models, daily levels of O3,
BS, NO2, PM10, BS, and NO2 linked to shortness of
SO2 breath. Some significant negative
associations reported for nasal symptoms
and levels of PM10, BS, and NO2. No
significant effect reported for SO2.
SO2 SO2 exposure linked to moderate symptoms
in these studies of moderately exercising
young asthmatics.
Comment
Black smoke is an indirect
measure of PM.
Results in the model highly
dependent on the lag
length used. The five-day
mean black smoke and
PM10 yielded significant
results, but current, one
and two day lags did not.
Current day O3 significant.


D-55

-------

Study
Neukirch et
al. (1998)




Ostro et al.
(1991)





Ostro et al.
(1995)

Peters et
al. (1996)



Roemer et
al. (1998)








Romieu et
al. (1996)





Location and
Period
Paris, France
11/92-5/93




Denver, CO
12/87-2/88





Los Angeles, CA
8/92-11/92

Three cities in
East Germany
and the Czech
Republic
9/90-6/92
28 locations in
Europe
winter 1993-
1994






Mexico City







Population
40 persons
(mean age
of sample
was 46)


207
persons
ages 18-70




83 children
ages 7-12

155 children
ages 7-15
and 102
adults ages
32-80
2,010
children
ages 6-12







71 children
ages 5-7






Endpoint
asthma,
wheeze,
shortness of
breath, cough,
respiratory
infection
severity of
asthma
symptoms,
cough, wheeze,
shortness of
breath, chest
tightness
cough,
shortness of
breath, wheeze
symptom score
based on a
variety of
respiratory
symptoms
symptoms
include:
shortness of
breath, cough,
phlegm,
wheeze, runny
nose, sore
throat,
headache, eye
irritation
cough, phlegm,
difficulty
breathing,
wheezing,
lower
respiratory
illness

Pollutants
PM13, BS,
NO2, SO2




SO2, PM25,
SO4, NO3,
H+, nitric
acid



03, N02,
S02, PM10

TSP, SO2,
S04,
particle
acidity

PM10, BS,
NO2, SO2








PM10,
PM25, 03,
NO2, SO2





Main Findings
In single pollutant models, daily levels of
PM13, BS, NO2, and SO2were each
significantly associated with asthma
attacks, wheeze, cough, respiratory
infections, and shortness of breath.

Daily levels of H+ linked to cough, asthma,
and shortness of breath. PM25 linked to
asthma. SO4 linked to shortness of breath.
No effects seen for other pollutants.



In single pollutant models, daily levels of O3
and PM10 linked only to shortness of breath.
No effect seen for NO2 and SO2.
Daily SO2 linked to the respiratory symptom
score. No link between the other pollutants
and the symptom score.


Daily pollutant levels not related to adverse
health symptoms.








Controlling for PM25, daily levels of O3
linked to cough and lower respiratory
illness. Controlling for O3, PM25 linked to
cough, phlegm, and lower respiratory
symptoms.



Comment
PM13 used rather than the
more common PM10.




Some PM2 5 estimated.
Exclusion of estimated
data removes significant
link to asthma. Only single
pollutant models reported.




















PM10 also linked adverse
symptoms. Published
results focused on O3 and
PM25. Results for NO2 and
SO2 not reported.


D-56

-------
              Location and
  Study         Period       Population      Endpoint      Pollutants                Main Findings                       Comment

Whittemore   Six communities   443 children   asthma          Ox, TSP      In a two pollutant model, daily levels of both    Respirable PM, NO2, SO2
and Korn     in southern CA    and adults                                  TSP and Ox were significantly related to       were highly correlated with
(1980)       Three 34-week                                               reported asthma attacks.                    TSP and excluded from the
             periods 1972-                                                                                         analysis.
             1975
                                                                  D-57

-------
                                               The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
C-R Functions Linking Air
Pollution and Adverse Health
Effects

    After selecting studies appropriate for the present
analysis, the published information was used to derive
a C-R function for estimating nationwide benefits for
each health  effect  considered.   In general,  these
functions combine air quality changes, the affected
population and information regarding the expected
per person change in incidence per unit change in
pollutant level.   The following tables present  the
functions used in this analysis, information needed to
apply these functions, and references for information.

Carbon Monoxide

    Four C-R relationships are available for estimating
hospital admissions  related to ambient CO levels.
These are summarized in Table D-15.
                                             D-58

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableD-15
Summary of C-R Functions for Carbon Monoxide
    Health
   End point
                          C-R Function
  Source of C-R Function
   hospital
 admissions -
   asthma
          A.asthmaadmissions =- [y0 -(e  /JACO -1)]- pop,

where:
y0     = daily hospital admission rate for asthma per person = 4.75 E-6
p     = CO coefficient = 0.0332
AGO  = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
pop   = population of all ages
Op     = standard error of p = 0.00861
Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
PM2.5.io, 03
   hospital
 admissions -
  obstructive
 lung disease
    Aobs. lung disease admissions =-[y0 -(e  /5ACO -1)]-pop,

where:
y0     = daily hospital admission rate for obstructive lung disease per
      person = 5.76 E-6
p     = CO coefficient = 0.0250
AGO  = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
pop   = population of all ages
Op     = standard error of p = 0.0165
Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
PM2.5.io, 03
   hospital
 admissions -
    COPD
         ACOPDadmissions =-[y0 -(e^ACO -1)]-pop,

where:
y0     = daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.75 E-5
p     = CO coefficient = 0.0573
A CO = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
pop   = population age 65 and older
Op     = standard error of p = 0.0329
Study: Moolgavkar (1997)
Location: Minneapolis-St. Paul
Other pollutants in model: O3,
PM,n
   hospital
 admissions-
   asthma
           Aasf/imaadmissions =-[y0 -(e MCO-1)]-pop,

where:
y0     = daily hospital admission rate for asthma per person = 4.52 E-6
p     = CO coefficient = 0.0528
A CO = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
pop   = population of ages < 65
Op     = standard error of p = 0.0185
Study: Sheppard (1999)
Location: Seattle, WA
Other pollutants in model:
PM2.5
   hospital
 admissions -
 dysrhythmias
      Adysrhythmiasadmissions =-[/0 -(e /5ACO -1
                where:
                y0    = daily hospital admission rate for dysrhythmias per person = 6.46
                      E-6
                p     = CO coefficient = 0.0573
                AGO  = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
                pop   = population of all ages
                Op    = standard error of p = 0.0229
Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
                                                    D-59

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Health
  End point
                          C-R Function
                                                                 Source of C-R Function
   hospital
 admissions -
  congestive
 heart failure
 Acongestive heart failure admissions =-[/0 -(e  /5ACO -1)]-pop,
where:
Vo

P
AGO
pop
OR
 = daily hospital admission rate for congestive heart failure per
 person = 9.33 E-6
 = CO coefficient = 0.0340
 = change in daily average CO concentration (ppm)
 = population of all ages
 = standard error of p = 0.0163
                                                              Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
                                                              Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                              Other pollutants in model: NO2
   hospital
 admissions -
ischemic heart
   disease
 kischemic heart disease admissions = -[y0 -(e /5ACO -1)]-pop,
where:
Vo

P
AGO
pop
OR
 = daily hospital admission rate for ischemic heart disease per
 person 65 and older = 9.96 E-5
 = CO coefficient= 0.000467
 = change in daily one-hour maximum CO concentration (ppm)
 = population age 65 and older
 = standard error of p = 0.000435
Study: Schwartz and Morris
(1995)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model:
PM,n
   hospital
 admissions -
  congestive
 heart failure
 Acongestiveheart failureadmissions = -[y0 -(e /5ACO -1)]- pop,
where:
Vo

P
AGO
pop
OR
 = daily hospital admission rate for congestive heart failure per
 person 65 and older = 5.82 E-5
 = CO coefficient = 0.0170
 = change in daily one-hour maximum CO concentration (ppm)
 = population age 65 and older
 = standard error of p = 0.00468
Study: Schwartz and Morris
(1995)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model:
PM,n
   hospital
 admissions -
cardiovascular
where:
Vo

P
AGO
pop
OR
Acardiovascularadmissions = -[y0 -(e /5ACO -1)]- pop,


 = daily hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease per
 person 65 and older = 2.23 E-4
 = CO coefficient = 0.0127
 = change in daily one-hour maximum CO concentration
 = population age 65 and older
 = standard error of p = 0.00255
Study: Schwartz (1999)
Location: eight U.S. counties
Other pollutants in model:
PM10
   hospital
 admissions -
cardiovascular
where:
Vo

P
AGO
pop
OR
Acardiovascular admissions = -[y0 -(e /5ACO -1)]- pop,


 = daily hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease per
 person 65 and older = 2.23 E-4
 = CO coefficient = 0.0139
 = change in daily one-hour maximum CO concentration
 = population age 65 and older
 = standard error of p = 0.00715	
Study: Schwartz (1997)
Location: Tucson, AZ
Other pollutants in model:
PM10
                                                    D-60

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Nitrogen Dioxide

     Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is the primary focus of
health studies on the nitrogen oxides and serves as the
basis for this analysis. Table D-16 summarizes the C-
R functions that are used to quantify the relationship
between NO2 and adverse health effects.
                                                D-61

-------
TableD-16
Summary of C-R Functions for Nitrogen Dioxide
   Health Endpoint
                                     C-R Function
                                                                           Source of C-R Function
 hospital admissions -
    all respiratory
A/A// respiratory =-[/„ .
                                                      -1)]-pop,
                       where:
                       Vo
                       P
                       ANO2
                       pop
       : daily hospital admission rate for all respiratory per person = 2.58 E-5
       ' NO2 coefficient = 0.00378
       : change in daily 12-hour average NO2 concentration (ppb)
       : population of all ages
       •• standard error of p = 0.00221
Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: PM25.10, O3, SO2
 hospital admissions -
  respiratory infection
              ARespiratorylnfectionAdmissions=-[ya-(e  /J
 hospital admissions -
     pneumonia
                   Apneumoniaadmissions =-[y0
                                                     /JAW°2
                       where
                       Vo
                       P
      = daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
      = NO2 coefficient = 0.00169
A NO2 = change in daily average NO2 concentration (ppb)
pop   = population age 65 and older
aB    = standard error of p = 0.00125
                                                                  Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
                                                                  Location: Toronto, Canada
where:
y0 = daily hospital admission rate for respiratory infection per person = 1 .56 E-5
p = NO2 coefficient = 0.001 72
ANO2 = change in daily average NO2 concentration (ppb)
pop = population of all ages
Op = standard error of p = 0.000521
Other pollutants in model: PM25, O3
                                                                  Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
                                                                  Location: Minneapolis, MN
                                                                  Other pollutants in model: O3, SO2, PM10
 hospital admissions -
congestive heart failure
                       where:
                       Vo
                       P
                       ANO2
                       pop
                       OR
             ACongestive Heart Failure Admissions =-[ya-(e /MW°2 -1)]-pop,


      = daily hospital admission rate for congestive heart failure per person = 9.33 E-6
      = NO2 coefficient = 0.00264
      = change in daily average NO2 concentration (ppb)
      = population of all ages
      = standard error of p = 0.000769
                                                                  Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
                                                                  Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                                  Other pollutants in model: CO
                                                                          D-62

-------
  Health Endpoint
                                     C-R Function
                                                                                                   Source of C-R Function
 hospital admissions -
ischemic heart disease
             A.lschemicHeartDiseaseAdmissions =-[/0 '(

where:
y0    = daily hospital admission rate for ischemic heart disease per person = 2.23 E-5
p     = NO2 coefficient = 0.00318
ANO2 = change in daily average NO2 concentration (ppb)
pop   = population of all ages
Op    = standard error of p = 0.000521
                                                                                          Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
                                                                                          Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                                                          Other pollutants in model: SO2
 respiratory symptoms
Aresp. symptoms =\         N02 ^AAA.^gender.Y
                       \_ i ~t~"
where:
a     = constant = -0.536
p     = NO2 coefficient = 0.0275
Y     = gender coefficient (used for males only) = -0.0295
ANO2 = change in annual NO2 concentration (ppb)
pop   = children ages 6-7
OB    = standard error of p = 0.0132	
                                                                                        1
                                                                           1 + e
                                                                                -a-N02:p,sl_cAAA-p-gender-Y
                                                                                                       •pop,
                                                                                          Study: Hasselblad et al. (1992)
                                                                                          Location: Middlesborough, England
                                                                                          Other pollutants in model: none
                                                                                          Comments: The NO2 coefficient was reported
                                                                                          by Hasselblad et al.  The constant and the
                                                                                          gender coefficient were obtained via personal
                                                                                          communication with V. Hasselblad 2/28/95 by
                                                                                          Abt Associates. The equation is based on
                                                                                          study results by Melia et al. (1980).
                                                                          D-63

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Ozone

     The health effects literature includes studies of
the relationships between  ozone and a variety of
health effects. Table D-17 summarizes the ozone C-R
functions used in this analysis.
                                                D-64

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableD-17
Summary of C-R Functions for Ozone
   Health
  Endpoint
                 C-R Function
                                                       Source of C-R Function
   mortality
^Mortality = -[/„ •
                              - 1)]- pop,
               where:
               Vo
               P
               AO3
               pop
               OR
: non-accidental deaths per person of any age
= ozone coefficient = 0.000634
: change in daily one-hour maximum ozone concentration (ppb)
: population all ages
= standard error of p = 0.000251
Study: Ito and Thurston (1996)
Location: Chicago, IL
Other pollutants in model: PM10
   mortality
               where:
               Vo
               P
               AO3
               pop
               OR
      ^.Mortality = -[/„ • (e^A°3 -1)]• pop,


• non-accidental deaths per person of any age
: ozone coefficient = 0
: change in daily 1-hour maximum ozone concentration (ppb)
: population all ages
= standard error of p =  0.000214
                                                    Study: Kinneyetal. (1995)
                                                    Location: Los Angeles, CA
                                                    Other pollutants in model: PM10
   mortality
A Mortality = -[/„ •
                              - 1)] • pop,
               where:
               Vo
               P
               AO3
               pop
• non-accidental deaths per person of any age
= ozone coefficient = 0.00061 1
: change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
: population all ages
= standard error of p = 0.00021 6
Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1995)
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Other pollutants in model: SO2,
TSP
   mortality
      ^.Mortality = -[/„ • (e^A°3 -1)]- pop,
                                                    Study: Samet et al. (1997)
                                                    Location: Philadelphia, PA






adult onset
asthma

where:
Vo
P
AO3
pop
°P




= non-accidental deaths per person
= ozone coefficient = 0.000936

of any age

Other pollutants in model: CO,
NO2, SO2, TSP

= change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
= population all ages
= standard error of p = 0.000312
r Yo

AChronic Asthrns — —\ — 	 	 — ^Q—
L( -Yol-e


1

/j y0 -pop,
+ /0 J


Study: McDonnell et al. (1999)
Location: California
Other pollutants in model: none
               where:
               y0    = annual asthma incidence rate per person = 0.00219
               p     = estimated O3 coefficient = 0.0277
               AO3  = change in annual average 8-hour O3 concentration
               pop  = population of non-asthmatic males ages 27 and older
               OR    = standard error of p = 0.0135
hospital
admissions -
all respiratory
\Allrespiratory =-[y0 .(e-"A°3 -1)]-pop,
where:
y0 = daily hospital admission rate for all respiratory per person = 2.58
E-5
p = O3 coefficient = 0.00498
AO3 = change in daily 12-hour average O3 concentration (ppb)
pop = population of all ages
Op = standard error of p = 0.001 06
Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
PM2.5.10, N02, S02
                                                    D-65

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
   Health
  Endpoint
                          C-R Function
   Source of C-R Function
   hospital
admissions -
   asthma
where:
y0
p
AO3
pop
          AAsthma Admissions =-[y0 -(e I>'A°3 -\)\pop,
                     = daily hospital admission rate for asthma per person = 4.75 E-6
                     = ozone coefficient = 0.00250
                     = change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
                     = population of all ages
                     = standard error of p = 0.000718
Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: CO,
PM2.5.10
   hospital
admissions-
 obstructive
lung disease
  ^Obstructive Lung Disease Admissions =-[/0 '(e ftA°3 -1)]'P°P.

where:
y0    = daily hospital admission rate for obstructive lung disease per
      person = 5.76 E-6
p     = ozone coefficient = 0.00303
AO3   = change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
pop   = population of all ages
OB    = standard error of p = 0.00110
Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: CO,
PM,,.,n
hospital
admissions -
respiratory
infection
ARespiratory Infection Admissions =- [ya • (e /M°3 - 1)] • pop,
where:
y0 = daily hospital admission rate for respiratory infection per person =
Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
PM2.5, N02
                     1.56E-5
               p     = ozone coefficient = 0.00198
               AO3   = change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
               pop   = population of all ages
               OB    = standard error of p = 0.000520
   hospital
admissions-
all respiratory
where:
p
AO3
pop
OB
        Aa// respiratory admissions =/?• A03 -pop,
                       ozone coefficient = 1 .68 E-8
                       change in daily one-hour maximum ozone concentration (ppb)
                       population all ages
                       standard error of p = 9.71 E-9 .
Study: Thurston et al. (1994)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: PM25
   hospital
admissions-
 pneumonia
where:
y0
p
AO3
pop
         Apneumonia admissions =-[/0 '(e /JA°3 -1)]'P°P>
                     = daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
                     = O3 coefficient = 0.00370
                     = change in daily average O3 concentration (ppb)
                     = population age 65 and older
                     = standard error of p = 0.001 03
Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Other pollutants in model: SO2,
N02, PM10
   hospital
admissions-
   COPD
where:
y0
p
AO3
pop
o
           ACOPD admissions =-[ya •(e"'3403 -1)]-pop,
                       daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.75 E-5
                       O3 coefficient = 0.00274
                       change in daily average O3 concentration (ppb)
                       population age 65 and older
                       standard error of p = 0.001 70
Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Other pollutants in model: CO,
PM,n
                                                    D-66

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Health
  Endpoint
                           C-R Function
                                                            Source of C-R Function
   hospital
admissions -
 pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
AO3
pop
OR
         Apneumoniaadmissions =-[/0 '(e /JA°3 -1)]'P°P.
                     = daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
                     = O3 coefficient = 0.00280
                     = change in daily average O3 concentration (ppb)
                     = population age 65 and older
                     = standard error of p = 0.00172
                                                          Study: Schwartz (1994c)
                                                          Location: Minneapolis, MN
                                                          Other pollutants in model: PM10
   hospital
admissions-
 pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
AO3
pop
OR
         A.pneumoniaadmissions =-[y0 -(e /JA°3 -1)]-pop,
                     = daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.18 E-5
                     = O3 coefficient = 0.00521
                     = change in daily average O3 concentration (ppb)
                     = population age 65 and older
                     = standard error of p = 0.0013
                                                          Study: Schwartz (1994b)
                                                          Location: Detroit, Ml
                                                          Other pollutants in model: PM10
   hospital
admissions-
   COPD
A.COPD admissions =-[ya
                                             -1)]-pop,
where:
y0
p
AO3
pop
                     = daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.05 E-5
                     = O3 coefficient = 0.00549
                     = change in daily average O3 concentration
                     = population age 65 and older
                     = standard error of p = 0.00205
Study: Schwartz (1994b)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model: PM10
hospital
admissions -
all respiratory
where:
Vo
Aall respiratory admissions = -[ya -(e /JA°3 -1)]-pop,
= daily hospital admissions for all respiratory per person 65 and
Study: Schwartz (1 995)
Location: New Haven, CT
Other pollutants in model: PM10
                     older = 1.187E-4
               p     = ozone coefficient = 0.00265
               AO3  = change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
               pop  = population age 65 and older
               aB    = standard error of p = 0.00140
   hospital
admissions-
all respiratory
    Aallrespiratory related admissions = -\y0 • (e /M°3 -1)]- pop,
where:
Vo

P
AO3
pop
OR
                     = daily hospital admissions for all respiratory conditions per person
                     65 and older = 1.187E-4
                     = ozone coefficient = 0.00715
                     = change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
                     = population age 65 and older
                     = standard error of p = 0.00257
                                                         Study: Schwartz (1995)
                                                         Location: Tacoma, WA
                                                         Other pollutants in model: PM10
   hospital
admissions-
   cardiac
     Acardiac =- [y0
                                        - 1)]- pop,
where:
y0
p
AO3
pop
                     = daily hospital admission rate for cardiac per person = 3.81 E-5
                     = O3 coefficient = 0.00531
                     = change in daily 1 2-hour average O3 concentration (ppb)
                     = population of all ages
                     = standard error of p = 0.001 42
Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model:
PM,,.,n
                                                     D-67

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
   Health
  Endpoint
                          C-R Function
                                                                 Source of C-R Function
  hospital
admissions -
dysrhythmias
where:
Vo

P
AO3
pop
 ADysrhythmias Ad missions =-[y0 '(e /JA°3 -1)]'P°P.


= daily hospital admission rate for dysrhythmias per person = 6.46
E-6
= ozone coefficient = 0.00168
= change in daily average ozone concentration (ppb)
= population of all ages
= standard error of p = 0.00103
                                                           Study: Burnett etal. (1999)
                                                           Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                           Other pollutants in model:
                                                           PM25, CO
 emergency
 room visits -
   asthma
         Aasthma related ER visits =
                                    BasePop
                                       • AO3 • pop,
               where:
               p        = ozone coefficient = 0.0203
               BasePop = baseline population in northern New Jersey = 4,436,976
               AO3      = change in daily five-hour average ozone concentration (ppb)
               pop      = population all ages
               Op       = standard error of p = 0.00717
                                                           Study: Cody etal. (1992)
                                                           Location: Northern NJ
                                                           Other pollutants in model: none
                                                           Comment: 63 % of estimate
                                                           used to avoid double-counting
                                                           hospital admissions for
                                                           asthma.
 emergency
 room visits -
   asthma
           ^asthma related ER visits =-
                                    BasePop
                                      • A03 -pop,
               where:
               p        = ozone coefficient = 0.0443
               BasePop = baseline population in northern New Jersey = 4,436,976
               AO3      = change in daily five-hour average ozone concentration (ppb)
               pop      = population all ages
               OR       = standard error of p = 0.00723
                                                           Study: Weisel et al. (1995)
                                                           Location: Northern, NJ
                                                           Other pollutants in model: none
                                                           Comment: 63 % of estimate
                                                           used to avoid double-counting
                                                           hospital admissions for
                                                           asthma.
 emergency
 room visits -
   asthma
         \asthmarelated ER visits =
                                    BasePop
                                       • AO3 • pop,
               where:
               p        = ozone coefficient = 0.0035
               BasePop = baseline population in Saint John, New Brunswick = 125,000
               AO3      = change in the daily one-hour maximum ozone concentration
                        (Ppb)
               pop      = population all ages
               a.       = standard error of p = 0.0018
                                                           Study: Stieb et al. (1996)
                                                           Location: New Brunswick,
                                                           Canada
                                                           Other pollutants in model: none
                                                           Comment: 63 % of estimate
                                                           used to avoid  double-counting
                                                           hospital admissions for
                                                           asthma.
 presence of
  any of 19
   acute
 respiratory
 symptoms
where:
P*
AO3
pop
OR
= first derivative of the stationary probability = 0.000137
= change in daily one-hour maximum ozone concentration (ppb)
= population aged 18-65 years old
= standard error of p* = 0.0000697
                                                              Study: Krupnicket al. (1990)
                                                              Location: Glendora-Covina-
                                                              Azusa, CA
                                                              Other pollutants in model: SO2,
                                                              COM
self-reported
   asthma
   attacks
           Aasthmaattacks = -
                                                  P°P,
               where:
               Vo
               P
               AO3
               pop
         = daily incidence of asthma attacks = 0.027
         = ozone coefficient = 0.00184
         = change in daily one-hour maximum ozone concentration (ppb)
         = population of asthmatics of all ages = 5.61% of the population
         of all ages
         = standard error of p = 0.000714
                                                              Study: Whittemore and Korn
                                                              (1980)
                                                              Location: Los Angeles, CA
                                                              Other pollutants in model: TSP
                                                    D-68

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Health                                 C-R Function                                Source of C-R Function
  Endpoint

  respiratory                     AMR/AD =-IV  •(e"/JA°3 -1)1- pop                     Study: Ostro and Rothschild
     and                                    L °            J                          (1989b)
nonrespiratory   where:                                                               Location: U.S.
  conditions     y0       = daily MRAD incidence per person = 0.02137                    Other pollutants in model: PM25
 resulting in a   p        = inverse-variance weighted PM25 coefficient = 0.00220            Comments: An inverse-
    minor      AO3     = change in two-week average of the daily one-hour maximum      variance weighting used to
  restricted              ozone concentrations (ppb)                                    estimate the coefficient, based
  activity day    pop     = adult population aged 18 to 65                                on Ostro and Rothschild.
   (MRAD)      OB	= standard error of p = 0.000658	
                                                     D-69

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Particulate Matter

    The  C-R functions  used to quantify  expected
changes  in health effects associated with reduced
exposure to particulate  matter are  summarized  in
Table D-18.  The measures of particulate matter used
in this analysis are PM2 5 and PM10, with a preference
for PM25.  Other measures of PM, however, have
been used,  including total  suspended particulates
(TSP) and coefficient of haze.
                                               D-70

-------
TableD-18
Summary of C-R Functions for Particulate Matter
    Health
   End point
                               C-R Function
                                                                                    Source of C-R Function
    mortality
ANonaccidental Mortality = -\y0
                                                     -1)]-pop,
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM25
                  pop
: county-level annual non-accidental deaths of persons ages 30+ per person
= PM25 coefficient = 0.006408
: change in annual median PM25 concentration
: population ages 30 and older
= standard error of p = 0.001509
Study: Pope et al. (1995)
Location: 50 U.S. cities
Other pollutants  in model: none
    mortality
kNonaccidental Mortality = -[/„ . (
                                                     -1)]-pop,
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM2.5
                  pop
 county-level annual non-accidental deaths of persons ages 25+ per person
 PM25 coefficient = 0.0124
 change in annual mean PM25 concentration
 population ages 25 and older
 standard error of p = 0.00423
Study: Dockery et al. (1993)
Location: six U.S. cities
Other pollutants in model: none
    neonatal
    mortality
   Alnfant Mortality = -

                                           pop,
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM10
                  pop
= county annual postneonatal infant deaths per infant 0-1 years old
 PM10 coefficient = 0.00392
 change in annual average PM10 concentration
 population infants ages 0-1
 standard error of p = 0.001 22
                                                                                      Study: Woodruff et al. (1997)
                                                                                      Location: 86 U.S. metropolitan areas
                                                                                      Other pollutants in model: none
    chronic
   bronchitis
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM10
                  pop
               ^Chronic Bronchitis = -\y0 • (e^A™10 -1)]- pop,
= annual bronchitis incidence rate per person = 0.00378
= estimated PM10 logistic regression coefficient = 0.00932
= change in annual average PM10 concentration
= population ages 27 and older "without chronic bronchitis"
= standard error of p = 0.00475
                                                                          Study: Abbey etal. (1993)
                                                                          Location: California
                                                                          Other pollutants in model: none
                                                                          Comments: Abbey et al. used TSP to measure
                                                                          PM. The TSP coefficient is applied to changes
                                                                          in PM10.
                                                                           D-71

-------
   Health
  End point
                                                        C-R Function
                                                                                                                               Source of C-R Function
 chronic
bronchitis
               where:
               Vo
               P
               APM2.5
               pop
                                          AChronic Bronchitis = -\y0 • (e /JA™25 -1)]• pop,


                            • annual bronchitis incidence rate per person = 0.00378
                            : estimated PM25 logistic regression coefficient = 0.09132
                            = change in annual average PM25 concentration
                            = population ages 27 and older "without chronic bronchitis"
                            = standard error of p = 0.00680
                                                                                                                   Study: Abbey etal. (1995)
                                                                                                                   Location: California
                                                                                                                   Other pollutants in model: none
 chronic
bronchitis
                  where:
                  Vo

                  P°
                  APM10
                  pop
                                                                                                                     Study: Schwartz (1993)
                                                                                                                     Location: 53 U.S. urban areas
                                                                                                                     Other pollutants in model: none
                        = national chronic bronchitis prevalence rate for individuals 18 and older= 0.0535
                        = annual bronchitis incidence rate per person = 0.00378
                        = estimated PM10 logistic regression coefficient = 0.0123
                        = change in annual average PM10 concentration
                        = population ages 30 and older "without chronic bronchitis"
                        = standard error of p = 0.00434
    hospital
admissions-all
   respiratory
               where:
               Vo
               P
               APM2.5.10
               pop
                                         A/A// respiratory =- [y0 . (e -^"2 =-"> -l)].pop,
                             daily hospital admission rate for all respiratory per person = 2.58 E-5
                             PM25.10 coefficient = 0.00147
                             change in daily average PM25.10 concentration
                             population of all ages
                             standard error of p = 0.001 79
                                                                                                                   Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
                                                                                                                   Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                                                                                   Other pollutants in model: O3, NO2, SO2
  hospital
admissions -
  asthma
                                      ^.Asthma Admissions =- [y0
                                                                                 -\)\pop,
               where:
               Vo
               P
               APM2.5.10
               pop
                           = daily hospital admission rate for asthma per person = 4.75 E-6
                           = PM25.10 coefficient = 0.00321
                           = change in daily average PM25.10 concentration
                           = population of all ages
                           = standard error of p = 0.00106
Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: CO, O3
                                                                          D-72

-------
    Health
   End point
                                        C-R Function
                                                                                                Source of C-R Function
    hospital
 admissions -
obstructive lung
    disease
                        A.OLD Admissions =- [y0 -(e
-/J.APM25_10
where:
Vo
P
A PM2.5.10
pop
 daily hospital admission rate for obstructive lung disease per person = 5.76 E-6
 PM25.10 coefficient = 0.00310
 change in daily average PM25_10 concentration
 population of all ages
 standard error of p = 0.00163
                                                                                      Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
                                                                                      Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                                                      Other pollutants in model: CO, O3
    hospital
 admissions -
  respiratory
    infection
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
       ^Respiratory Infection Admissions =-[y0 -(e /JA™25 -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for respiratory infection per person = 1.56 E-5
= PM25 coefficient = 0.00328
: change in daily average PM25 concentration
: population of all ages
= standard error of p = 0.000735
                                             Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
                                             Location: Toronto, Canada
                                             Other pollutants in model: NO2, O3
    hospital
admissions-all
  respiratory
                    Aa// respiratory admissions =/?• APM25 -pop,
where:
P
APM25
pop
                           : ozone coefficient = 1.81 E-8
                           : change in daily average PM25
                           = population all ages
                           = standard error of p = 1.79 E-8 .
                                                                                      Study: Thurston et al. (1994)
                                                                                      Location: Toronto, Canada
                                                                                      Other pollutants in model: O3
    hospital
 admissions -
  pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
            Apneumoniaadmissions =-[y0-(e 'JA™1° -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
= PM10 coefficient = 0.000498
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
: population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.000505
                                             Study: Moolgavkar et al.  (1997)
                                             Location: Minneapolis, MN
                                             Other pollutants in model: O3, SO2, NO2
    hospital
 admissions -
    COPD
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
                        ACOPDadmissions=-[ya .(
                           = daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.75 E-5
                           = PM10 coefficient = 0.000877
                           : change in daily average PM10 concentration
                           = population age 65 and older
                           = standard error of p = 0.000777
                                                                                      Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
                                                                                      Location: Minneapolis, MN
                                                                                      Other pollutants in model: CO, O3
                                                                          D-73

-------
   Health
  End point
                                        C-R Function
                                                                                              Source of C-R Function
  hospital
admissions -
 pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
OR
           Apneumonia admissions =-[/0 '(e /JA™10 -1)]-pop,


daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.18 E-5
PM10 coefficient = 0.00157
change in daily average PM10 concentration
population age 65 and older
standard error of p = 0.000677
Study: Schwartz (1994c)
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Other pollutants in model: O3
  hospital
admissions -
   COPD
             ACOPD admissions =-[ya
                                                          -1)]-pop,
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
                          daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.75 E-5
                          PM10 coefficient = 0.00451
                          change in daily average PM10 concentration
                          population age 65 and older
                          standard error of p = 0.00138
Study: Schwartz (1994c)
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Other pollutants in model: none
  hospital
admissions -
 pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
OR
           Apneumonia admissions =-[/0 '(e /JA™10 -1)]-pop,


daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
PM10 coefficient = 0.00174
change in daily average PM10 concentration
population age 65 and older
standard error of p = 0.000536
Study: Schwartz (1994a)
Location: Birmingham, AL
Other pollutants in model: none
  hospital
admissions -
   COPD
             ACOPD admissions =-[ya
                                                          -1)]-pop,
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
                          daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person = 3.75 E-5
                          PM10 coefficient = 0.00239
                          change in daily average PM10 concentration
                          population age 65 and older
                          standard error of p = 0.000838
Study: Schwartz (1994a)
Location: Birmingham, AL
Other pollutants in model: none
  hospital
admissions -
 pneumonia
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
OR
           Apneumonia admissions =-[/0 '(e /JA™10 -1)]-pop,


daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.18 E-5
PM10 coefficient = 0.00115
change in daily average PM10 concentration
population age 65 and older
standard error of p = 0.00039
Study: Schwartz (1994b)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model: O3
                                                                        D-74

-------
Health
End point
hospital
admissions -
COPD
hospital
admissions -all
respiratory

where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
°P
where:
Vo
P
C-R Function
ACOPDadmissions=-[ya -(e~'
= daily hospital admission rate for COPD per person
= PM10 coefficient = 0.00202
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.00059
Aa// respiratory admissions =- [ya •
= daily hospital admission rate for all respiratory per
= PM10 coefficient = 0.00163

*"•"<• -1)]. pop,
= 3.05 E-5
(e-^""-1)]-pop,
person 65 or older = 1 .187 E-4
Source of C-R
Study: Schwartz (1994b)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model:
Study: Schwartz (1996)
Location: Spokane, WA
Other pollutants in model:
Function
03
none
                  A PM10   = change in daily average PM10 concentration
                  pop      = population age 65 and older
                  Op        = standard  error of p = 0.000470
    hospital
admissions-all
  respiratory
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
OR
           &.all respiratory admissions = -[y0 -(e ^A™1° -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admissions for all respiratory per person 65 and older = 1.187 E-4
= PM10 coefficient = 0.00172
: change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.000930
Study: Schwartz (1995)
Location: New Haven, CT
Other pollutants in model: O3
    hospital
admissions-all
  respiratory
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
         \allrespiratory related admissions = -[y0-(e /M™10 -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admissions for all respiratory conditions per person 65 and older = 1.187 E-4
= PM10 coefficient = 0.00227
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.00145
Study: Schwartz (1995)
Location: Tacoma, WA
Other pollutants in model: O3
    hospital
 admissions -
    asthma
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
OR
                        AAsthmaAdmissions =-[y0-(e /M™25 -1)]-pop,
                           = daily hospital admission rate for asthma per person = 4.52 E-6
                           = PM25 coefficient = 0.0027
                           : change in daily average PM25 concentration
                           = population of ages < 65
                           = standard  error of p = 0.000948
                                                                                       Study: Sheppard et al. (1999)
                                                                                       Location: Seattle, WA
                                                                                       Other pollutants in model: CO
                                                                            D-75

-------
    Health
   End point
                                         C-R Function
                                                                                                 Source of C-R Function
    hospital
 admissions -
    cardiac
                   Acardiac =-[/„
                                                        -1)]-pop,
where:
Vo
P
APM2.5.10
pop
OR
                             = daily hospital admission rate for cardiac per person = 3.81 E-5
                             = PM25.10 coefficient = 0.00704
                             = change in daily average PM25_10 concentration
                             = population of all ages
                             = standard error of p = 0.00215
Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: O3
    hospital
 admissions -
 dysrhythmias
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
OR
                     ADysrhythmiasAdmissions =-[y0 -(e /JA™25 -1)]-pop,
                            = daily hospital admission rate for dysrhythmias per person = 6.46 E-6
                            = PM25 coefficient = 0.00136
                            : change in daily average PM25 concentration
                            : population of all ages
                            = standard error of p = 0.000910
                                                                                       Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
                                                                                       Location: Toronto,  Canada
                                                                                       Other pollutants in model: CO, O3
    hospital
 admissions -
 ischemic heart
    disease
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
      Alschemic Heart Disease Admissions = -\y0 -(e ^A™1° -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for ischemic heart disease per person 65 and older = 9.96 E-5
= PM10 coefficient= 0.000496
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.000220
Study: Schwartz and Morris (1995)
Location: Detroit, Ml
Other pollutants in model: CO
    hospital
 admissions -
congestive heart
     failure
                ACongestiveHeart Failure Admissions = -[y0 -(e f'APM"> -1)]-pop,

where:
y0       = daily hospital admission rate for congestive heart failure per person 65 and older = 5.82 E-5
p        = PM10 coefficient = 0.000741
APM10   = change in daily average PM10 concentration
pop      = population age 65 and older
OR       = standard error of p = 0.000311
                                                                                       Study: Schwartz and Morris (1995)
                                                                                       Location: Detroit, Ml
                                                                                       Other pollutants in model: CO
    hospital
 admissions -
 cardiovascular
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
OR
          ^cardiovascularadmissions = -\y0 -(e 'JA™1° -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease per person 65 and older = 2.23 E-4
= PM10 coefficient = 0.000737
: change in daily average PM10 concentration
: population age 65 and older
= standard error of p = 0.000170
Study: Schwartz (1999)
Location: eight U.S. counties
Other pollutants in model: CO
                                                                            D-76

-------
     Health
   End point
                                         C-R Function
                                                                                                 Source of C-R Function
    hospital
  admissions -
 cardiovascular
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
          Acardiovascularadmissions = -[ya-(e 'JA™1° -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for cardiovascular disease per person 65 and older = 2.23 E-4
= PM10 coefficient = 0.00102
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population age 65 and older
= standard  error of p = 0.000423
Study: Schwartz (1997)
Location: Tucson, AZ
Other pollutants in model: CO
emergency room
     visits
                           A asthma visits = -[/„ • (e^A™10 -1)]- pop,
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM10
                  pop
          = daily ER visits for asthma per person under 65 years old  = 7.69 E-6
          = PM10 coefficient (Schwartz et al., 1993, p. 829) = 0.00367
          : change in daily average PM10 concentration
          = population ages 0-64
          = standard  error of p (Schwartz et al., 1993, p. 829) = 0.00126
                                                                                       Study: Schwartz (1993)
                                                                                       Location: Seattle, WA
                                                                                       Other pollutants in model: none
 acute bronchitis
                                          AAcute Bronchitis = -
                  where:
                  Vo
                  P
                  APM25
                  pop
                                                                                                  Study: Dockery et al. (1996)
                                                                                                  Location: 24 U.S. and Canadian cities
                                                                                                  Other pollutants in model: none
              annual bronchitis incidence rate per person = 0.044
              estimated PM25 logistic regression coefficient = 0.0272
              change in annual average PM25 concentration
              population ages 8-12
              standard error of p = 0.0171
lower respiratory
symptoms (LRS)
   defined as
  cough, chest
  pain, phlegm,
  and wheeze
                    ALowerRespiratory Symptoms = -
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
                                                                                       Study: Schwartz, et al. (1994)
                                                                                       Location: six U.S. cities
                                                                                       Other pollutants in model: none
= daily lower respiratory symptom incidence rate per person = 0.0012
: estimated PM25 logistic regression coefficient = 0.01823
: change in daily average PM25 concentration
= population ages 7-14
= standard  error of p = 0.00586
                                                                            D-77

-------
Health
End point
Shortness of
breath, days
URS, defined as
runny or stuffy
nose, wet
cough, burning,
aching, or red
eyes
presence of any
of 19 acute
respiratory
symptoms
moderate or
worse asthma
status

where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
°P
where:
Vo
P
APM10
pop
°P
where:
P*
APM10
pop
°P
where:
P
PM2.5
pop
°u
C-R Function

Aonorrncssortirearn- .ea>M,,-e >o
= daily shortness of breath incidence rate per person = 0.056
= estimated PM10 logistic regression coefficient = 0.00841
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= asthmatic African-American population ages 7 to 12
= standard error of p = 0.00363
[ /o
Source of C-R Function
Study: Ostro et al. (1995)
pop, Location: Los Angeles, CA
Other pollutants in model: none
] Study: Pope etal. (1991)



AUppcrRcspiratory Symptoms - \ &PM,,-IS yo r (JU(-'i Luodiiun. uidii vdiiey
Ll ~ y°' y° 1 Other pollutants in model: none
= daily upper respiratory symptom incidence rate per person = 0.3419
= estimated PM10 logistic regression coefficient = 0.0036
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= asthmatic population ages 9 to 1 1 = 6.91 % of population ages 9 to 1 1
= standard error of p = 0.0015
AARD2 = p"PMw-APMw-pop,
= first derivative of the stationary probability = 0.000461
= change in daily average PM10 concentration
= population ages 18-65
= standard error of p* = 0.000239

(PM2.5,b,lar,,
= estimated PM25 coefficient for year i = 0.0006
= change in daily average PM25 concentration
= asthmatic population of all ages = 5.61% of the population of a
= standard error of p = 0.0003
Study: Krupnicket al. (1990)
Location: Glendora-Covina-Azusa, CA
Other pollutants in model: SO2, O3
Comments: COM used in estimation of model.
The estimated COM coefficient is used with
PM10 data.
Study: Ostro et al. (1991)
•P°P> Location: Denver
Other pollutants in model: none
Comments: The estimated coefficient is applied
to populations of all ages.
II ages
D-78

-------
    Health
   End point
                                         C-R Function
                                                                                                  Source of C-R Function
asthma attacks
                                          Aasthmaattacks = -
                                                                              -/o I POP,
                 where:
                 Vo
                 P
                 APM10
                 pop
                 OR
           daily incidence of asthma attacks = 0.027
           PM10 coefficient = 0.00144
           change in daily PM10 concentration
          = population of asthmatics of all ages = 5.61% of the population of all ages
           standard error of p = 0.000556
                                                                                                  Study: Whittemore and Korn (1980)
                                                                                                  Location: Los Angeles, CA
                                                                                                  Other pollutants in model: O3
   Restricted
 Activity Days
    (RADs)
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
OR
                           = daily RAD incidence rate per person = 0.0177
                           : inverse-variance weighted PM25 coefficient = 0.00475
                           = change in daily average PM2 5 concentration
                           = adult population ages 18 to 65
                           = standard error of p = 0.00029
                                                                                        Study: Ostro(1987)
                                                                                        Location: U.S. metropolitan areas
                                                                                        Other pollutants in model: none
                                                                                        Comments: An inverse-variance weighting used
                                                                                        to estimate the coefficient, based on Ostro
                                                                                        (1987, Table III)].
respiratory and
nonrespiratory
  conditions
 resulting in a
minor restricted
  activity day
   (MRAD)
where:
Vo
P
APM25
pop
OR
: daily MRAD daily incidence rate per person = 0.02137
: inverse-variance weighted PM25 coefficient = 0.00741
= change in daily average PM25 concentration
= adult population ages 18 to 65
= standard error of p = 0.0007
Study: Ostro and Rothschild (1989b)
Location: U.S.
Other pollutants in model: O3
Comments: An inverse-variance weighting used
to estimate the coefficient, based on Ostro and
Rothschild (1989b, Table 4)
work loss days
    (WLDs)
                 where:
                 Vo
                 P
                 APM25
                 pop
                 OR
                          AI/W.D = Ay • pop =- [y0 • (e-"A™25 - 1)]- pop,


          : daily work-loss-day incidence rate per person = 0.00648
          = inverse-variance weighted PM25 coefficient = 0.0046
          = change in daily average PM25 concentration
          : population ages 18 to 65
          = standard error of p = 0.00036	
                                                                                        Study: Ostro (1987)
                                                                                        Location: U.S. metropolitan areas
                                                                                        Other pollutants in model: none
                                                                                        Comments: An inverse-variance weighting used
                                                                                        to estimate the coefficient, based on Ostro
                                                                                        (1987, Table III).
                                                                            D-79

-------
                                                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Sulfur Dioxide

    The C-R functions used to estimate the impact of
sulfur dioxide are summarized in Table D-19.
                                             D-80

-------
TableD-19
Summary of C-R Functions for Sulfur Dioxide
 Health Endpoint
                      Concentration-Response Function
                                                                                        Source of C-R Function
hospital admissions
- all respiratory
where:
Vo
P
ASO2
pop
\Allrespiratory =- [y0 • (e /iAS°2 - 1)]- pop,
= daily hospital admission rate for all respiratory per person = 2.58 E-5
= SO2 coefficient = 0.00446
= change in daily one-hour maximum SO2 concentration (ppb)
= population of all ages
= standard error of p = 0.00293
Study: Burnett et al. (1997b)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: PM25.10, NO2, O3
hospital admissions
   - pneumonia
        \pneumoniaadmissions =-[y0 -(
                                               /JAS°2
Study: Moolgavkar et al. (1997)
Location: Minneapolis,  MN
where:
y0 = daily hospital admission rate for pneumonia per person = 5.30 E-5
p =SO2 coefficient = 0.00143
A SO2 = change in daily average SO2 concentration (ppb)
pop = population age 65 and older
Op = standard error of p = 0.00290
Other pollutants in model: O3, NO2 PM10
hospital admissions
 - ischemic heart
     disease
where:
Vo
P
ASO2
pop
  \lschemicHeart Disease Admissions =-[y0 -(e f>'AS°2 -1)]-pop,


= daily hospital admission rate for ischemic heart disease per person = 2.23 E-5
= SO2 coefficient = 0.00177
= change in daily average SO2 concentration
= population of all ages
= standard error of p = 0.000854
Study: Burnett et al. (1999)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Other pollutants in model: NO2
  chest tightness,
shortness of breath,
    or wheeze
          Asympfoms =
                               1
                         + e"
                                                      •pop,
                    .where:
                    a     = constant = -5.65
                    P
                    Y     = status coefficient (used for moderate asthmatics only) = 1.10
                    SO2   = peak five minute SO2 concentration (ppb) in an hour = hourly SO2
                          concentration (ppb) multiplied by 2.5 peak to mean ratio of 2.5
                          = exercising asthmatics = population of asthmatics of all ages (5.61% of the
                          population of all ages (Adams et al., 1995 Table 57)) of whom 1.7% are
                          exercising. Moderate asthmatics compose one third of exercising asthmatics;
                          mild asthmatics compose the other two thirds (U.S. EPA, 1997, p.  D-39).
                          = standard error of p = 0.00247	
Study: Linn et al. (1987; 1988; 1990) and Roger et al. (1985)
Location: Chamber study
Other pollutants in model: none
Comments: The results of four chamber studies were
combined to develop this C-R function. Moderate asthmatics
compose one third of exercising asthmatics; mild asthmatics
compose the other two thirds.
pop
                                                                         D-81

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Modeling Results

      This section presents the results of the health
effects modeling resulting from improvements in air
quality  between  the Pre-CAAA  and Post-CAAA
scenarios  for the years 2000 and 2010. Tables D-20
and D-21  summarize the health effects for each study
included in the analysis, presenting the mean, as well
as the  estimated  credible  interval  (5th and  95th
percentiles) of the number of avoided cases of each
endpoint.   Table D-20 presents these results for the
subpopulation living within  50 kilometers of an air
quality monitor.  Table D-21 presents results for the
entire population of the 48 contiguous states. Table
D-22 summarizes the life-years lost  by  age group;
Tables D-23 and D-24 present illustrative calculations
of the impact of air pollution on mortality; and Figure
D-2  presents  the results of using alternative effect
thresholds in the calculation of mortality.

      The ranges of estimates presented in Tables D-
20 and D-21 reflect the measured uncertainty  inherent
in the estimated C-R coefficients used in calculating
the  avoided  incidence  for each  endpoint.   These
ranges  are  only a partial  measure  of the total
uncertainty associated with the estimation of  the
avoided incidence of each health effect.  There are
other potentially important sources of uncertainty in
this benefits analysis that would likely lead to a wider
uncertainty range. For example, some of the analytical
components   are   point  estimates   that   do   not
incorporate   information  about  the  uncertainty
inherent in the estimates, such as the emissions and air
quality  estimates.    A complete  depiction  of  the
uncertainty  of  the estimates  would include  the
uncertainty in these important analytical components.
Incorporating quantitative uncertainty estimates into
each  of these components  is not feasible  for  this
current analysis. Therefore, the range of estimates
presented  herein  is only a partial reflection of  the total
uncertainty range.

Uncertainty

      The stated goal of this study  is to provide  a
comprehensive estimate of the benefits of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990.  To achieve this goal,
information with very different levels of confidence
must be used. The analysis presents information on
the plausible range of estimates through the use  of
two approaches.  The first approach is to reflect the
measured  uncertainty in  estimating  the  avoided
incidence of health effects by  using  an estimated
probability distribution for each C-R coefficient used
in the analysis.  The second approach is to present
analysis  using  different  key  assumptions.   The
threshold choice, the time between PM exposure and
mortality,  the choice of studies,  and whether  to
estimate mortality using  statistical  life years  or
statistical lives lost are important assumptions that are
examined in this analysis.

     To capture the  variation in the  C-R function
coefficient estimates used to  estimate the  avoided
incidence of health effects, this analysis uses a Monte
Carlo procedure  to generate distributions of estimated
effects  by randomly  sampling  the distribution  of
coefficients  (given by  the mean  coefficient  and
standard deviation reported in the literature) and then
evaluating  the  C-R  function  with the  randomly
selected coefficient.  This yielded  an estimate  of
avoided incidence  for  the given  effect and  was
repeated many  times to  generate  distributions  of
avoided incidence.  Both the mean estimates and the
5th  and  95th percentile  estimates  of  the  resulting
distributions of avoided  incidence  estimates  are
presented here for each health effect.

      The second type of uncertainty considered here
addresses the fact that different published results
reported in the  scientific literature typically do not
report   identical  findings; in  some  instances the
differences are substantial.  For this analysis, some
health endpoints used more than one concentration-
response function, each representing a different study.
The alternative  concentration-response  functions
provide differing measures of the  effect air quality
reductions  have on  changes  in particular health
endpoints.  This between-study variability is captured
by  considering  the range of estimates for  a given
endpoint, and can be used to  derive a range  of
possible results.  For example, concentration-response
functions for developing chronic  bronchitis from
                                                D-82

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
three different studies are used to estimate the range
of avoided cases of chronic bronchitis.

     Another important source of uncertainty that is
considered as an alternative analysis is the estimation
of statistical life years lost. Table D-22 presents the
percentage of lives lost for each age group considered
and  the average number of life  years lost.  The
majority of the estimated deaths occur in people over
the age of 65 (due to their higher baseline mortality
rates),  and this group  has  a short life expectancy
relative to other age groups.

Sensitivity Analyses

     One particularly important uncertainty is the
impact that alternative threshold assumptions have on
both the  estimates  of specific health effects  and
ultimately  on  monetary benefits.    The available
evidence has failed to  identify thresholds - or safe
levels  of  air  pollution  - for  any of the  effects
associated with criteria  pollutants, so  this  analysis
assumes that there are no effective thresholds and that
air pollution has effects down to zero ambient levels.
Nevertheless, thresholds may exist and their potential
impact  on the  overall  benefits analysis could  be
substantial. Any of the health effects estimated in this
analysis could have a threshold; however a threshold
for PM-related mortality would have  the  greatest
impact  on the overall benefits analysis.  Figure D-2
shows  the effect of incorporating a  range of possible
thresholds, using 2010 PM levels and the  Pope  et al.
(1995)  study.

     Pope et al. (1995) did  not explicitly include a
threshold  in their analysis.   However, if the true
mortality C-R relationship has a threshold, then Pope
et al.'s  slope coefficient would likely have  been
underestimated   for that  portion  of  the  C-R
relationship above the threshold.  This would likely
lead to an underestimate of the incidences  of avoided
cases above any assumed threshold level. It is difficult
to determine the size of the underestimate without
data on a likely threshold and without re-analyzing the
Pope et al. data.
      The  quantitative  results  of  several  other
sensitivity analyses are also presented.  As discussed
above, there is information suggesting a possible
relationship between ozone and premature mortality,
and  between PM and infant mortality.  However,
there  is   considerable  uncertainty  about  these
relationships at this time, so quantitative estimates of
these effects are not included in the aggregated results.
The  possible magnitude of these health effects are
explored as sensitivity analyses, reported in Tables D-
23 (for the population  within  50 kilometers of a
monitor) and D-24 (for the entire population of the
48 contiguous  states).  In addition, the results of an
alternative estimate of the premature adult mortality
associated with long-term PM  exposure based on
Dockery et al.  (1993) are also presented in Tables D-
23 and D-24. The Dockery et al. study used a smaller
sample of individuals from fewer cities than the study
by Pope et al., although it features improved exposure
estimates, a slightly broader study population, and a
follow-up period nearly twice as long as that of Pope
et al. The results based on  Dockery  are presented
only as sensitivity calculation for this important health
effect; the Pope et al. (1995) estimate  is used in the
primary analysis.

      Finally, this study includes a sensitivity analysis
illustrating the effect of alternative assumptions about
a potential lag between PM exposure and premature
mortality  on   monetized  benefit  estimates.   As
discussed earlier, a change in the assumed lag period
will have no effect on the total  estimate of avoided
mortality presented in Table  D-21; it will only affect
the distribution of those avoided deaths through time.
Changes to this distribution will, however, affect
monetized  benefit estimates if  the values  of the
avoided future deaths are discounted.  Therefore,
although we discuss the various lag scenarios here,
the results of this sensitivity analysis are presented in
the valuation appendix, Appendix H.

      Before  describing  the   lag  scenarios,  we
emphasize that no scientific evidence currently exists
to support the assumption of a  significant  lag (i.e.,
several years or more) between PM exposure and
premature mortality.  The prospective cohort study
design of long-term epidemiological studies  of PM
                                                 D-83

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
exposure  (including Pope et al.,  1995) provides no
information about whether a lag exists or whether a
particular length of exposure is required to elicit an
effect.   Further, we have  identified no  studies
specifically designed to test for such a PM/mortality
lag.  However, we have incorporated a  lag into our
primary analysis and conducted this sensitivity analysis
for  two  reasons.   First, other  similar  types of
exposures, such as  cigarette  smoking,  do  show
evidence of a lag. Studies of reductions in cigarette
smoking  suggest that  the  benefits  of smoking
cessation  occur over a several year period.  Second,
differences between  the  relative  risk estimates of
short-term studies of PM exposure and those of long-
term (i.e., cohort) studies may suggest the presence of
a lag for some portion of the overall mortality effect
of PM exposure.

      Short-term epidemiological studies linking daily
measures  of PM exposures with daily mortality rates
show statistically significant increases in  mortality
within days of increased PM exposure.  However, the
appropriate lag period for the portion of deaths that
do not occur immediately is unclear. Some interpret
the analysis by Brunekreef (1997) as indicative of a
much longer mortality lag of 15 years; however,  it
appears that Brunekreef simply employed assumptions
consistent with the cohort design of the Dockery et
al., 1993 study, which examined the relative risk for a
cohort aged 25 to 74 over a 15-year   period.  The
selection of such a follow-up period by Dockery et al.
was  not  based  on  biological or epidemiological
evidence of a 15-year lag, and Brunekreef cites no
evidence supporting a lag of this length.  Therefore,
we  do not find the Brunekreef (1997) study to be
convincing evidence of a fifteen-year lag.

      Table  D-25  compares  the distribution of
avoided mortality benefits assumed in the primary
analysis with each of the sensitivity analysis scenarios.
In  the  primary  analysis, we  apply  the  same lag
structure used as a sensitivity analysis in the draft RIA
for  the proposed Tier  2 motor vehicle  emission
standards  (U.S. EPA, 1999).  Under this scenario, the
avoided mortality occurs over a five year period, with
fifty percent of the avoided mortality occurring within
the first two years (i.e. 25 percent per year), and the
remainder of avoided deaths distributed evenly across
the last three years (approximately  16.7 percent per
year). As mentioned above, the appropriate length of
the lag period is highly uncertain, and  so is  the
distribution of deaths  over that period, although
evidence from short-term studies suggests weighting
the distribution  toward the first  couple  of years
following exposure. The assumptions of the Tier 2
lag structure reflect the best judgment of the Agency
on this issue; however,  they do not represent  any
known lag structure for PM mortality.

      We  evaluate  three lag  scenarios  for  the
sensitivity analysis. The first scenario assumes no lag;
that is, all avoided mortality occurs in the same year as
exposure  (Year  1  in  Table D-25).   The  second
distributes avoided mortality evenly across eight years;
this scenario is based on the eight-year cohort follow-
up period of the  Pope et al., 1995 study.  The third
scenario is based  on the Dockery et al., 1993 follow-
up period  of 15 years,  with  avoided mortality
distributed evenly across that period.  As discussed
earlier, we find the 15-year lag to  be  an extremely
conservative assumption.

      The effect of these different lag assumptions on
our estimate of monetary benefits  depends on the
discount rate used. Given the discount rate used in
the primary analysis, five percent, the no lag scenario
would  increase  the  primary  mortality  reduction
benefits estimate by nine percent; the Pope-based lag
estimate would decrease the estimate by eight percent;
and the Dockery-based lag estimate would decrease
the estimate by 21 percent.  The  actual monetary
benefit estimates generated by this sensitivity analysis
are presented in Appendix H.
                                                 D-84

-------
Table D-20
Change in Incidence of Adverse Health Effects Associated with Criteria Pollutants (Pre-CAAA minus Post-CAAA) - 48 State U.S.
Population within 50 km of a Monitor (avoided cases per year)
Endpoint

Pollutant

5th %
2000
mean

95th %

5th %
2010
mean
% of Baseline Incidences for the
mean estimates a
95th %
2000
2010
Mortality
ages 30 and older
PM
7,900
13,000
18,000
13,000
20,000
28,000
0.67%b
0.95%b
Chronic Illness
chronic bronchitis
chronic asthma
PM
03
2,300
910
11,000
4,900
20,000
8,300
4,300
1,100
18,000
5,500
30,000
8,700
2.05%
3.46%
3.09%
3.59%
Hospitalization
respiratory
admissions
cardiovascular
admissions
emergency room
visits for asthma
PM, CO, NO2,
SO2, O3
PM, CO, NO2,
SO2, O3
PM, O3
7,300
5,400
200
12,000
19,000
1,300
17,000
41,000
6,600
12,000
9,400
310
19,000
38,000
2,000
29,000
90,000
10,000
0.52%
0.59%
0.19%
0.76%
1.10%
0.27%
Minor Illness
acute bronchitis
upper respiratory
symptoms
lower respiratory
symptoms
respiratory illness
moderate or
worse asthmad
asthma attacksd
PM
PM
PM
NO2
PM
O3, PM
0°
170,000
130,000
24,000
32,000
520,000
25,000
570,000
270,000
110,000
210,000
960,000
49,000
970,000
420,000
180,000
370,000
1 ,400,000
0°
260,000
210,000
63,000
48,000
800,000
40,000
870,000
440,000
270,000
310,000
1,500,000
79,000
1 ,500,000
670,000
450,000
570,000
2,100,000
3.19%
0.61%
2.19%
7.62%
0.15%
0.74%
4.71%
0.86%
3.30%
17.29%
0.21%
1.06%
D-85

-------
Endpoint Pollutant
chest tightness, SO2
shortness of
breath, or wheeze
shortness of PM
breath
work loss days PM
minor restricted O3, PM
activity days / any
of 1 9 respiratory
symptoms6
restricted activity PM
daysd

5th %
200
16,000
1 ,900,000
14,000,000
5,500,000
2000
mean
80,000
57,000
2,200,000
17,000,000
6,200,000

95th %
370,000
95,000
2,500,000
20,000,000
6,800,000

5th %
270
25,000
3,100,000
22,000,000
9,000,000
2010
mean
100,000
88,000
3,500,000
27,000,000
10,000,000
% of Baseline Incidences for the
mean estimates a
95th % 2000
470,000 0.003%
150,000 1.25%
4,000,000 0.60%
32,000,000 1.47%
11,000,000 0.61%
2010
0.004%
1 .79%
0.87%
2.16%
0.91%
aThe baseline incidence generally is the same as that used in the C-R function for a particular health effect.  However, there are a few exceptions. To calculate the baseline incidence
rate for respiratory-related hospital admissions, we used admissions for persons of all ages for ICD codes 460-519; for cardiovascular admissions, we used admissions for persons of
all ages for ICD codes 390-429; for emergency room visits for asthma, we used the estimated ER visit rate for persons of all ages; for chronic bronchitis we used the incidence rate for
individuals 27 and older;  for the pooled estimate of minor restricted activity days and any-of-19 respiratory symptoms, we used the incidence rate for minor restricted activity days.

b Calculated as the ratio of avoided mortality to the projected baseline annual non-accidental mortality for adults aged 30 and over.  Non-accidental mortality was approximately 95% of
total mortality for this subpopulation in 2010.

0 Monte Carlo modeling returned a negative value for the fifth percentile estimate of this endpoint. However, we believe the  negative result represents an artifact of the statistical methods
employed in the uncertainty analysis, since none of the studies used in the health benefits analysis suggest a negative correlation between criteria air pollutant exposure and this health
endpoint.  We therefore truncate this value at zero for presentation.  The full distribution of estimates, including negative values, is used in all aggregations of benefits estimates presented
in this document.

d These health endpoints overlap with the "any-of-19 respiratory symptoms" category. As a result, although we present estimates for each endpoint individually,  these results are not
aggregated into the total benefits estimates.

e Minor restricted activity days and any-of-19 respiratory symptoms have overlapping definitions and are pooled.
                                                                                 D-86

-------
Table D-21
Change in Incidence of Adverse Health Effects Associated with Criteria Pollutants (Pre-CAAA
Population (avoided cases per year)
Endpoint

Pollutant

5th %
2000
mean

95th %

5th %
2010
mean
minus Post-CAAA) - 48 State U.S.
% of Baseline Incidences for
the mean estimates a
95th % 2000
2010
Mortality
ages 30 and older
PM
8,800
14,000
19,000
14,000
23,000
32,000 0.66%b
1 .00%b
Chronic Illness
chronic bronchitis
chronic asthma
PM
03
3,100
1,300
13,000
5,600
22,000
9,600
5,000
1,800
20,000
7,200
34,000 2.21%
12,000 3.22%
3.14%
3.83%
Hospitalization
respiratory
admissions
cardiovascular
admissions
emergency room
visits for asthma
PM, CO, NO2,
SO2, O3
PM, CO, NO2,
SO2, O3
PM, O3
8,100
5,800
260
13,000
22,000
3,100
20,000
48,000
8,900
13,000
10,000
430
22,000
42,000
4,800
34,000 0.40%
100,000 0.49%
14,000 0.39%
0.62%
0.86%
0.55%
Minor Illness
acute bronchitis
upper respiratory
symptoms
lower respiratory
symptoms
respiratory illness
moderate or
worse asthmad
asthma attacksd
PM
PM
PM
NO2
PM
O3, PM
0°
180,000
150,000
31,000
52,000
590,000
29,000
620,000
320,000
130,000
260,000
1,100,000
59,000
1,000,000
480,000
220,000
460,000
1,600,000
0°
280,000
240,000
76,000
80,000
920,000
47,000
950,000
520,000
330,000
400,000
1 ,700,000
94,000 3.39%
1,600,000 0.61%
770,000 2.38%
550,000 4.46%
720,000 0.17%
2,500,000 0.73%
5.06%
0.86%
3.57%
10.44%
0.24%
1.04%
D-87

-------
Endpoint Pollutant
chest tightness, SO2
shortness of
breath, or wheeze
shortness of PM
breath
work loss days PM
minor restricted O3, PM
activity days / any
of 1 9 respiratory
symptoms6
restricted activity PM
daysd

5th %
220
16,000
2,200,000
16,000,000
6,400,000
2000
mean
88,000
59,000
2,500,000
19,000,000
7,200,000

95th %
410,000
98,000
2,900,000
23,000,000
7,900,000

5th %
290
26,000
3,600,000
25,000,000
10,000,000
2010
mean
110,000
91 ,000
4,100,000
31,000,000
12,000,000
% of Baseline Incidences for
the mean estimates a
95th % 2000
520,000 0.002%
150,000 1.19%
4,600,000 0.62%
37,000,000 1 .43%
13,000,000 0.65%
2010
0.003%
1.69%
0.94%
2.15%
1.00%
aThe baseline incidence generally is the same as that used in the C-R function for a particular health effect.  However, there are a few exceptions. To calculate the baseline incidence
rate for respiratory-related hospital admissions, we used admissions for persons of all ages for ICD codes 460-519; for cardiovascular admissions, we used admissions for persons of
all ages for ICD codes 390-429; for emergency room visits for asthma, we used the estimated ER visit rate for persons of all ages; for chronic bronchitis we used the incidence rate for
individuals 27 and older;  for the pooled estimate of minor restricted activity days and any-of-19 respiratory symptoms, we used the incidence rate for minor restricted activity days.

b Calculated as the ratio of avoided mortality to the projected baseline annual non-accidental mortality for adults aged 30 and over.  Non-accidental mortality was approximately 95% of
total mortality for this subpopulation in 2010.

0 Monte Carlo modeling returned a negative value for the fifth percentile estimate of this endpoint. However, we believe the  negative result represents an artifact of the statistical methods
employed in the uncertainty analysis, since none of the studies used in the health benefits analysis suggest a negative correlation between criteria air pollutant exposure and this health
endpoint.  We therefore truncate this value at zero for presentation.  The full distribution of estimates, including negative values, is used in all aggregations of benefits estimates presented
in this document.

d These health endpoints overlap with the "any-of-19 respiratory symptoms" category. As a result, although we present estimates for each endpoint individually,  these results are not
aggregated into the total benefits estimates.

e Minor restricted activity days and any-of-19 respiratory symptoms have overlapping definitions and are pooled.
                                                                                 D-88

-------
 Table D-22
 Mortality Distribution by Age in Primary Analysis, Based on Pope et al. (1995)
                    Age Group                              Proportion of Premature Mortality by Agea                   Life Expectancy (years)

                      Infants                                             not estimated

                       1-29                                              not estimated

                      30-34                                                  1 %                                            48

	35-44	4%	38	

                      45-54                                                  6%                                            29

                      55-64                                                 12%                                            21

                      65-74                                                 24%                                            14

	75-84	30%	9	

	85+	24%	6	


' Percentages sum to 101 percent due to rounding.
                                                                    D-89

-------
 Table D-23
 Illustrative Estimates of the Impact of Criteria Pollutants on Mortality - 48 State U.S. Population within 50 km of a Monitor (cases per
 year)
Endpoint
ages 30 and older
(Popeetal., 1995)
ages 25 and older
(Dockeryetal., 1993)*
all ages *
post-neonatal *

Pollutant
PM
PM
03
PM

5th %
7,900
12,000
81
39
The Dockery et al. (1993), ozone mortality, and post-neonatal
Table D-24
Illustrative Estimates
Endpoint
ages 30 and older
(Popeetal., 1995)
ages 25 and older
(Dockeryetal., 1993)*
all ages *
post-neonatal *
of the Impact

Pollutant
PM
PM
03
PM
of Criteria

5th %
8,800
15,987
Of
45
2000
mean
13,000
29,000
1,100
81

95th %
18,000
46,000
2,200
120

5th %
13,000
20,000
130
59
mortality estimates are not aggregated into total
Pollutants on
2000
mean
14,000
34,860
1,400
88
Mortality - 48

95th %
19,000
54,677
2,800
130
State U.

5th %
14,000
26,000
Of
69
2010
mean
20,000
47,000
1,600
120
benefits estimates
S. Population
2010
mean
23,000
56,000
2,200
130
% of Baseline Incidences for
the mean estimates
95th %
28,000
73,000
3,400
180

(cases per
2000
0.67%
1 .35%
0.06%
0.93%

year)
2010
0.95%
2.19%
0.08%
1.39%


% of Baseline Incidences for
the mean estimates
95th %
32,000
88,000
4,600
200
2000
0.66%
1 .60%
0.07%
1 .02%
2010
1 .00%
2.39%
0.09%
1.38%
*The Dockery et al. (1993), ozone mortality, and post-neonatal mortality estimates are not aggregated into total benefits estimates.

fMonte Carlo modeling returned a negative value for the fifth percentile estimate of this endpoint. However, we believe the negative result represents an artifact of the statistical methods
employed in the uncertainty analysis, since none of the studies used in the health benefits analysis suggest a negative correlation between criteria air pollutant exposure and this health
endpoint. We therefore truncate this value at zero for presentation.  The full distribution of estimates, including negative values, is used in all aggregations of benefits estimates presented
in this document.
                                                                             D-90

-------
Table D-25
Comparison of Alternative Lag Assumptions for Premature Mortality Associated with PM Exposure

Year
Tier II SA Lag
(Primary Estimate)
No Lag
Lag Distributed
Evenly Over the
Period Covered by
Pope et al., 1995
Lag Distributed
Evenly Over the
Period Covered by
Dockery et al., 1993
Percent of Avoided Mortality By Year
12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
25 25 16.67 16.67 16.67 0 0 00000000

100 00 0 00000000000
12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 0000000



6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67



Totals may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.
                                                                         D-91

-------
                                               The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure D-2
Long-Term Mortality Based on Pope (1995):  National Avoided Incidence Estimates (2010)
at Different Assumed Effect Thresholds, Based on a 50 Km Maximum Distance
     25,000
                                         8       8       8      8
                          Assumed Effect Threshold (Annual Mean PM2.5 (ug/m3))
                                             D-92

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Abbey, D.E., RJ. Burchette, S.F. Knutsen, W.F. McDonnell, M.D. Lebowitz and P.L. Ennght.  1998.  Long-
       term particulate and other air pollutants and lung function in nonsmokers. American Journal  of
       Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 158(1): 289-298.

Abbey, D.E., B.E. Ostro, F. Petersen and RJ. Burchette. 1995. Chronic Respiratory Symptoms Associated
       with Estimated Long-Term Ambient Concentrations of Fine Particulates Less Than 2.5 Microns in
       Aerodynamic Diameter (PM2.5) and Other Air Pollutants. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol.  5(2):
       137-159.

Abbey, D.E., F. Petersen, P.K. Mills and W.L. Beeson. 1993. Long-Term Ambient Concentrations of Total
       Suspended Particulates, Ozone, and Sulfur Dioxide and Respiratory Symptoms in a Nonsmoking
       Population. Archives of Environmental Health. 48(1): 33-46.

Abt Associates Inc. 1998. Air Quality Estimation for the NOx SIP Call RIA.  Prepared for U.S. EPA,
       Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, under contract no.  68-D-98-001.  Research Triangle
       Park, NC.  September.

Abt Associates Inc. 1999. Memorandum from Leland Deck to Jim Neumann, Industrial Economics,  Inc.,
       "Prospective 812 Temporal and Spatial Air Quality Modeling Procedures," May 27, 1999.

Ackermann-Liebrich, U., P. Leuenberger, J. Schwartz, C. Schindler, C. Monn, C. Bolognini, J.P. Bongard, O.
       Brandli, G. Domenighetti, S. Elsasser, L. Grize, W. Karrer, R. Keller, H. Keller-Wossidlo, N. Kunzli,
       B.W. Martin, T.C. Medici, A.P. Perruchoud, M.H. Schom, J.M. Tschopp, B. Villiger, B. Wuthnch,
       J.P.  Zellweger and E. Zemp.  1997.  Lung function and long term exposure to air pollutants in
       Switzerland. Study on Air Pollution and Lung Diseases in Adults (SAPALDIA) Team.  Am J Respir
       Cnt Care Med.  155(1): 122-129.

Adams, P.P. and M.A. Marano.  1995. Current Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey,  1994.
       Vital Health Statistics,  Series  10, No. 193. National Center for Health Statistics. Hyattsville, MD.

Anderson, H.R., C. Spix, S. Medina, J.P. Schouten, J. Castellsague, G. Rossi, D. Zmirou, G. Touloumi, B.
       Wojtyniak, A. Ponka, L. Bacharova, J. Schwartz and K. Katsouyanni.  1997. Air pollution and daily
       admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 6 European cities: Results from the
       APHEA project. European Respiratory Journal. 10(5): 1064-1071.

Atkinson, R.W., H.R. Anderson, D.P. Strachan, J.M. Bland, S.A. Bremner and A. Ponce de Leon. 1999.
       Short-term associations between outdoor air pollution and visits to accident and emergency
       departments in London for respiratory complaints. Eur Respir J. 13(2): 257-65.

Bates, D.V., M. Baker-Anderson and R. Sizto.  1990.  Asthma attack periodicity:  a study of hospital
       emergency visits in Vancouver. Environ Res. 51(1): 51-70.

Bobak, M. and D.A. Leon.  1992. Air pollution and infant mortality in the Czech Republic, 1986-88. Lancet.
       340(8826): 1010-4.
                                              D-93

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Buchdahl, R., A. Parker, T. Stebbings and A. Babiker. 1996. Association between air pollution and acute
        childhood wheezy episodes: prospective observational study. Bmj.  312(7032): 661-5.

Burnett, R.T., J.R. Brook, W.T. Yung, R.E. Dales and D. Krewski.  1997a. Association between ozone and
        hospitalization for respiratory diseases in 16 Canadian cities.  Environmental Research.  72(1): 24-31.

Burnett, R.T., S. Cakmak, J.R. Brook and D. Krewski. 1997b.  The role of particulate size and chemistry in
        the association between summertime ambient air pollution and hospitalization  for cardiorespiratory
        diseases.  Environ Health Perspect.  105(6): 614-20.

Burnett, R.T., S. Cakmak, M.E. Raizenne, D. Stieb, R. Vincent, D. Krewski, J.R. Brook, O. Philips and H.
        Ozkaynak. 1998. The association between ambient carbon monoxide levels and daily mortality in
        Toronto Canada. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association. 48(8): 689-700.

Burnett, R.T., R. Dales, D. Krewski, R. Vincent, T. Dann and J.R. Brook. 1995.  Associations between
        ambient particulate sulfate and admissions to Ontario hospitals for cardiac and respiratory diseases.
        AmJ Epidemiol. 142(1): 15-22.

Burnett, R.T., R.E. Dales, J.R. Brook, M.E. Raizenne and D. Krewski. 1997c. Association between ambient
        carbon monoxide levels and hospitalizations for congestive heart failure in the  elderly in 10 Canadian
        cities.  Epidemiology. 8(2): 162-167.

Burnett, R.T., R.E. Dales, M.E. Raizenne, D. Krewski, P.W. Summers, G.R. Roberts, M. Raadyoung, T.
        Dann andj. Brook.  1994. Effects of Low Ambient Levels of Ozone and Sulfates On the Frequency
        of Respiratory Admissions to  Ontario Hospitals. Environ Res.  65(2): 172-194.

Burnett, R.T., M. Smith-Doiron, D. Stieb, S. Cakmak and J.R. Brook. 1999.  Effects of particulate and
        gaseous air pollution on cardiorespiratory hospitalizations. Archives Environmental Health.  54(2):
        130-139.

Castellsague, J., J.  Sunyer, M. Saez and J.M. Anto.  1995.  Short-term association between air pollution and
        emergency room visits for asthma in Barcelona.  Thorax. 50(10): 1051-6.

Chapman, R.S., D.C. Calafiore and V  Hasselblad.  1985. Prevalence of persistent cough and phlegm in
        young adults in relation to long-term ambient sulfur oxide exposure. Am Rev Respir Dis. 132(2):
        261-7.

Cody, R.P., C.P. Weisel, G. Birnbaum  and PJ. Lioy. 1992.  The effect of ozone associated with summertime
        photochemical smog on the frequency of asthma visits to hospital emergency departments. Environ
        Res.  58(2): 184-94.

Delfino, R.J., M.R. Becklake and J.A. Hanley.  1994. The relationship of urgent hospital admissions for
        respiratory illnesses to photochemical air pollution levels in Montreal. Environ Res. 67(1): 1-19.
                                               D-94

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Delfmo, R.J., A.M. Murphy-Moulton and M.R. Becklake. 1998. Emergency room visits for respiratory
       illnesses among the elderly in Montreal: association with low level ozone exposure.  Environ Res.
       76(2): 67-77.

Delfmo, R.J., A.M. MurphyMoulton, R.T. Burnett, J.R. Brook and M.R. Becklake. 1997.  Effects of air
       pollution on emergency room visits for respiratory illnesses in Montreal, Quebec. Am J Respir Grit
       CareMed. 155(2): 568-576.

Betels, R., D.P. Tashkin, J.W. Sayre, S.N. Rokaw, FJ. Massey, A.H. Coulson and D.H. Wegman.  1991. The
       Ucla Population Studies of Cord .10. a Cohort Study of Changes in Respiratory Function Associated
       With Chronic Exposure to Sox, Nox, and Hydrocarbons. American Journal of Public Health. 81(3):
       350-359.

Dockery, D.W., J. Cunningham, A.I. Damokosh, L.M. Neas, J.D. Spengler, P. Koutrakis, J.H. Ware, M.
       Raizenne and F.E. Speizer.  1996. Health Effects of Acid Aerosols On North American Children -
       Respiratory Symptoms. Environmental Health Perspectives.  104(5): 500-505.

Dockery, D.W., C.A. Pope, X.P. Xu, J.D. Spengler, J.H. Ware, M.E. Fay, B.C. Ferris and F.E. Speizer. 1993.
       An association between air pollution and mortality in six U.S. cities. N Engl J Med.  329(24): 1753-
       1759.

Dockery, D.W., F.E. Speizer, D.O. Strain, J.H. Ware, J.D. Spengler and B.C. Ferris, Jr. 1989. Effects of
       Inhalable Particles on Respiratory Health of Children. Am Rev Respir Dis.  139: 587-594.

Evans, J.S., T. Tosteson and P.L. Kinney. 1984. Cross-Sectional Mortality Studies and Air Pollution Risk
       Assessment. Environment International.  10: 55-83.

Forsberg, B., N. Stjernberg, M.  Falk, B. Lundback and S.  Wall.  1993. Air pollution  levels, meteorological
       conditions and asthma symptoms. Eur Respir J. 6(8): 1109-15.

Gielen, M.H., S.C. vanderZee, J.H. vanWijnen, CJ. vanSteen and B. Brunekreef. 1997. Acute effects of
       summer air pollution on respiratory health of asthmatic children.  Am J Respir Crit Care Med.
       155(6): 2105-2108.

Goldstein, I.F. and A.L. Weinstein.  1986. Air pollution and asthma: effects of exposures to short-term
       sulfur dioxide peaks. Environ Res. 40(2): 332-45.

Graves, EJ. and B.S. Gillum. 1997. Detailed Diagnoses  and Procedures, National Hospital Dsicharge
       Survey, 1994.  Vital Health Statistics, Series 13, No. 127. National  Center for Health Statistics.
       Hyattsville, MD.  March.

Hasselblad, V., D.M. Eddy and DJ. Kotchmar.  1992. Synthesis of Environmental Evidence - Nitrogen
       Dioxide Epidemiology Studies.  J Air Waste Manage Assoc. 42(5): 662-671.

Hiltermann, T.J.N., J. Stolk, S.C. vanderZee, B. Brunekreef, C.R. deBruijne, P.H. Fischer, C.B. Ameling, PJ.
       Sterk, P.S. Hiemstra and L. vanBree.  1998.  Asthma severity and susceptibility to air pollution. Eur
       Respir J. 11(3): 686-693.
                                               D-95

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Hoek, G. and B. Brunekreef.  1995.  Effect of Photochemical Air Pollution On Acute Respiratory Symptoms
        in Children. Am J Respir Grit Care Med. 151(1): 27-32.

Ito, K. and G.D. Thurston. 1996. Daily Pm(10)/Mortality Associations - an Investigation of At-Risk
        Subpopulations. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. 6(1): 79-95.

Kinney, P.L., K. Ito and G.D. Thurston. 1995. A Sensitivity Analysis of Mortality Pm-10 Associations in
        Los  Angeles. Inhalation Toxicology. 7(1): 59-69.

Krupnick, A.J., W. Harrington and B. Ostro.  1990.  Ambient Ozone and Acute Health Effects - Evidence
        From Daily Data. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.  18(1): 1-18.

Linn, W.S., E.L. Avol, R.C. Peng, D.A. Shamoo and J.D. Hackney.  1987. Replicated dose-response study of
        sulfur dioxide effects in normal, atopic, and asthmatic volunteers. Am Rev Respir Dis.  136(5):
        1127-34.

Linn, W.S., E.L. Avol, D.A. Shamoo, R.C. Peng, C.E. Spier, M.N. Smith and J.D. Hackney. 1988. Effect of
        metaproterenol sulfate on mild asthmatics' response to sulfur dioxide exposure and exercise. Arch
        Environ Health. 43(6): 399-406.

Linn, W.S., D.A. Shamoo, R.C. Peng, K.W. Clark, E.L. Avol and J.D. Hackney.  1990. Responses to sulfur
        dioxide and exercise by medication-dependent asthmatics: effect of varying medication levels. Arch
        Environ Health. 45(1): 24-30.

Lipfert, F.W. 1993. A Critical Review of Studies of the Association Between Demands For Hospital
        Services and Air Pollution. Environmental Health Perspectives.  101(S2): 229-268.

Lipfert, F.W. and T. Hammerstrom. 1992. Temporal Patterns in Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions.
        Environmental Research. 59(2): 374-399.

Lipfert, F.W. and R.E. Wyzga. 1995. Air Pollution and Mortality - Issues and Uncertainties. J Air Waste
        ManagAssoc. 45(12): 949-966.

Lipsett, M., S. Hurley and B. Ostro.  1997.  Air pollution and emergency room visits for asthma in Santa
        Clara County, California.  Environmental Health Perspectives.  105(2): 216-222.

Loomis, D.,  M. Castillejos, D.R. Gold, W. McDonnell and V.H. Borja-Aburto. 1999. Air pollution and
        infant mortality in Mexico City.  Epidemiology.  10(2): 118-23.

McDonnell,  W.F., D.E. Abbey, N. Nishino and M.D. Lebowitz. 1999. Long-term ambient ozone
        concentration and the incidence of asthma in nonsmoking adults: the ahsmog study [In Process
        Citation].  Environ Res.  80(2 Pt 1): 110-21.

Melia, R.J., C.D. Florey, S. Chinn, B.D. Goldstein, A.G.F. Brooks, H.H.John, D. Clark, I.E. Craighead and
        X. Webster.  1980. The relation between indoor air pollution from nitrogen dioxide and respiratory
        illness in schoolchildren.  Clinical Respiratory Physiology.  16: 7P-8P.
                                               D-96

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Melia, R.J., C.d.V. Florey, R.W. Morns, B.D. Goldstein, H.H. John, D. Clark, I.E. Craighead and J.C.
        Mackinlay.  1982. Childhood respiratory illness and the home environment. II. Association between
        respiratory illness and nitrogen dioxide, temperature and relative humidity.  Int J Epidemiol.  11(2):
        164-9.

Moolgavkar, S.H., E.G. Luebeck and E.L. Anderson. 1997. Air pollution and hospital admissions for
        respiratory causes in Minneapolis St. Paul and Birmingham. Epidemiology.  8(4): 364-370.

Moolgavkar, S.H., E.G. Luebeck, T.A. Hall and E.L. Anderson. 1995. Air Pollution and Daily Mortality in
        Philadelphia. Epidemiology.  6(5):  476-484.

Morgan, G., S. Corbett and J. Wlodarczyk.  1998.  Air pollution and hospital admissions in Sydney, Australia,
        1990 to 1994. Am J Public Health. 88(12): 1761-6.

Morris, R.D. and E.N. Naumova.  1998.  Carbon monoxide and hospital admissions for congestive heart
        failure: evidence of an increased effect at low temperatures. Environ Health Perspect.  106(10): 649-
        53.

Morris, R.D., E.N. Naumova and R.L. Munasinghe. 1995. Ambient Air Pollution and Hospitalization for
        Congestive Heart Failure Among Elderly People in Seven Large U.S. Cities.  American Journal of
        Public Health.  85(10): 1361-1365.

National Center for Health Statistics.  1994. Vital Statistics of the United States, 1990, vol II, Mortality, Part
        B. Public Health Service: Washington, DC.

Neas, L.M. and J. Schwartz. 1998. Pulmonary function levels as predictors of mortality in a national sample
        of US adults. American Journal of Epidemiology. 147(11): 1011-1018.

Neukirch, F., C. Segala, Y. Le Moullec, M. Korobaeff and M. Aubier. 1998. Short-term effects of low-level
        winter pollution on respiratory health of asthmatic adults.  Arch Environ Health.  53(5): 320-8.

Ostro, B.D.  1987.  Air Pollution and Morbidity Revisited: A Specification Test. Journal of Environmental
        Economics and Management. 14: 87-98.

Ostro, B.D., MJ. Lipsett and N.P. Jewell. 1989a.  Predicting Respiratory Morbidity From Pulmonary
        Function Tests - a Reanalysis of Ozone Chamber Studies.  Japca. 39(10): 1313-1318.

Ostro, B.D., MJ. Lipsett, J.K. Mann, H. Braxtonowens  and M.C. White. 1995. Air Pollution and Asthma
        Exacerbations Among African-American  Children in Los Angeles.  Inhalation Toxicology. 7(5):
        711-722.

Ostro, B.D., MJ. Lipsett, J.K. Mann, A. Krupnick and W. Harrington.  1993. Air Pollution and Respiratory
        Morbidity Among Adults in Southern  California.  AmJ Epidemiol. 137(7): 691-700.

Ostro, B.D., MJ. Lipsett, M.B. Wiener and J.C. Seiner.  1991. Asthmatic Responses to Airborne Acid
        Aerosols. AmJ Public Health. 81(6):  694-702.

Ostro, B.D. and S. Rothschild. 1989b. Air Pollution and  Acute Respiratory Morbidity - an Observational
        Study of Multiple Pollutants.  Environ Res. 50(2): 238-247.

                                                D-97

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Pantazopoulou, A., K. Katsouyanni, J. Kourea-Kremastinou and D. Trichopoulos.  1995.  Short-term effects
        of air pollution on hospital emergency outpatient visits and admissions in the greater Athens, Greece
        area.  Environ Res.  69(1): 31-6.

Pereira, L.A.A., D. Loomis, G.M.S. Conceicao, A.L.F. Braga, R.M. Areas, H.S. Kishi, R.M. Singer, G.M.
        Bohm and P.H.N. Saldiva. 1998. Association between air pollution and intrauterine mortality in Sao
        Paulo, Brazil.  Environmental Health Perspectives.  106(6): 325-329.

Peters, A., I.F. Goldstein, U. Beyer, K. Franke, J. Heinrich, D.W. Dockery, J.D. Spengler and H.E.
        Wichmann.  1996. Acute Health Effects of Exposure to High Levels of Air Pollution in Eastern
        Europe. American Journal of Epidemiology.  144(6): 570-581.

Peters, J.M., E. Avol, W.  Navidi, SJ. London, WJ. Gauderman, F. Lurmann, W.S. Linn, H. Margolis, E.
        Rappaport, H. Gong and D.C. Thomas. 1999. A Study of Twelve Southern California Communities
        with Differing Levels and Types of Air Pollution. I. prevalence of respiratory morbidity. Am J
        Respir Cnt Care  Med. 159(3): 760-767.

Ponce de Leon, A., H.R.  Anderson, J.M. Bland, D.P. Strachan and J. Bower.  1996. Effects of air pollution
        on daily hospital admissions for respiratory disease in London between 1987-88 and 1991-92. J
        Epidemiol Community Health.  50 Suppl 1: s63-70.

Ponka, A. and M. Virtanen.  1994. Chronic bronchitis, emphysema, and low-level air pollution in Helsinki,
        1987-1989.  Environ Res. 65(2): 207-17.

Pope, C.A. and D.W. Dockery.  1992.  Acute Health Effects of PM10 Pollution On Symptomatic and
        Asymptomatic Children.  American Review of Respiratory Disease.  145(5): 1123-1128.

Pope, C.A., D.W. Dockery, J.D. Spengler and M.E. Raizenne. 1991. Respiratory Health and PmlO Pollution
        - a Daily Time Series Analysis.  American Review of Respiratory Disease.  144(3):  668-674.

Pope, C.A., MJ. Thun, M.M. Namboodin, D.W. Dockery, J.S. Evans, F.E. Speizer and C.W. Heath. 1995.
        Particulate air pollution as a predictor of mortality in a prospective study of U.S. adults. Am J Respir
        Cnt Care Med. 151(3): 669-674.

Portney, P.R.  and J. Mullahy. 1990.  Urban Air Quality and Chronic Respiratory Disease.  Regional Science
        and Urban Economics. 20(3): 407-418.

Richards, W.,  S.P. Azen, J. Weiss, S. Stocking and J. Church.  1981.  Los Angeles air pollution and asthma in
        children. Ann Allergy.  47(5 Pt 1): 348-54.

Ritz, B. and F. Yu.  1999. The effect of ambient carbon monoxide on low birth weight among children born
        in southern  California between 1989 and 1993. Environ Health Perspect. 107(1): 17-25.

Roemer, W., G. Hoek, B. Brunekreef, J. Haluszka, A. Kalandidi and J. Pekkanen. 1998.  Daily variations in
        air pollution and respiratory health in a multicentre study: the PEACE project. Pollution Effects on
        Asthmatic Children in Europe. Eur Respir J.  12(6): 1354-61.

Roger, L.J., H.R. Kehrl, M. Hazucha and D.H. Horstman.  1985.  Bronchoconstriction in asthmatics exposed
        to sulfur dioxide during repeated exercise.  J Appl Physiol.  59(3): 784-91.

                                              D-98

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Romieu, I., F. Meneses, S. RuizJJ. SienraJ. Huerta, M.C. White and R.A. Etzel.  1996.  Effects of air
        pollution on the respiratory health of asthmatic children living in Mexico City. Am J Respir Grit
        CareMed. 154(2 Pt 1): 300-7.

Romieu, I., F. Meneses, JJ. Sienra-Monge,J. Huerta, S. Ruiz Velasco, M.C. White, R.A. Etzel and M.
        Hernandez-Avila.  1995.  Effects of urban air pollutants on emergency visits for childhood asthma in
        Mexico City. AmJ Epidemiol.  141(6): 546-53.

Rosas, I., H.A. McCartney, R.W. Payne, C. Calderon, J. Lacey, R. Chapela and S. Ruiz-Velazco. 1998.
        Analysis of the relationships between environmental factors (aeroallergens, air pollution, and
        weather) and asthma emergency admissions to a hospital in Mexico City. Allergy.  53(4): 394-401.

Saldiva, P.H.N., A. Lichtenfels, P.S.O. Paiva, LA. Barone, M.A. Martins, E. Massad, J.C.R. Pereira, V.P.
        Xavier, J.M. Singer and G.M. Bohm.  1994.  Association Between Air Pollution and Mortality Due to
        Respiratory Diseases in Children in Sao Paulo, Brazil - a Preliminary Report.  Environ Res. 65(2):
        218-225.

Saldiva, P.H.N., C.A. Pope, J. Schwartz, D.W. Dockery, AJ. Lichtenfels, J.M. Salge, I. Barone  and G.M.
        Bohm. 1995.  Air Pollution and Mortality in Elderly People - a Time-Series Study in Sao Paulo,
        Brazil. Arch Environ Health.  50(2): 159-163.

Samet,J.M., Y. Bishop, F.E.  Speizer,J.D. Spengler and E.G. Ferris, Jr.  1981.  The relationship between  air
        pollution and emergency room visits in an industrial community. J Air Pollut Control Assoc.  31(3):
        236-40.

Samet, J.M., S.L. Zeger, J.E. Kelsall, J. Xu and L.S. Kalkstein.  1997.  Air Pollution, Weather, and Mortality in
        Philadelphia 1973-1988.  Health Effects Institute.  Cambridge, MA.  March.

Schwartz, J. 1993.  Particulate Air Pollution and Chronic Respiratory Disease.  Environ Res. 62:7-13.

Schwartz, J. 1994a. Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions For the Elderly in Birmingham, Alabama.
        American Journal of Epidemiology. 139(6): 589-598.

Schwartz, J. 1994b. Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions For the Elderly in Detroit, Michigan.  American
        Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 150(3): 648-655.

Schwartz, J. 1994c. PM(10)  Ozone, and Hospital Admissions For the Elderly in Minneapolis  St Paul,
        Minnesota. Archives of Environmental Health.  49(5): 366-374.

Schwartz, J. 1995.  Short term fluctuations in air pollution and hospital admissions of the elderly for
        respiratory disease. Thorax. 50(5): 531-538.

Schwartz, J. 1996.  Air pollution and hospital admissions for respiratory disease.  Epidemiology. 7(1): 20-28.

Schwartz, J. 1997.  Air pollution and hospital admissions for cardiovascular disease in Tucson.
        Epidemiology. 8(4): 371-377.
                                               D-99

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Schwartz,}.  1999.  Air pollution and hospital admissions for heart disease in eight U.S. counties.
        Epidemiology.  10(1): 17-22.

Schwartz,]., D.W. Dockery, L.M. Neas, D. WypijJ.H. WareJ.D. Spengler, P. Koutrakis, F.E. Speizer and
        E.G. Ferris. 1994. Acute Effects of Summer Air Pollution On Respiratory Symptom Reporting in
        Children. Am J Respir Grit Care Med.  150(5): 1234-1242.

Schwartz,}, and R. Morris. 1995. Air Pollution and Hospital Admissions For Cardiovascular Disease in
        Detroit, Michigan. American Journal of Epidemiology. 142(1): 23-35.

Schwartz,]., D. Slater, T.V. Larson, W.E. Pierson and J.Q. Koenig.  1993. Participate air pollution and
        hospital emergency room visits for asthma in Seattle. Am Rev Respir Dis.  147(4): 826-31.

Schwartz,], and S. Zeger.  1990. Passive Smoking, Air Pollution, and Acute Respiratory Symptoms in a
        Diary Study of Student Nurses. American Review of Respiratory Disease.  141(1): 62-67.

Sheppard, L., D. Levy, G.  Norris, T.V. Larson and J.Q. Koenig. 1999.  Effects of ambient air pollution on
        nonelderly asthma hospital admissions  in Seattle, Washington,  1987-1994.  Epidemiology. 10(1): 23-
        30.

Smith, D.H., D.C. Malone, K.A. Lawson, LJ. Okamoto, C. Battista and W.B. Saunders. 1997. A national
        estimate of the economic costs of asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 156(3 Pt 1): 787-93.

Spix, C., H.R. Anderson,]. Schwartz, M.A. Vigotti, A. LeTertre, J.M. Vonk, G. Touloumi, F. Balducci, T.
        Piekarski, L. Bacharova, A. Tobias, A. Ponka and K. Katsouyanni. 1998. Short-term effects  of air
        pollution on hospital admissions of respiratory diseases in Europe: A quantitative summary of
        APHEA study results.  Archives of Environmental Health.  53(1): 54-64.

Stieb, D.M., R.T. Burnett, R.C. Beveridge and J.R. Brook. 1996. Association between ozone and asthma
        emergency department visits in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.  Environmental Health
        Perspectives. 104(12): 1354-1360.

Sunyer, J., M. Saez, C. Murillo, J. Castellsague, F. Martinez and J.M.  An to. 1993. Air pollution and
        emergency room admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a 5-year study. Am J
        Epidemiol.  137(7): 701-5.

Sunyer, J., C. Spix, P. Quenel, A. PoncedeLeon, A. Ponka, T. Barumandzadeh, G. Touloumi, L. Bacharova,
        B. Wojtyniak, J. Vonk, L. Bisanti, J. Schwartz and K. Katsouyanni. 1997. Urban air pollution and
        emergency admissions for asthma in four European  cities: the APHEA Project. Thorax.  52(9): 760-
        765.

Tenias, J.M., F. Ballester and M.L. Rivera. 1998. Association between hospital emergency visits for asthma
        and air pollution in Valencia, Spain. Occup Environ Med.  55(8): 541-7.

Thurston, G.D., K. Ito, C.G. Hayes, D.V Bates and M. Lippmann.  1994. Respiratory Hospital Admissions
        and Summertime  Haze Air Pollution in Toronto, Ontario - Consideration of the Role of Acid
        Aerosols. Environ Res. 65(2): 271-290.
                                              D-100

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Thurston, G.D., K. Ito, P.L. Kinney and M. Lippmann.  1992. A Multi-Year Study of Air Pollution and
        Respiratory Hospital Admissions in 3 New-York State Metropolitan Areas - Results For 1988 and
        1989 Summers. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. 2(4): 429-450.

Touloumi, G., E. Samoli and K. Katsouyanni. 1996.  Daily Mortality and Winter Type Air Pollution in
        Athens, Greece - a Time Series Analysis Within the Aphea Project. Journal of Epidemiology and
        Community Health. 50(S1): S47-S51.

U.S. Bureau of Econmic Analysis. 1995. BEA Regional Projections to 2045: Volume 1, States. U.S.
        Departmnet of Commerce.  Washington, DC. July.

U.S. EPA.  1991. Air Quality Criteria for Carbon  Monoxide. U.S. EPA, Office of Research and
        Development. Washington, DC. EPA/600/8-90/045F. December.

U.S. EPA.  1997. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act: 1970 to 1990.  U.S. EPA, Office of Air and
        Radiation, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation. Washington, DC. October.

U.S. EPA.  1999. An SAB Advisory: The Clean Air Act Section 812 Prospective Study Health and Ecological
        Initial Studies. Prepared by the Health and Ecological Effects Subcommittee (HEES) of the
        Advisory Council on the Clean Air Compliance Analysis, Science Advisory Board, U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency.  Washington, DC. EPA-SAB-Council-ADV-99-005.  February.

Vigotti, M.A., G. Rossi, L. Bisanti, A. Zanobetti and J. Schwartz. 1996. Short term effects of urban air
        pollution on respiratory health in Milan, Italy, 1980-89. J Epidemiol Community Health. 50 Suppl 1:
        s71-5.

von Mutius, E., D.L. Sherrill, C. Fritzsch, F.D. Martinez and M.D. Lebowitz.  1995. Air pollution and upper
        respiratory symptoms in children from East Germany.  Eur Respir J.  8(5): 723-8.

Wang, X., H. Ding, L. Ryan and X. Xu. 1997. Association between air pollution and low birth weight: a
        community-based study. Environ Health Perspect.  105(5):  514-20.

Weisel, C.P., R.P. Cody and PJ. Lioy.  1995.  Relationship between summertime ambient ozone levels and
        emergency department visits for asthma in central New Jersey. Environ Health Perspect.  103 Suppl
        2: 97-102.

Wessex,!.  1994. PRO/FILER, US Demographics and ZIPS: Summary Tape File 1A. 1.1. (CD-ROM).
        Winnetka, Illinois.

White, M.C., R.A. Etzel, W.D. Wilcox and C. Lloyd.  1994. Exacerbations  of childhood asthma and ozone
        pollution in Atlanta. Environ Res.  65(1): 56-68.

Whittemore, A.S. and E.L.  Korn.  1980.  Asthma and Air Pollution in the Los Angeles Area. Am J Public
        Health. 70: 687-696.

Woodruff, T.J., J. Grille and K.C. Schoendorf.  1997. The relationship between selected causes of
        postneonatal infant mortality and particulate air pollution in the United States. Environmental
        Health Perspectives. 105(6): 608-612.
                                              D-101

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
World Health Organization (WHO). 1996. Final Consultation on Updating and Revision of the Air Quality
        Guidelines for Europe. Bilthoven, The Netherlands 28-31 October, 1996 ICP EHH 018 VD 96
        2.11.

Xu, X., H. Ding and X. Wang. 1995a. Acute effects of total suspended particles and sulfur dioxides on
        preterm delivery: a community-based cohort study.  Arch Environ Health. 50(6): 407-15.

Xu, X., B. Li and H. Huang.  1995b. Air pollution and unscheduled hospital outpatient and emergency room
        visits.  Environ Health Perspect.  103(3): 286-9.

Xu, X. and L. Wang.  1993. Association of indoor and outdoor particulate level with chronic respiratory
        illness. Am Rev Respir Dis.  148(6 Pt 1): 1516-22.

Yang, W., B.L. Jennison and S.T. Omaye. 1998.  Cardiovascular disease hospitalization and ambient levels of
        carbon monoxide. J Toxicol Environ Health.  55(3): 185-96.

Zemp, E., S. Elsasser, C. Schindler, N. Kunzli, A.P. Perruchoud, G. Domenighetti, T. Medici, U.
        Ackermann-Liebrich, P. Leuenberger, C. Monn, G.  Bolognini, J.P. Bongard, O. Brandli, W. Karrer,
        R. Keller, M.H. Schoni,J.M. Tschopp, B. Villiger and J.P. Zellweger. 1999. Long-term ambient air
        pollution and respiratory symptoms in adults (SAPALDIA study). The SAPALDIA Team.  Am J
        Respir Cnt Care Med. 159(4 Pt 1): 1257-66.
                                              D-102

-------
Ecological  Effects
Introduction

    This appendix characterizes the ecological benefits
of the Clean Air Act Amendments. Although EPA's
focus on  a clean environment  has  long included
protection  of  both ecosystem health  and human
health, many past analyses,  particularly  economic
analyses, have focused on human health benefits of
pollution control. Ecological benefits, by comparison,
have not always been as well-represented, for a variety
of reasons:

    •  Ecological impacts may be complex and non-
       linear, involving relationships at various levels
       of biological  organization.    Important
       ecological effects such as population decline
       of a keystone species can ripple  through a
       food web and alter community structure and
       ecosystem function.

    •  Ecological systems,   like  human  bodies,
       possess a wide range of adaptive capacities
       that can mitigate or mask effects  and make
       them difficult to detect. What differentiates,
       and further complicates the measurement of
       ecological effects is  the  lack of sufficient
       baseline data on natural ecosystem structure
       and function though successional stages.

    •  Prevention  of ecological  effects may be
       viewed by the public and decision-makers as
       a lower priority than the protection of human
       health.

    Nonetheless, within the   last  few decades air
pollution started to receive attention for not  only
affecting human health but also its dramatic injuries to
ecosystems. Increased public awareness and research
results have led to the development of air pollution
research as an important branch of applied biological
sciences. Numerous scientific studies have revealed
adverse effects of air pollution on natural systems that
have, in turn, led to increasingly heightened levels of
public   concern   and  subsequent  environmental
statutory developments.  Public policy concerning the
regulation of air pollution to mitigate these impacts
requires accurate appraisals  of the effectiveness of
regulatory options, but not until quite recently has it
become possible to reliably quantify  at least some of
the ecological and economic benefits of ecosystem
impacts linked to air pollution.

    This analysis attempts to incrementally expand the
base of quantitative and qualitative information that
can be used to assess affects to ecosystems associated
with air pollution.  There are two major goals of the
analysis: to provide a broad overall characterization of
the range  of effects of air pollutants on ecosystem
structure, function, and health; and to extend existing
methods  and  data to characterize the potential
magnitude  of economic benefits  derived from the
1990 Clean Air Act  Amendments  (CAAA).   The
economic analysis is  focused on a  relatively small
subset of effects for which ecologists'  and economists'
understanding  of  and ability to model an effect  is
sufficient to develop a quantitative characterization.
In most cases, we rely on published, peer-reviewed
literature to establish the validity of the methods and
data applied.

    The remainder of this appendix  is comprised of
seven major sections.  We  first provide a broad
overview  of the  ecological  impacts  of the  air
pollutants regulated by the CAAA, and then outline
the rationale for choosing a subset of  these effects for
quantitative  and economic analysis.  Following this
largely   qualitative characterization  of effects, we
describe the methods, data, and results used to
quantitatively assess benefits of the Clean Air Act
Amendments for the following categories of effects:
                                              E-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    •   Eutrophication of estuaries associated with
        airborne nitrogen deposition;
    •   Acidification of freshwater bodies associated
        with airborne nitrogen and sulfur deposition;
    •   Reduced tree growth associated with ozone
        exposure;
    •   Accumulation of toxics in freshwater fisheries
        associated with airborne toxics deposition;
    •   Aesthetic  degradation of forests associated
        with ozone and airborne toxics exposure;
    •   Other  less well-understood  effects  of air
        pollution on ecosystem health.

The concluding section includes a summary of those
economic estimates that are used in  the larger 812
analysis, a  summary   of  major  limitations,  and
recommendations  for future research.1

    Because  the  breadth  and complexity  of air
pollutant-ecosystem interactions does not allow for
comprehensive  quantitative   analysis  of all  the
ecological benefits of the CAAA  we  stress  the
importance  of continued  consideration of  those
impacts not valued in this report in policy  decision-
making and in further technical  research.  Judging
from the geographic breadth and magnitude  of the
relatively modest  subset of impacts  that we find
sufficiently well-understood to quantify and monetize,
it is evident that the economic benefits of the CAAA's
reduction of air pollution impacts on ecosystems are
of a large magnitude.
    1 More detailed documentation of the ecological benefits of
the CAAA can be found in a series of memoranda and other work
products prepared as a part of EPA's benefits analysis and research
effort. These memoranda provide comprehensive descriptions of
the ecological impacts avoided by the CAAA, methods used to
characterize those damages,  data sources, and ecological and
economic benefits assessments. The more detailed documentation
can be obtained through the EPA contacts identified in the
Acknowledgements section of the overall report.
Ecological Overview  of the
Impacts of Air Pollutants
Regulated  by the CAAA

    The purpose of this section  is to provide an
overview of  potential  interactions  between  air
pollutants and the natural environment. We identify
major  single pollutant-environment  interactions, as
well as the synergistic impacts of ecosystem exposure
to multiple air pollutants. Although a wide variety of
complex air pollution-environment interactions are
described or hypothesized in the literature, for the
purposes of this analysis we focus on major aspects of
ecosystem-pollutant interactions.   We do  this by
limiting our review according to the following criteria:

    •   Pollutants regulated by the CAAA;
    •   Known  interactions between pollutants and
        natural   systems    as   documented   in
        peer-reviewed literature; and,
    •   Pollutants  present  in the  atmosphere  in
        sufficient  amounts  after  1970  to  cause
        significant damages to natural systems.

    Our understanding of air pollution effects on
ecosystems has progressed considerably during the
past decades.  Previously, air pollution was regarded
primarily as a local phenomenon  and concern was
associated with  the vicinity  of industrial  facilities,
power plants  or urban  areas.  The pollutants  of
concern were gaseous (e.g., sulfur dioxide and ozone)
or heavy metals  (e.g., lead) and the observed effects
were visible stress- specific symptoms of injury (e.g.,
foliar  chlorosis).   The  most typical  approach  to
document the effects of specific  pollutants was  a
dose-response  experiment, where the objective was to
develop  a  regression   equation  describing  the
relationship between  exposure  and  some  easily
measured effect  (e.g., growth, yield or mortality). As
analytic methods improved and ecology progressed, a
broader  range of  effects of air pollutants  were
identified and understanding of the  mechanisms of
effect  improved.   Observations made on various
temporal scales  (e.g., long-term studies) and spatial
scales (e.g., watershed studies) lead to the recognition
                                                 E-2

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
that air pollution can affect all organizational levels of
biological systems.

    In this analysis, we attempt to broadly describe
the  impacts  of  air  pollutants at  all  levels  of
organization, though we are constrained to a review of
the most significant impacts on a national scale. For
a comprehensive review of the ecological impacts of
air pollutants regulated under the CAAA, see Overview
of Ecological Impacts of Air Pollutants Regulated by the 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments (EPA, 1998a).

Effects  of Atmospheric  Pollutants on
Natural Systems

    Ecosystem  impacts can  be  organized by the
pollutants of concern and by the level of biological
organization at which impacts are directly measured.
We  attempt  to  address   both  dimensions  of
categorization in this overview.  In Table E-l we
summarize the major pollutants of concern, and the
documented acute and long-term ecological impacts
associated with them. We follow with a description of
each of the major pollutant classes and conclude with
a summary of  pollutant  impacts at each level of
biological organization.
Table E-1
Classes of Pollutants And Ecological Effects
Pollutant Class
Acidic deposition
Nitrogen Deposition
Hazardous Air
Pollutants (HAPs)
Ozone
Major Pollutants and
Precursors
Sulfuric acid, nitric acid
Precursors: Sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxides
Nitrogen compounds (e.g.,
nitrogen oxides)
Mercury, dioxins
Tropospheric ozone
Precursors: Nitrogen oxides
Acute Effects
Direct toxic effects to plant
leaves and aquatic
organisms.

Direct toxic effects to
animals.
Direct toxic effects to plant
leaves.
Long-term Effects
Progressive deterioration of soil
quality. Chronic acidification of
surface waters.
Saturation of terrestrial ecosystems
with nitrogen. Progressive nitrogen
enrichment of coastal estuaries.
Conservation of mercury and dioxins
in biogeochemical cycles and
accumulation in the food chain.
Alterations of ecosystem wide
patterns of energy flow and nutrient
cycling.
                      and Volatile Organic
                      Compounds (VOCs)
                                               E-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Acidic Deposition

    Acidification is perhaps the best-studied effect of
atmospheric   pollutant   deposition   to   natural
environments. Acidification of ecosystems has been
shown  to  cause direct  toxic  effects  to  sensitive
organisms as well as long-term changes in ecosystem
functions.  Acidification   can affect all  levels  of
biological organization in both terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystems.  Adverse  effects  seen in  terrestrial
ecosystems can  include acute toxic interactions of
acids  with  terrestrial plants  or, more  importantly,
chronic acidification of terrestrial ecosystems leading
to  nutrient  deficiencies   in   soils,  aluminum
mobilization, and concomitant decreases in health and
biological productivity of forests (Smith, 1990;SOS/T
18, 1989). Similar to terrestrial ecosystems, adverse
acidification-induced effects on surface waters may
include elevated mortality rates of sensitive species,
changes  in  the  composition of  communities,  and
changes in  ecosystem-level interactions  like nutrient
cycling and energy  flows.   In the United States,
acidification-related injuries to aquatic ecosystems may
be more significant than  injuries of terrestrial sites
(EPA, 1995a;NAPAP  1991).

    The predominant causes of acidic precipitation are
sulfuric and nitric acid (H2SO4 and HNO3). These
strong mineral acids  are formed from sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NCQ  in the atmosphere
(i.e., they are secondary pollutants). Sulfur compounds
are emitted from anthropogenic sources in the form
of sulfur dioxide  and, to a much lesser extent, primary
sulfates,  principally  from  coal   and   residual-oil
combustion and a few industrial processes.  Since the
late  1960s  electric utilities  have been the major
contributor to SO2 emissions  (NAPAP, 1991 p. 178).
The   combustion   of   fuels   is   the   principal
anthropogenic source  of emissions of NOX. Such
combustion occurs in  internal combustion engines,
residential and commercial furnaces,  industrial boilers,
electric utility boilers, engines, and other miscellaneous
sources.  Because a large portion of anthropogenic
NOX emissions come from transportation sources  (i.e.,
non-point  source pollution), NOX  sources are on
average more dispersed compared with anthropogenic
sources of SO2 (NAPAP, 1991, p. 189).
    In the atmosphere, SO2 and NOX are converted to
sulfates and nitrates, transported over long distances,
and deposited over large areas downwind of point
sources or in the vicinity of urban areas. Deposition
occurs via three main pathways: 1) precipitation or
wet deposition, where material is dissolved in rain or
snow; 2) dry deposition, involving direct deposition of
gases and particles (aerosols) to any surface; and 3)
cloud-water deposition, involving material dissolved
in cloud droplets that is deposited when cloud or fog
droplets are intercepted by vegetation (NAPAP, 1991,
p. 181).

    Initially, it was thought that SO2 emissions were
the only significant contributor to  acidic deposition.
Subsequently, emissions of SO2 declined substantially
between  1970 and 1988 due to a variety of factors,
including emissions controls mandated by the  Clean
Air Act and changes in industrial processes such as
the switch of electric utility plants to coal with lower
sulfur  content (NAPAP, 1991, p.  198). During  this
period, the  role of  nitrogen   deposition  as  a
contributor to aquatic acidification  became apparent.
While  initial evidence suggested that most deposited
nitrogen  would be taken up by biota, more recent
research has indicated that nitrogen may be leaching
from  terrestrial   systems   and  causing  aquatic
acidification.

    Comprehensive   research  on the   ecological
impacts of acidification is found in the publications of
the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
and  EPA's Add  Deposition Standard Feasibility Study
Report  to  Congress (1995a).  In this analysis  we  rely
heavily upon the extensive research conducted under
these two programs.

Nitrogen Deposition

    Atmospheric nitrogen deposition to terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems can cause deleterious  ecological
effects ranging from eutrophication  to acidification (as
discussed  above).    Deposition  of  nitrogen  can
stimulate    nitrogen-uptake   by   plants    and
microorganisms and increase biological productivity
and growth.  Chronic deposition  of nitrogen may
adversely affect biogeochemical cycles of watersheds
                                                 E-4

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
by progressively saturating terrestrial portions with
nitrogen. Nitrogen saturation is a gradually occurring
process, during which watersheds undergo progressive
changes in their nitrogen cycle.  This process can lead
to increases in the amount of nitrogen leached into
lower-elevation terrestrial ecosystems, wetlands and,
most notably, surface waters (Stoddard, 1994; Aber et
al., 1989).

    Among the most pernicious effects of nitrogen
leaching  from  terrestrial   ecosystems   can  be
acidification  of fresh  water bodies (as previously
discussed)    and   eutrophication   of   estuaries
(Richardson, 1996; Vollweider et al., 1990).  Similar to
terrestrial ecosystems, nitrogen enrichment of coastal
estuaries can  have a  fertilizing effect, stimulating
productivity  of algae, marine plants (Vitusek and
Howarth, 1991) and aquatic animals, including fish
and shell fish.  If eutrophication is excessive, however,
it is  likely to result in  serious  damages  to estuarine
ecosystems.  Specifically, massive algae  blooms can
develop, leading to declining oxygen levels, habitat
loss, and declines in fish and shellfish populations.

    Nitrogen  loading  to estuaries  is a major and
growing problem.  A 1996 inventory of estuarine
water  quality  performed  by coastal  states  and
encompassing  72 percent of  estuaries  in  the  U.S.
shows that nutrient enrichment pollutes 6,254 square
miles (22  percent)  of the surveyed waters, and
contributes to  57 percent of all  the reported water
quality problems. At a recent meeting  of National
Estuary Program directors, eleven out of twenty-eight
directors ranked nutrient overloading as a high priority
issue for  their programs, and  seven additional
directors  ranked it  as  a  mid-level  priority  (EPA,
1997b). Eighty-six percent of East Coast estuaries are
considered susceptible to nitrogen enrichment (EPA,
1997c), and many coastal communities are finding that
the nutrient loading problem is already so severe that
they must add advanced wastewater treatment  to
existing plants, add infrastructure to promote water
reuse, and impose stricter controls on all development
and agricultural practices (EPA, 1997a).

    Atmospherically derived nitrogen makes  up a
sizable fraction of total nitrogen inputs to estuaries in
the Northeast pinga et al. 1991; Jaworski et al. 1997;
Paerl  1997;  Paerl  et  al.  1990;  McMahon  and
Woodside, 1996; Rendell et al.  1993; Valiela et al.
1997). Atmospheric nitrogen is deposited  to waters
and watersheds in wet (rain, snow, and fog) and dry
(aerosols and gases) forms. Approximately 10 to 50
percent of total nitrogen load to coastal  waters  is
derived  from   direct  and  indirect  atmospheric
deposition. Estuaries  on the eastern seaboard, and
those downwind of urban areas tend to have a larger
percentage of total nitrogen coming from atmospheric
deposition.

Hazardous Air Pollutant Deposition

    Hazardous  air pollutants (HAPs), are  a general
category of toxic substances covered under a single
title of the Clean Air Act. Title III lists 189 HAPs,
though only five are  responsible for the majority of
currently  documented ecosystem impacts.  These
HAPs are mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
chlordane,   dioxins,    and    dichlorodiphenyl-
trichloroethane (DDT).  The use of three of these
compounds (PCBs,  chlordane, and  DDT)   was
effectively illegal in the  United States prior to  1990
(EPA 1992), and there are currently no  plans for
additional CAAA regulations  of these compounds
(Federal Register Unified Agenda 1998). Emissions of
the remaining  two  toxins, mercury and dioxins,
continue to cause ecosystem impacts.

    Mercury  (Hg)  is   a  toxic   element  found
ubiquitously throughout  the  environment. Unlike
many HAPs, much of the mercury released to the
environment   comes   from    natural   sources.
Anthropogenic sources can also release mercury to the
environment. Estimates of the percentage of mercury
emissions attributable to anthropogenic sources range
from  10 to 80 percent (Mason et al. 1994, Hudson et
al. 1995, Stein et al. 1996), although most  estimates
cluster between 40 and 75 percent (EPA 1997d).

    About 80 percent of all anthropogenic mercury
loadings  to the  environment are from air emissions.
Global atmospheric concentrations of mercury have
approximately  tripled  since  pre-industrial  times
(Mason et al.   1994).  Atmospheric deposition of
                                                 E-5

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
mercury has increased by a factor of about 3.7 (Swain
et al. 1992),  and the concentration  of mercury in
sediments in remote lakes has increased by a factor of
2.3 (Lucotte et al. 1995).  These findings suggest that
approximately 57 to 73 percent of atmospherically
deposited mercury is anthropogenic in origin.

    Atmospheric deposition  of  mercury  and  its
subsequent movement in ecosystems may result in the
concentration   of   mercury   within   organisms
("bioaccumulation")  and its  subsequent  transfer
throughout the food  chain.   As a consequence,
mercury  tends to accumulate along the hierarchical
organization   of  food   webs,  with  increasing
concentrations found in animals at higher levels of the
food chain ("biomagnification").   Fish, birds and
mammals are among the group of organisms most
threatened  by  mercury  contamination  of  the
environment. Symptoms may range from behavioral
abnormalities to reduced reproductive success and
death (EPA,  1997d). In 1996,  mercury levels in fish
were high enough that 11 states had mercury-based
statewide fish consumption advisories. Twenty-eight
more had  at least one water  body under advisory
because of mercury concerns.  These observations
suggest that  atmospheric mercury deposition may
contribute significantly to mercury levels in freshwater
ecosystems nationally.

    Mercury  is a neurotoxin that, at sufficient levels,
can  cause neurologic  damage and  death  in  both
animals and  humans.  Adverse effects on wildlife
include    neurotoxicity,    reproductive,    and
developmental effects (EPA 1997d).  While fish are
unlikely to experience toxic effects  from mercury
poisoning  in  the  absence  of point discharges,
piscivorous  predators   and   predators  who  eat
piscivores accumulate more mercury  and may suffer
from mercury poisoning.  However, the only species
for  which there is currently  strong evidence  of
poisoning from atmospheric mercury are the common
loon and possibly the Florida panther. It is unclear
whether other piscivorous species, such as kingfishers,
mink, and river otters, have suffered adverse health
effects as  a  consequence of atmospheric mercury
deposition (EPA 1997d).
    Mercury is likely to persist at levels of concern in
ecosystems  for  some  time.    The  majority  of
atmospherically-released  mercury  is  deposited  to
terrestrial  environments,   where   it  is   largely
sequestered.  However, as mercury accumulates in
soils, some amount (less than 30 percent of that which
is deposited within a watershed) will be slowly released
to freshwater bodies and oceans. Modeling efforts by
Swain  et al. (1992, reviewed in Mason et al. 1994)
suggest that the retention of mercury by some lakes is
essentially complete. Studies by Mason et al. (1994)
predicted that elimination of anthropogenic mercury
presently in the oceans and in the atmosphere would
take 15 to 20 years after the complete termination of
all anthropogenic emissions. Because of mercury's
persistence in terrestrial and aquatic environments, it
will probably   take  some  time  for  reductions  in
mercury emissions to be notable in ecosystems (Swain
et al. 1992, reviewed in Mason et al. 1994).

    The other HAPs of concern are polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxins  (PCDDs),  a   group   of 75
organochlorine  compounds that   are  sometimes
referred to as dioxins. The most toxic member of this
group is 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD).
Because TCDD is the most toxic dioxin, the toxicity
of a dioxin  mixture  is often expressed as the toxic
equivalency (TEQ) of  some amount of  TCDD.
Polychlorinated dibenzofurans  (PCDFs) are  close
chemical  relatives of PCDDs.   Both classes  of
compounds are produced by the same processes, and
both are ubiquitous in the environment (WHO 1989).
TEQ estimates are often given jointly for dioxins and
furans.

    Dioxins and furans,  unlike mercury,  are not
natural to the environment.  They are formed during
the combustion of wastes and fossil fuels, and as a
consequence of fires or spills that involve particular
chemicals like  benzenes or PCBs.   They are also
formed as by-products in both the manufacturing of
other chemicals and in pulp and paper mill bleaching
processes (WHO 1989, EPA 1992a).   EPA estimates
that combustion sources emit over ten times as many
TEQs  as did all other categories combined.
                                                E-6

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Dioxins  accumulate in the fat of animals and
bioaccumulate through food chains. Fish are among
the most sensitive vertebrates to the effects of TCDD,
especially during early life stages. Fish are exposed to
dioxins primarily through their food (EPA 1993), but
some studies have reported that they can also absorb
the trace amounts of dioxins present in water. EPA
(1992) reported bioconcentration factors (BCFs)2 for
dioxins  in  fish of 5,000 to 9,000, and EPA  (1993)
estimated that  bioaccumulation factors (BAFs)  for
lake  trout can be  on  the order of 500,000  to
1,200,000.3   Toxic  effects on  young fish  include
decreased  feeding,  weight loss,  and  fin necrosis;
however, with a few exceptions, TCDD levels in the
environment are generally too low to result in toxicity
to juvenile  or  adult fish  (EPA 1993, Walker and
Peterson 1994).

    The risk that dioxins  pose to other wildlife is
difficult to assess because  both laboratory and field
studies in this area are limited (EPA 1993, Giesey et al.
1994). One study (White et al. 1994) found that wood
duck eggs  from a contaminated area had levels  of
PCDDs  and PCDFs 50 times higher than levels in
control  eggs.     The contaminated  nests  were
significantly  less  successful than control nests, and
contaminated ducklings also suffered from teratogenic
effects.

    TCDD is an  extremely stable chemical  and is
unlikely to be significantly degraded by chemical or
biological hydrolysis under normal  environmental
conditions. Its half-life in soils may be on the order of
a decade or more, and it may be even more persistent
    2Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) are calculated based on
laboratory experiments.  BCFs represent the ratio between the
chemical's concentration in the organism to its concentration in the
water, but unlike bioaccumulation factors (BAFs), they measure
only  how much of a chemical an organism accumulates  as a
consequence of its exposure to contaminated water. BCFs do not
measure  contaminant uptake  as a function of exposure to
contaminated food or sediments (EPA 1993).

     Because  dioxins have such  low solubility,  accurately
measuring their concentrations in water is extremely difficult.  For
this reason, any reported BCFs and BAFs should be examined
carefully.
in aquatic sediments (Webster and Commoner 1990).
For example, Johnson et al. (1996) found that, though
TCDD levels in fish and sediments from an Arkansas
river  declined  significantly during the  12  years
following the  initial pollution of the river, fish from
some locations continued to have levels  of TCDD
that exceeded Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
guidelines.  TCDD  is subject  to  photochemical
degradation, but since  the penetration of light into
soils and many natural water bodies is limited, this
degradation  is  not likely  to  be environmentally
significant (WHO 1989, Zook and Rappe  1990).
Because  of dioxins' toxicity and persistence, their
presence in freshwater ecosystems is likely to be an
issue of concern for decades.

Tropospheric Ozone

    Ozone  pollution is widespread  in the  eastern
United  States, in southern  California, and in the
vicinity of most major cities. Many of the observed
effects of ozone on vegetation are related to direct
toxic   or   harmful   interactions   with  essential
physiological  functions of plants and subsequent
reductions in biomass  production (reduced growth).
Damages to plants are commonly manifested as stress
specific symptoms such as necrotic spots of plant
leaves,  acceleration of  leaf  aging,  and  reduced
photosynthesis. Ozone damages at the community
and  ecosystem-level vary widely depending upon
numerous   factors,  including  concentration  and
temporal variation of  tropospheric  ozone,  species
composition, soil properties and climatic factors. In
most  instances, responses to  chronic  or recurrent
exposure are  subtle and  not observable  for many
years.  These  injuries  can  cause stand-level forest
decline in sensitive ecosystems  (EPA, 1996; McBride
et al., 1985; Miller et al., 1982).

    Species that are particularly sensitive to ozone can
be found among all groups of plants. Although many
visible injuries have occurred in conifer species (e.g.,
Ponderosa and Jeffrey  pine), a variety of deciduous
trees and shrubs are also sensitive to ozone.  Black
cherry, many poplars  (genus Populus)  and many fruit
trees including almond (Prunus amygdalis Batsch), peach
(Prunuspersica), and plum (Prunus domestica) trees are all
                                                  E-7

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
affected by elevated levels of ozone (EPA 1996a). In
annual species, effects of ozone on production occur
through changes in allocation of carbohydrates and
can result in reduced seed production.  Many annual
plant species, including commercial crops, are among
the most sensitive  species.  The National Crop Loss
Assessment Network (NCLAN 1988), a multi-year
program of the EPA, established that ambient ozone
levels  cause physical  damages to crop plants and
statistically significant reductions in agricultural yields.

    Ecosystems  with  known  damages  that  are
attributed to  ozone  include the San Bernardino
Mountains of Southern California, the Sierra Nevada
Mountains, and  sites  in the vicinity of urban areas
throughout the country. According to EPA  (1996a),
the San Bernardino Mountain range is by far the most
severely   ozone-impacted   ecosystem.      This
mixed-conifer forest ecosystem has been exposed to
chronically elevated ozone levels over a period of 50
or more years.  This exposure has resulted in major
changes of ecosystem characteristics, including species
composition, nutrient cycling and energy flow.  The
first indications of ozone damages to the ecosystem
were observed on the more sensitive members of the
forest  community: individual Ponderosa and Jeffrey
pines.  Direct injuries  included visible foliar damage,
premature needle senescence, reduced photosynthesis,
altered carbon allocation, and  reduction of growth
rates and reproductive success. Changes in the energy
available  to  trees  (i.e., changes in  carbohydrate
production and  allocation) influenced  interactions
with   predators,   pathogens   and   symbionts.
Subsequently,  the  accumulation of weakened trees
resulted in heavy bark beetle attack that significantly
elevated mortality rates and extensive salvage logging
during the 1960s  and 1970s  (Miller and McBnde,
1998).  Alterations in the composition and population
density of  the  fungal  microflora  weakened soil
microbial  organisms  and  slowed  the  rate  of
decomposition, leading to the accumulation of a thick
needle layer under stands with the most severe needle
injuries and defoliation. Reduced production of seeds
and fruits  also affected the amount of food available
to small vertebrates in the ecosystem, thereby affecting
the local food chain (EPA 1996a).  Similarly, ozone
concentrations capable of causing injury to the Sierra
Nevada Mountains have been occurring  for many
years, but injury to sensitive trees has never reached
the same proportions as in the San Bernardino Forest.
Significant differences  in  both the  forest stand
composition (e.g., the presence of fewer conifers and
more hardwoods), and site dynamics have probably
played an important role in determining the different
ecosystem responses.

    In  each  of these  areas,  ozone  may   act
synergistically  with other stress  factors to induce
further damages to vegetation. In the eastern United
States, for example,  regionally elevated  levels of
tropospheric  ozone co-occur with  high deposition
rates of nitrogen, sulfur and acids.   These multiple
stress factors may have acted synergistically in injuring
many high elevation forests throughout the eastern
United States.

Multiple Stresses and Patterns of
Exposure

    Although  air  pollutants can be grouped  into
classes according to their effects, as described above,
it is  recognized  that one pollutant  (or one class of
pollutants) does not solely impact most ecosystems.
Many environmental damages are the  result of the
combined action of multiple stress factors, including
several types of air pollution and other anthropogenic
or natural stress  factors.

    The recognition of interactions between several
types of pollutants and between pollutants  and other
kinds of stress  has  introduced  a new level of
complexity in air pollution research.  In many cases,
various  stress factors  act synergistically to induce
damages to ecosystems. These multiple  stress factors
can include: (1) various kinds of air pollutants (e.g.,
acidic deposition, ozone and nitrogen deposition); (2)
other anthropogenic stress factors such as harvesting,
overfishing or habitat disruption (e.g., the disruption
of  ecosystems  by  roads  or  urban  areas);  (3)
environmental factors including availability of water,
nutrients, light, or temperature  (including heat and
frost); and (4) biological factors such as animals
feeding on plants, pathogens,  and the  status of
micro-organisms in the soil  (Taylor  et  al., 1994;
                                                 E-8

-------
  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Winner, 1994; Smith, 1990).  In the eastern US, for
example, elevated deposition rates of nitrogen, sulfur
and acids  co-occur with regionally elevated levels of
tropospheric ozone and climatic stress factors.

    In addition, air pollutants  have indirect effects
that are at least as important as direct toxic effects on
living organisms.  Indirect effects include  those in
which the pollutants (s) alter the physical or  chemical
environment (e.g., soil properties) the plant's  ability to
compete for limited resources  (e.g., water, light), or its
ability to withstand pests or pathogens.  Examples are
excessive availability of nitrogen, soil depletion caused
by acidic  deposition, and changes in the ability to
adapt  to   cold   temperatures  induced  by acidic
deposition  (Taylor et al.,  1994;  NAPAP, 1991).
Unfortunately,   few  mechanisms  of  interactions
between  various  stress   factors are  known,  and
interpretations  of scientific  findings  are usually
associated with a high degree  of uncertainty.

    The situation is further complicated  by the fact
that  the  specific temporal and spatial patterns of
pollutant  exposures play a  significant role in  the
response  of  organisms  and  ecosystems to  air
pollution.  Temporal patterns include timing, duration
and  patterns of recurrent exposure  to a specific
pollutant or pollutants. For example, plant  response
to peak concentrations of ozone during daylight can
   be more severe (compared to exposure to the same
   level of ozone at night) because uptake of ozone is
   often higher during the day (EPA,  1996a).  Spatial
   patterns include proximity of ecosystems  to various
   pollution sources  and the identification of specific
   source-receptor relationships between ecosystems and
   pollution sources (Taylor et al., 1994).  For example,
   the  deposition of most pollutants  occurs  after
   long-range atmospheric transport, with deposition
   rates depending upon climate, land-use and geology.

   Summary  of Ecological Impacts from  Air
   Pollutants Regulated by the CAAA

        We summarize major examples  of air pollution
   interactions  with   various   levels   of  biological
   organization in Table E-2 through E-4. We organize
   these interactions  according to classes of pollutants
   and  injuries they cause, the various levels of biological
   systems,  and types of affected ecosystems.   It is
   important to note that interactions listed are intended
   to illustrate the range  of possible  adverse effects.
   These effects  are  examples for a wide  variety of
   interactions  but do  not cover  all aspects  of air
   pollution-environment interactions.
E-9

-------
                                             The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-2
Interactions Between Acid Deposition and Natural Systems
At Various Levels of Organization
Examples of Interactions
Spatial
Scale
Molecular
and cellular
Individual

Population
Community
Local
Ecosystem
(e.g.,
landscape
element)
Regional
Ecosystem
(e.g.,
watershed)
Type of Interaction
Chemical and
biochemical processes
Direct physiological
response
Indirect effects: Death
due to ionoregulatory
failure. Acidification can
indirectly affect response
to altered environmental
factors or alterations of
the individual's ability to
cope with other kinds of
stress.
Change of population
characteristics like
productivity or mortality
rates.
Changes of community
structure and competitive
patterns
Changes in nutrient
cycle, hydrological cycle,
and energy flow of lakes,
wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles
within a watershed.
Region-wide alterations
of biodiversity.
Acidification of Forests
Damages to epidermal layers and
cells of plants through deposition
of acids.
Increased loss of nutrients via
foliar leaching.
Cation depletion in the soil
causes nutrient deficiencies in
plants. Concentrations of
aluminum ions in soils can reach
phytotoxic levels. Increased
sensitivity to other stress factors
like pathogens and frost.
Decrease of biological
productivity of sensitive
organisms. Selection for less
sensitive individuals.
Microevolution of resistance.
Alteration of competitive patterns.
Selective advantage for acid-
resistant species. Loss of acid
sensitive species and individuals.
Decrease in productivity.
Decrease of species richness and
diversity.
Progressive depletion of nutrient
cations in the soil. Increase in the
concentration of mobile aluminum
ions in the soil.
Leaching of sulfate, nitrate,
aluminum, and calcium to
streams and lakes. Acidification
of aquatic bodies.
Acidification of Streams
and Lakes
Decreases in pH and increases
in aluminum ions cause
pathological changes in
structure of gill tissue in fish.
Hydrogen and aluminum ions in
the water column impair
regulation of body ions.
Aluminum ions in the water
column can be toxic to many
aquatic organisms through
impairment of gill regulation.
Acidification can indirectly
affect submerged plant species,
because it reduces the
availability of dissolved carbon
dioxide (CO,).
Decrease of biological
productivity of sensitive
organisms. Selection for less
sensitive individuals.
Microevolution of resistance.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective advantage
for acid-resistant species. Loss
of acid sensitive species and
individuals. Decrease in
productivity. Decrease of
species richness and diversity.
Measurable declines of
decomposition of some forms
of organic matter, potentially
resulting in decreased rates of
nutrient cycling.
Additional acidification of
aquatic systems through
processes in terrestrial sites
within the watershed.
                                           E-10

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-3
Interactions Between Nitrogen Deposition and Natural Systems
At Various Levels of Organization	
                                                          Examples of Interactions
                                         Eutrophication and Nitrogen
Spatial
Scale
Molecular
and cellular
Individual

Population
Community
Local
Ecosystem
(e.g.,
landscape
element)
Regional
Ecosystem
(e.g.,
watershed)
Type of Interaction
Chemical and biochemical
processes
Direct physiological
response.
Indirect effects: Response
to altered environmental
factors or alterations of the
individual's ability to cope
with other kinds of stress.
Change of population
characteristics like
productivity or mortality
rates.
Changes of community
structure and competitive
patterns
Changes in nutrient cycle,
hydrological cycle, and
energy flow of lakes,
wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles
within a watershed. Region-
wide alterations of
biodiversity.
Saturation of Terrestrial
Landscapes
Assimilation of nitrogen by
plants and microorganisms
Increases in leaf- size of
terrestrial plants.
Decreased resistance to biotic
and abiotic stress factors like
pathogens and frost. Disruption
of plant-symbiont relationships
with mycorrhiza fungi.
Increase in biological
productivity and growth rates of
some species.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective advantage
for fast growing species and
individuals that efficiently use
additional nitrogen. Loss of
species adapted to nitrogen-
poor environments.
Magnification of the
biogeochemical nitrogen cycle.
Progressive saturation of
microorganisms, soils, and
plants with nitrogen.
Leaching of nitrogen from
terrestrial sites to streams and
lakes. Acidification of aquatic
bodies. Eutrophication of
estuaries.
Eutrophication of Coastal
Estuaries
Assimilation of nitrogen by
plants and microorganisms.
Increase in growth of marine
plants.
Injuries to marine fauna through
oxygen depletion of the
environment. Loss of physical
habitat due to loss of sea-grass
beds. Injury through increased
shading. Toxic blooms of
plankton.
Increase in biological
productivity. Increase of growth
rates (esp. of algae and marine
plants).
Excessive algal growth.
Changes in species
composition. Decrease in sea-
grass beds.
Magnification of the nitrogen
cycle. Depletion of oxygen,
increased shading through
algal growth.
Additional input of nitrogen
from nitrogen-saturated
terrestrial sites within the
watershed.
Note: See Overview of Ecological Impacts of Air Pollutants Regulated by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (I EC 1998) for
sources.
                                                E-11

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-4
Interactions of Mercury and Ozone with Natural Systems
At Various Levels of Organization	
                                                            Examples of Interactions
  Spatial
   Scale
  Type of Interaction
        Mercury in streams
             and lakes
          Ozone
Molecular
and cellular
Chemical and
biochemical processes
Mercury enters the body of
vertebrates and binds to sulfhydril
groups (i.e.  proteins).
Oxidation of enzymes of
plants. Disruption of the
membrane potential.
Individual
Direct physiological
response.
Neurological effects in vertebrates.
Behavioral abnormalities. Damages
to the liver.
Direct injuries include visible
foliar damage, premature
needle senescence, reduced
photosynthesis, altered
carbon allocation, and
reduction of growth rates and
reproductive success.	
              Indirect effects:
              Response to altered
              environmental factors or
              alterations of the
              individual's ability to
              cope with other kinds of
              stress.
                         Few interactions known.
                         Damages through increased
                         sensitivity to other environmental
                         stress factors could occur, for
                         example, through impairment of
                         immune response.
                                      Increased sensitivity to biotic
                                      and abiotic stress factors like
                                      pathogens and frost.
                                      Disruption of plant-symbiont
                                      relationship (mychorrhizae),
                                      and symbionts.
Population    Change of population
              characteristics like
              productivity or mortality
              rates.
                         Reduced reproductive success offish
                         and bird species. Increased mortality
                         rates, especially in earlier life stages.
                                      Reduced biological
                                      productivity.  Selection for
                                      less sensitive individuals.
                                      Possibly microevolution for
                                      ozone resistance.
Community
Changes of community
structure and
competitive patterns
Loss of species diversity of benthic
invertebrates.
Alteration of competitive
patterns. Selective
advantage for ozone-
resistant species. Loss of
ozone sensitive species and
individuals.  Reduction in
productivity.
Local
Ecosystem
(e.g.Jandsc
ape
element)
Regional
Ecosystem
(e.g.,
watershed)
Changes in nutrient Not well understood.
cycle, hydrological
cycle, and energy flow of
lakes, wetlands, forests,
grasslands, etc.
Biogeochemical cycles Not well understood.
within a watershed.
Region-wide alterations
of biodiversity.
Alterations of ecosystem-
wide patterns of energy flow
and nutrient cycling.
Region-wide loss of sensitive
species.
Note: See Overview of Ecological Impacts of Air Pollutants Regulated by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (I EC 1998) for
sources.
                                                  E-12

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Predicting ecological impacts of air pollution at
the regional scale or for the United States as a whole
would require an understanding of interactions at
many temporal  and  spatial  scales, where  there is
currently a general lack of data. Furthermore, there is
limited transferability of existing information between
various  spatial and temporal  scales and between
geographic regions. However, we can reach several
general conclusions, based on the existing literature.

    •   Although ambient concentrations of most air
        pollutants significantly decreased after the
        Clean Air Act of 1970, some pollutants still
        occur in concentrations  high enough to
        directly injure living organisms. These direct
        injuries can be observed, for example, in areas
        with high  ambient  levels  of tropospheric
        ozone or in some high-elevation ecosystems
        that  are exposed to  high levels  of  acid
        deposition (EPA, 1996a;NAPAP, 1991).

    •   Air pollutants have indirect effects that are at
        least as important  as direct toxic  effects on
        living organisms.  Indirect effects include
        those in which  the  pollutant  alters  the
        physical or chemical environment (e.g., soil
        properties), the plant's ability to compete for
        limited resources (e.g., water, light), or the
        plant's   ability  to  withstand   pests   or
        pathogens.     Examples   are   excessive
        availability of nitrogen, depletion of nutrient
        cations   in the  soil by  acid deposition,
        mobilization  of  toxic  elements  such as
        aluminum, and changes in winter hardiness
        (Taylor  et al., 1994).  As is true for other
        complex interactions,  indirect effects are
        more difficult to observe than direct toxic
        relationships between air pollutants and biota,
        and there may be a variety of interactions that
        have not yet been detected.

    •   There is a group of pollutants that tend to be
        conserved in  the landscape after they have
        been  deposited  to   ecosystems.   These
        conserved pollutants are transformed through
        biotic   and   abiotic   processes   within
ecosystems,     and     accumulate     in
biogeochemical  cycles.   These  pollutants
include, but are not limited to, hydrogen ions
(H+), sulfur (S) and nitrogen (N) containing
substances, and  mercury  (Hg).    Chronic
deposition of these pollutants, can  result in
progressive increases  in concentrations  and
cause  injuries  due to  cumulative  effects.
Indirect,  cumulative  damages  caused  by
chronic exposure  (i.e., long-term, moderate
concentrations)  to  these  pollutants  may
increase in magnitude over time frames of
decades or centuries with very subtle annual
increments  of  change.    Examples  are
N-saturation of terrestrial ecosystems, cation
depletion    of    terrestrial    ecosystems,
acidification  of  streams  and  lakes,  and
accumulation  of mercury  in aquatic food
webs (Pitelka 1994; Taylor et al. 1994; Likens
etal. 1996; EPA 1997e).

Damages  to  ecosystems  are most  likely
caused by a combination of environmental
stress factors with every interactive  stress or
else   have   a  mechanistic  model   that
incorporates  interactions among pollutants.
Unfortunately  neither  approach  is  yet
possible.    These include  anthropogenic
factors  such  as   air  pollution  and  other
environmental stress factors  such as  low
temperature, excess or limited  water,  and
limited availability  of nutrients. The specific
combinations of factors differ among regions
and  ecosystems where  declines have been
observed  (Taylor et al., 1994; Winner, 1994;
Smith,  1990).   To  accurately predict  the
impacts of multiple acting stress factors we
would have to build a catalogue  of  research
results  that defines the  response of every
plant species to every air pollutant, with every
interactive stress or else have  a mechanistic
model that incorporates interactions among
pollutants. Unfortunately neither approach is
yet possible.
                                                 E-13

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    •   Pollutant-environment   interactions   are
        complicated by the fact that biotic and abiotic
        factors  in  ecosystems change  dramatically
        over time.   Besides oscillations on  a daily
        basis, and changes in a seasonal rhythm, long
        range successional changes occur over time
        periods of years, decades, or even centuries.
        These temporal variations occur in polluted
        and pristine ecosystems, and no single point
        in  time or  space  can  be  defined  as
        representative of the entire system.

    Long-term  impacts of air pollution are often
manifested in interactions at the regional scale. The
history  of  lead pollution  may  provide  a useful
illustration of  impacts  of air  pollution long  after
deposition rates  have declined significantly  due to
environmental  regulations.   Historically, scientists
were concerned about lead deposition because of its
high  affinity  to  soil  organic  matter  and  its
accumulation in  the litter layers  of soils.   Starting
around  1960, lead accumulated in forest soils in the
northeastern United  States as a result of  human
activities.     Following  a  significant  decline  of
combustion  of leaded gasoline between 1970  and
1988, deposition rates dropped, and decreases in lead
levels  in  soils   and  rivers have  been observed
throughout  the United States.   Apparently  forest
floors have responded rapidly to  the decline  of lead
input, and instead of accumulating lead, forest soils
are now slowly releasing lead to the underlying mineral
horizon. It  has been estimated that sometime in the
middle of the next century, forests  will begin to release
anthropogenic lead deposited after 1960 to rivers and
streams (Miller and Friedland, 1994), where it may
cause unforeseen damages to aquatic ecosystems.

    There is evidence that current air pollution is an
important environmental stress factor over large areas
of the United  States and other  countries, even if
effects have not yet been fully documented.  Actions
taken  now  to  reduce  air emissions  may  have
consequences far into  the future and  may affect
ecosystems in ways  that are not yet known. Because
it  is not  yet possible to  predict what long-term,
continuous exposure to multiple pollutants might do
to ecosystem structure  and  function,  it may be
concluded that the ecological benefits of air pollution
control lie in the prevention of long-term damages to
resources and the potential for increased recovery
rates, as well as the more traditional prevention of
acute injuries. Because it is not yet possible to predict
what long-term,  continuous exposure to multiple
pollutants  might do to  ecosystem  structure and
function, it  may  be prudent to  focus on  the
prevention  of  possible  long-term  damages  to
resources and preserve the potential  for increased
recovery rates, as well as preventing more traditional
acute injures to ecosystems.
Methodological Overview

    In this section  we describe the  methods  for
characterizing the economic  benefits of reducing
several  classes of ecological  impacts through  the
regulations  of the  CAAA.   As  indicated  in  the
previous section, it is not possible to characterize and
quantify all impacts  associated with air  pollution.
Instead,  we  select  those  impacts  amenable  to
quantitative analysis, using two criteria:
    Criterion #1:
   flow
ml must be an identi
                   '£ service
    Criterion  #2: A defensible link must exist between
    changes in air pollution emissions and the  quality or
    quantity of the ecological service flow, and quantitative
    models must be available to monetise these changes

    The use  of these criteria greatly constrains the
range of impacts that can be treated in this analysis.
While the previous section identifies many pollutant-
ecosystem interactions, only a handful are understood
and  have been  modeled to an extent sufficient to
reliably quantify their impact. We attempt to present
both reliable quantitative information regarding the
benefits  of  the  CAAA while  demonstrating the
potential magnitude of the ecological benefits of the
CAAA if all  impacts were valued. A more detailed
description of the choice of endpoints is  found in
                                                 E-14

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Methods for Selecting Moneti^able Benefits Derived from
Ecological Resources as a Result of Air Quality Improvements
Attributable to the  1990 Clean Air Act Amendments,
1990-2010 (lEc 1998b) and Characterising  Economic
benefits  of Reducing Impacts to Ecosystem Integrity (lEc
1998c).

Using  Service Flow Endpoints for
Valuation
from environmental regulations  in  an analysis of
national scope.

    Based on the constraints of economic valuation
methods and data,  we  select from  the  host of
ecosystem impacts identified in the previous section
a set of service flows as candidate endpoints for
analysis.  These endpoints are listed in Table E-5.
    The theoretical  basis  of economic  benefits
assessment  is that ecosystems provide services to
humankind, and that those  services have economic
value.   The application of this theory requires the
isolation of service flows that have market values or
are otherwise amenable to available methods for
determining value  in the absence of formal markets.
Freeman (1997) provides  one possible grouping of
ecological service flows:

    •   Sources of material inputs to the economy,
        including   fossil  fuels,  wood   products,
        minerals, water, and animals;

    •   Life support services, including breathable air
        and a livable climate;

    •   Amenities  that provide  opportunities for
        active recreation and passive enjoyment of
        nature, including nonuse values; and

    •   Processing  of waste  products  that are
        generated   by  economic   activity   and
        discharged into the environment.

    Available    methods    do   not   exist   to
comprehensively value each of these service flows for
all ecosystems.  Generally, we  are limited  to those
service flows that either are sources of material inputs
or natural  amenities that  involve active recreation.
Impacts to these service flows that can be valued tend
to manifest themselves immediately and can be readily
measured and assessed in terms of the proven cause
and  effect  relationships.  The result is that we can
value only  a small subset  of the ecosystem benefits
                                                E-15

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table E-5
 Ecological Impacts with Identifiable Human Service Flows
    Pollutant Class
                                     Ecosystem Effect
     Service Flow Impacted
 Acidification (H2SO4,
 HNO3)
                      High-elevation forest acidification resulting in
                      dieback

                      Freshwater acidification resulting in aquatic
                      organism (e.g. fish) population decline

                      Changes in biological diversity and species mix in
                      terrestrial and aquatic systems
Forest aesthetics
                                                                        Recreational fishing
                                                                        Existence value for maintenance of
                                                                        biological diversity	
 Nitrogen Saturation
 and Eutrophication
 (NOX)
                      Freshwater acidification resulting in aquatic
                      organism (e.g. fish) population decline

                      Estuarine eutrophication causing oxygen depletion
                      and changes in nutrient cycling

                      Changes in biological diversity and species mix in
                      terrestrial and aquatic systems
Recreational fishing


Recreational and commercial
fishing

Existence value for maintenance of
biological diversity	
 Toxics Deposition
 (Mercury, Dioxin)
                      Terrestrial bioaccumulation of mercury and dioxin

                      Aquatic bioaccumulation of mercury and dioxin
                       Changes in biological diversity and species mix in
                       terrestrial and aquatic systems	
Hunting, wildlife aesthetics

Recreational and commercial
fishing

Existence value for maintenance of
biological diversity	
Tropospheric   Ozone
                       Terrestrial plant foliar damage causing lower
                       productivity and reduced competitiveness
Commercial timber productivity,
forest aesthetics, existence value
 Multiple Pollutant
 Stress
                      Ecosystem deterioration resulting in visual effects,
                      habitat loss, and changes in biological diversity and
                      species mix caused by synergistic action of several
                      pollutants	
Ecosystem aesthetics, ecosystem
existence value
Defensible Links and Quantitative
Modeling Requirements

    The second criterion for endpoint selection is
satisfied when complete data and model coverage is
available to describe the impacts of air pollutants. We
briefly describe the types of data and models necessary
to accomplish quantitative benefits assessment, then
identify those endpoints that we can pursue  in this
analysis.

    In  order  to determine changes  in ecological
service  flows,  defensible  links  between  pollution
emissions  and   service  flow  changes  must  be
quantitatively modeled. Described generally, five steps
are necessary to complete  a  quantitative  analysis;
emissions characterization;  environmental  fate and
transport  assessment;  exposure  characterization;
                                                     ecosystem  effects characterization; and  economic
                                                     behavior models.


                                                         Emissions characterization requires models that
                                                     project  the level of  air  pollutants  entering  the
                                                     atmosphere over the period of time in question for
                                                     both  factual and counterfactual  scenarios  under
                                                     consideration in  the analysis.  In our analyses the
                                                     factual scenario is the level of emissions in the United
                                                     States generated between 1990 and 2010, as regulated
                                                     by the CAAA  (Post-CAAA).   The  counterfactual
                                                     scenario is  the  level of emissions during the same
                                                 E-16

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
period without the regulations promulgated under the
CAAA (Pre-CAAA)4.

    The geographic  transport and deposition of air
pollutants are  estimated using models that consider
multiple  chemical and meteorologic  factors.  The
section 812 prospective analysis of the  CAAA uses
three models, detailed in Appendix C and Air Quality
Modeling to Support the  Section 812 Prospective Analysis
(prepared  for  EPA  by   Systems   Applications
International, Inc., 1999)5.

    In  cases where the presence of a pollutant  in a
geographic region, as estimated by dispersion models,
is not an adequate measure of the exposure of biota to
the pollutant, an exposure model is required.  These
models  must  take  biotic  and  abiotic ecosystems
processes into account.

    Once the exposure of the  biota in question is
estimated, the physiological effect of that  exposure
must be  estimated.  Dose-response functions  that
describe the effects of varying levels of pollutants to
specific organisms are derived from laboratory, field,
and modeling experiments.  The intensive nature of
this research and the necessity of studying each species
individually causes  this link  to be weak in most
quantitative ecological assessments.
    4For all analyses in this report, emissions under each scenario
are based upon EPA's National Emissions Inventory (NEI) with
modeling provided by the Emissions Reduction and Cost Analysis
Model (ERCAM). See Appendix A for details.

    5The three regional-scale air quality modeling systems applied
include  the regulatory Modeling System for  Aerosols and
Deposition (REMSAD), the Regional Acid Deposition Model
(RADM), and the Urban Airshed Model (UAM-IV and UAM-V).
In addition, this prospective ecological benefits assessment uses
results from the Regional Lagrangian Model of Air Pollution
(RELMAP) to estimate mercury and dioxin deposition.
                                                   E-17

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-6
Model Coverage for Candidate Endpoints for Quantitative Assessment
Pollutant
Acidification
(H2S04,
HN03)


Nitrogen
Saturation and
Eutrophication
(NOY)

Toxics
Deposition
(Hg, Dioxin)



Multiple
Pollutant
Stress
Endpoint
Forest
aesthetics
Recreational
fishing
Biological
diversity
existence value
Recreational
and commercial
fisheries
Biological
diversity
existence value
Forest
aesthetics
Hunting, wildlife
aesthetics
Recreational
and commercial
fishing
Biological
diversity
existence value
Ecosystem
aesthetics,
ecosystem
existence
value.
Emissions
Model
NEI,
ERCAM
NEI,
ERCAM
NEI,
ERCAM
NEI,
ERCAM
NEI,
ERCAM
None
Available
None
Available
None
Available
None
Available
NEI,
ERCAM
Transport
and
Deposition
RADM
RADM
RADM
RADM
RADM
RELMAP,
ISC3
RELMAP,
ISC3
RELMAP,
ISC3
RELMAP

Exposure
Model
Not
Required
MAGIC
(region
specific)
MAGIC
(region
specific)
Estuary-
specific
models
available
Estuary-
specific
models
available
None
Available
None
Available
IEM-2M (site
specific)
None
Available
None
Available
Dose-
response
Functions
Multiple
available
Multiple
available
Multiple
available
None
Available
Multiple
available
Multiple
available
Multiple
available
Multiple
available, or
consumption
advisory limits
can be used
Multiple
available
None
Available
Economic
Model
Only site-
specific
models
available
Only site-
specific
models
available
Only site-
specific
models
available
Only site-
specific
models
available
None Available
Only site-
specific
models
available
Only site-
specific
models
available
Only site-
specific
models
available
None Available
None Available
NEI: National Emissions Inventory; ERCAM: Emissions Reduction and Cost Analysis Model; RADM: Regional Acid Deposition
Model;REMSAD: Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and Deposition; RELMAP: Regional Lagrangian Model of Air Pollution;
UAM: Urban Airshed Model; TAMM: Timber Assessment Market Model, developed and maintained by the U.S. Forest Service.
                                                   E-18

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    When  pollutant doses  are  sufficiently high to
cause physiologic responses in biota, ecological service
flows may be affected.  In order to monetize these
impacts, a model of the economic behavior associated
with the service flow must be developed. Economic
models are specific  to  the service  flow and the
consuming population, and not all service flows have
adequate economic models that  describe their value.
For example, recreational fishing models account for
the preferences and geographic distribution of anglers
as well as the site characteristics of the  fisheries.
These  data  are  site specific,  making the  model
specification fairly non-transferable.

    Table E-6 describes the extent to which models
are available to estimate the full chain of defensible
links for the ecological endpoints identified in Table
E-5. Each column must have an identified model in
              order to complete the required modeling steps to
              quantify changes in that endpoint.  In cases where
              defensible links are not quantified, opportunities exist
              for qualitative analysis.

                  Table  E-7  summarizes  the  quantitative  and
              qualitative  analyses that we propose based on the
              available model coverage. Geographic scope plays an
              important role in  determining the level of analysis,
              such  as a national  assessment, a case study or a
              qualitative description that is possible given existing
              models. This exhibit demonstrates that, of the great
              number of known impacts of air pollution, only a
              subset can be assessed. In the next section we discuss
              the methods, results, and caveats of the analyses of
              these selected endpoints.
 Table E-7
 Summary of Endpoints Selected for Quantitative Analysis
              Endpoint
            Analysis
      Geographic Scope
 Lake acidification impacts on
 recreational fisheries
Quantification of improved fisheries
with monetization of recreational
value
Case study of New York State
 Estuarine  eutrophication   impacts  on
 recreational and commercial fisheries
Quantification of improved fisheries
with monetization of avoided costs
of alternative eutrophication control
methods
Illustrative calculations for case
studies of Chesapeake Bay,
Long Island Sound, and Tampa
Bay (with extensions to East
Coast estuaries)	
 Ozone impacts on  commercial  timber
 sales
Quantification of improved timber
growth with monetization of
commercial timber revenues
National assessment
 Ozone impacts on carbon sequestration   Quantification
 in commercial timber	sequestration
              of  improved  carbon   National assessment
 Toxicity impacts on recreational fishing
Qualitative analysis of improved
recreational fisheries
Qualitative regional case studies
of New York and Tennessee
                                                 E-19

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Extending Future Analyses

    By focusing on the readily measured  impacts
identified in Table E-7, it is possible to lose sight of
ecosystem-level changes that may threaten ecosystem
integrity  in ways  that alter or increase  the risk of
changing ecosystem structure and function.   The
isolation  of  service  flows  may often  imply  an
oversimplified cause and effect relationship between
pollution and the provision of the service flow, when
more often the service flow is affected by complex
non-linear  relationships  that  govern  ecosystem
structure  and function. Economic analyses that focus
on a narrow class of acute service-flow impacts will
not cover larger ecosystem-wide impacts that may
ultimately prove  most  relevant to  environmental
policy decision making.   This  analytical weakness
becomes  apparent  when  impacts  to  ecological
functions such as  nutrient  cycling  and biological
diversity are assessed.

    Issues on which to focus future analytic work in
this field  include:

    •  Major linkages of cause and  effect between
       air pollution and  subtle  deterioration in
       ecosystem integrity are difficult to quantify;

    •  Degradation of ecosystem  integrity  most
       often does not cause  immediate measurable
       declines in ecosystem service flows that are
       monetarily valued by society;

    •  The time-frame required for many ecological
       impacts to manifest themselves is such that
       the present value of these impacts discounts
       to negligible sums; and,

    •  Uncertainties associated with the scale of
       complex ecological impacts are too great to
       allow for reliable estimation of the economic
       implications.

    Because  of the weaknesses in  the  available
methods and data, the  benefits  assessment in  this
appendix does not represent a comprehensive estimate
of the economic benefits of the CAAA.  Moreover,
the potential  magnitude  of long-term  economic
impacts of ecological damages mitigated by the CAAA
suggests great care must be taken to consider those
ecosystem  impacts that  are not  quantified here.
Significant future analytical work must be performed
to build a sufficient base of knowledge and data to
allow the expansion of this benefits assessment.
Eutrophication of Estuaries

    This analysis considers the economic benefits of
reduced  nitrogen  deposition and the  effects on
selected  eastern estuaries  attributable to the  1990
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). Note that these
estimates were not included in the primary benefits of
the CAAA; these are presented here as an  alternative
calculation only. We  present a description of how
nitrogen deposition affects estuarine ecosystems, an
explanation of the effects on ecological service flows,
and an  assessment of the  benefits of reducing
nitrogen deposition in the context of several  case
studies  using avoided-damage  and  displaced-cost
approaches as alternative estimates of benefits.  A
more comprehensive  description of this  analysis is
found  in  Benefits  Assessment of Decreased  Nitrogen
Deposition to Estuaries in the  United States Attributable to
the  1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990-2010 (lEc,
1999a).

Impacts of Nitrogen Deposition on
Estuaries

    Atmospherically derived nitrogen makes up a
sizable fraction of total nitrogen inputs in estuaries in
the eastern United States. When atmospheric nitrogen
enters  estuaries it  can cause  eutrophication, or  an
increased nutrient load that, in  excess, changes the
ecosystem's structure  and function and affects the
provision of ecological service flows. The ecological
effects and their associated service flows are listed in
Table E-8.
                                               E-20

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
     Table E-8
     Service Flows Affected by Changes in Estuarine Ecosystems
                Ecosystem Changes
              Service Flow Impacts
     Deterioration of breeding grounds for fisheries
Commercial fishing yields, species mix
Recreational fishing catch rate, species mix
     Loss of habitat for aquatic and avian biota
Existence value of a healthy estuarine ecosystem
Wildlife viewing
Aesthetics
    Derivation  of   dose-response   relationships
between atmospheric nitrogen loading and ecological
effects is complicated by the dynamic nature of
ecological systems.  In addition to being characterized
by non-linear, "threshold" type responses, esturine
ecosystems are simultaneously influenced by a variety
of    stressors    (both    anthropogenic    and
non-anthropogenic).    This makes  it  difficult to
quantify  the nature  and  magnitude  of ecological
changes expected to result from a change in a single
stressor such as nutrient loading. Further, if the state
of the ecosystem has changed (as from oligotrophic6
to eutrophic) the removal  of the initial stressor does
not necessarily mean a rapid return to the prior state.
This complicates the quantitative benefits assessment
of controlling nitrogen deposition through the CAAA.

Economic Benefits of Decreasing
Atmospheric Deposition of Nitrogen

    EPA's   analysis   begins   with  a  geographic
information system (GIS) approach to estimate the
total volume of nitrogen inputs that the CAAA would
reduce to three major estuaries, the Chesapeake Bay,
Long Island Sound, and Tampa Bay.  Unfortunately,
resource  limitations  prevented us from examining
more than three estuaries at this  point.  The three
estuaries were chosen for several reasons.  First, each
of these  areas maintains an active research center,
either under Clean-Water Act or National Estuary
Program provisions,  and has identified  airborne
    6Oligotrophy refers to a state of relatively low nutrient
enrichment and low productivity of  aquatic ecosystems.  In
contrast, eutrophy refers to a state of relatively high nutrient
loading and  higher  productivity,  sometimes leading to
overenrichment and reduction in ecological service flows via water
quality decline.
   nitrogen as  a  major factor  in  its efforts to limit
   eutrophication.   Second, each has conducted some
   research into the level  of damages associated with
   nitrogen eutrophication, although in the final analysis
   only  the Chesapeake Bay Program's research was
   sufficient to establish  some measure  of avoided
   damages. Third, each of these estuaries has in place a
   binding commitment to meet its nitrogen reduction
   targets, a necessary condition for applying the avoided
   costs approach.  In these estuaries, failure to reduce
   airborne nitrogen deposition  (as would be the case if
   no CAAA were in place) would imply that additional
   nitrogen reductions would be necessary from other
   sources, such  as point or nonpoint surface  water
   discharges.  Implementation of the CAAA therefore
   effectively avoids the imposition of costs to achieve
   those nitrogen discharge reductions.

       For each of the three estuaries selected, we then
   conduct two types of analyses.  First, we assess  the
   avoided nitrogen deposition loadings to the watershed
   and avoided costs from reducing nitrogen deposition,
   using   submerged  aquatic  vegetation  as a  key
   biophysical  indicator.    Second,  we estimate  the
   avoided cost of implementing planned alternatives to
   the CAAA for reducing nitrogen deposition.

   GIS-Based Deposition and Loadings
   Estimates

       The    first    step    toward     calculating
   deposition-related nitrogen  loadings to the  three
   estuaries is to estimate the total deposition of nitrogen
   to the watersheds. Table E-9 presents our estimates
   of the  quantity of  nitrogen  deposited  to  the
   Chesapeake Bay, Long Island  Sound, and Tampa Bay
                                                E-21

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table E-9
 Total Nitrogen Deposition Based on GIS Analysis
 (millions of Ibs.)
Watershed
Chesapeake Bay
Long Island Sound
Tampa Bay
Scenario 1: 1990
345.1
78.3
8.1
Scenario 2:
2010 without CAAA
452.4
93.7
11.3
Scenario 3:
2010 with CAAA
258.1
56.8
7.0
Difference
194.3
36.9
4.3
watersheds.  We  present data for three different
scenarios.  The first scenario is our estimate of the
quantity of nitrogen deposited in 1990, prior to the
introduction of the CAAA. Scenario 2 is our estimate
of the quantity of nitrogen deposited in 2010 without
the CAAA, and Scenario 3 is the quantity deposited
with the CAAA. The difference between Scenarios 2
and  3 represents the potential future  impacts of the
CAAA on nitrogen deposition.7

    As the exhibit indicates, the CAAA are likely to
have a significant impact on the quantity of nitrogen
deposited to each of the three watersheds.  For the
Chesapeake Bay watershed, nitrogen deposition  is
expected to be nearly 195 million pounds less in 2010
(43 percent)  than it would have been without the
CAAA. For the Long Island Sound and Tampa Bay
watersheds, this figure is approximately  37 million
pounds (39 percent) and four million pounds (38
percent), respectively.

    We  also  estimate  the prevalence  of major
categories of land use in each of the three watersheds.
Land use is  a critical  component of our analysis
because the quantity of nitrogen runoff that eventually
reaches the estuary varies according to the type of land
that receives  the  atmospheric  deposition.    For
example, the fate of atmosphericly deposited nitrogen
will differ if the nitrogen falls on forest versus urban
land, because forest land generally retains a greater
percentage of nitrogen than urban land.  Our analysis
uses distinct nitrogen "pass-through" figures for each
category of land use.   Pass-through  represents the
percentage of atmospherically deposited nitrogen that
is ultimately transported to surface water rather than
retained by the land.

    Table E-10 presents the land use prevalence and
the pass-through factors that we use for each of the
three watersheds in our  analysis.8  As  the exhibit
indicates, forests (53 percent) and agricultural lands
(32 percent) represent the majority of the land use in
the Chesapeake  Bay watershed.  In the Long Island
Sound watershed, forests (67 percent) again dominate
land use; however, urban lands account for as much
territory as agricultural lands (11 percent).  For the
Tampa Bay watershed, agricultural lands constitute the
largest land use (33 percent), while rangelands (19
percent), urban  land (15 percent), and wetlands (10
percent)  represent a much greater proportion of the
land use than in  the other two watersheds.
     These data are derived from lEc's spatial analysis of the
watersheds  and RADM nitrogen  deposition modeling.  The
RADM modeling is described in Appendix C of this report.
    8 Pass-through estimates were derived from EPA's analysis of
the relevant literature - see lEc (1999).
                                                 E-22

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Table E-10
    Land Use Prevalence and Pass-Through Figures
Watershed
Forest
Agricultural
Urban
Water
Wetlands
Other*
Chesapeake Bay
Land Use
N Pass-Through
53%
20%
32%
30%
6%
50%
7%
100%
1%
20%
1%
30%
Long Island Sound
Land Use
N Pass-Through
67%
20%
11%
30%
11%
50%
9%
100%
2%
20%
0%
30%
Tampa Bay
Land Use
N Pass-Through
* "Other" areas in Tampa Bay
5%
20%
33%
30%
include rangeland (19%) and barren
15%
50%
land (3%).
15%
100%

10%
20%

22%
30%

    We use  the pass-through figures and land use
prevalence in conjunction with deposition quantities
to estimate nitrogen loadings to each estuary. Table
E-ll displays our nitrogen loadings estimates for the
three watersheds under the three scenarios. As the
exhibit   indicates,  loadings   from   atmospheric
deposition decrease significantly due to the CAAA.
For Chesapeake Bay, for example, we estimate that
nitrogen  loadings  with   the  CAAA   will  be
approximately   79   million  pounds  in   2010,
approximately  58  million pounds  less  than our
estimate for loadings in 2010 without implementation
of the CAAA. For the Long Island Sound and Tampa
Bay, the difference between the two  scenarios is
approximately  13 million  pounds and  1.8 million
pounds, respectively.
    Table E-11
    Nitrogen Loadings from Atmospheric Deposition
    (millions of Ibs.)
Watershed
Chesapeake Bay
Long Island Sound
Tampa Bay
Scenario 1:
1990
105.2
26.7
3.4
Scenario 2:
2010 without CAAA
137.5
31.9
4.7
Scenarios: 2010
W/CAAA
79.4
19.1
2.9
Difference
58.1
12.8
1.8
Displaced Costs from Reducing
Atmospheric Deposition to Estuaries

    It is possible to use a displaced cost approach to
determine  the  benefits  associated with reduced
nitrogen emissions. To reduce excess nutrient loads
(including nitrogen)  to local estuaries, many coastal
communities are pursuing costly abatement options.
These options include point source controls as well as
urban non-point and agricultural non-point source
controls.   We  estimate  the  marginal costs of
abatement  associated  with  these  controls  as
implemented in the three case study estuaries. To the
extent  that nitrogen  deposition can be controlled
more cost effectively than point-source discharges, the
control expenditures  displaced  by the  CAAA
represent a benefit to  society.

    Ideally, a nitrogen management program would
result  in the least expensive abatement possible,
                                              E-23

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
thereby minimizing the resources society expends on
nitrogen control.  The lowest marginal cost pollution
reduction is exploited first, and pursued to its limit
before the next least costly alternative is exploited, and
so on until the required nitrogen reduction  is met
(represented by the dark columns in Figure E-l).

    With  the CAAA, a portion  of the resources
society committed to or would have committed  to
reducing a quantity of waterborne nitrogen may be
unnecessary.  Following the cost minimizing strategy,
society will forego the most expensive control cost
option first, pursue it to its limit before the next most
expensive alternative is foregone, and so on until the
nitrogen  reduction benefits  from the  CAAA are
exhausted (represented by the lightly shaded columns
in Figure  E-2).  The level of nitrogen reduction
remaining will therefore be accomplished at the lowest
cost (represented by the dark columns in Figure E-2).
                                                E-24

-------
                                          The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
   10 -i
S/t/y
    8 -
    7 -
'•8  (>]
Marginal Cos
               Figure E-l. Nitrogen Reduction Without CAAA

                                              Required reductions from waterborne sources

/-








































^






V —



































\





                                 Target (allowed)
                                 N levels at 20 10
                                                                      Projected N levels
                                                                           at 2010
                                        N Level (t/yr)
   10
    9
uction
s
u
•a
•a
c3
S
3 -
2 -
                 Figure E-2.  Nitrogen Reduction With CAAA

                                                              Reductions from CAAA
                                       Required reductions
                                        from waterborne
                                      t
                                 Target (allowed)
                                 N levels at 2010
                                                                      Projected N levels
                                                                           at 2010
                                        N Level (t/yr)
                                       E-25

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    We  develop  our  avoided-cost  estimate  by
assuming that decision makers will choose to forego
the most costly nitrogen  abatement projects first.
That is, we assume that reduced deposition and the
resulting loadings reduction will eliminate the need for
additional point or non-point source controls at the
high end of the marginal cost curve.

    To estimate the economic  benefits  of reduced
nitrogen deposition from the CAAA, we require site
specific information from the watershed level.   A
justifiable  avoided cost analysis relies  upon the
existence   of realistic   and  enforceable nitrogen
reduction goals for each estuary. Without specific
targets or reduction goals, it is not possible to suggest
that there  are any control  costs  to be avoided. As
described earlier, we have chosen case study estuaries
that fit this criterion.  These areas have established
nitrogen reduction programs  that rely primarily on
reductions  of effluent from point sources as well  as
reductions    in    non-point   source   discharges.
Information  on the  reduction  goal and potential
abatement options  for meeting those goals allow us  to
estimate the portion of the goal that can be met by the
CAAA, as  well as  the  associated cost savings.9  We
summarize those results  in Table E-12.

    Next, we need to know the annual  quantity  of
atmospheric  nitrogen  deposited on the watershed.
Last, we need to understand details about the different
nitrogen   reduction   programs  that   could   be
implemented in the watershed.  This includes the
quantity of nitrogen reduced  through a  particular
control option (e.g., agriculture best management
plans[BMPs]), and the  unit cost of reducing that
nitrogen (i.e. dollars per pound  or ton  of nitrogen
reduced).

    The benefits valuation derived using the avoid-
costs approach should be interpreted cautiously for
two reasons.  First, it is an estimation of capital costs
    'With increasing populations, controls of alternative sources
(e.g., automobile and utility emissions) may be needed simply to
meet the original target or goal; if the CAAA amendments are
necessary just to achieve the target reductions, then we are actually
measuring alternative costs and not displaced costs.
that serve  more purposes than mitigating nitrogen
inputs into the estuaries of concern. Water treatment
works are intended to provide waste water treatment
for a variety of pollutants and may be required even in
the absence of air deposition of nitrogen.  Second, the
nitrogen loading targets  for  the  estuaries  are not
concrete, strictly enforced limits, based  on certain
knowledge of the capacity of the estuaries to accept
nitrogen inputs.  Instead, the targets may change over
time as knowledge of the effects of nitrogen to these
estuaries change.   For  these  reasons, we  do not
include   these  estimates  in the  primary  benefits
estimates for the CAAA.
                                                 E-26

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableE-12
Estimated Avoided Costs For Three Estuaries
Estuary Reduced N Deposition in
2010(millions of pounds)
Long Island
Sound
Chesapeake
Bay
Tampa Bay
12.8
58.1
1.8
Lower-BoundMarginal Upper-Bound
Cost($/lb/yr.) Marginal Cost
($/lb/yr.)
$2
$6
$6
$8
$22
$38
Estimated Annual
Avoided Costs in 2010
($millions)
$25.6-$102.4
$349-$1,278
$11 -$68
     Results for Case Study Estuaries
     •   Under the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the
         signatories   (EPA,   Maryland,   Virginia,
         Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia)
         have agreed to reduce nutrient loadings to the
         Bay by 40 percent by the year 2000, relative to
         1985 levels. This goal translates to a nitrogen
         reduction  of about 186 million pounds per
         year.  A great deal of progress toward this
         goal has already been made, although success
         differs across sub-regions in the watershed
         (Chesapeake Bay Program 1997).  Nitrogen
         loadings reductions achieved thus far are the
         result of both point and non-point source
         controls.  Since  1985, 33 of the 315 major
         municipal treatment plants in the region have
         upgraded  to  biological  nutrient removal
         (BNR),  an advanced treatment  technology
         specifically focused on nitrogen  removal.
         These upgrades have reduced annual loadings
         by about  13 million pounds  (as of  1996).
         Approximately 60 additional facilities are
         expected to implement BNR in the future.  In
         addition,   agricultural   and  urban  best
         management  practices   have   reduced
         non-point  source loadings  by  about  16
         million  pounds  per year, with  additional
         implementation of BMPs planned for coming
         years  (Chesapeake  Bay Program,   1997).
         Because both point and non-point  source
         controls play  a  role  in anticipated  future
         nitrogen reductions in Chesapeake Bay, we
         develop marginal and avoided cost estimates
         that  incorporate both types of control. As
         reflected in Exhibit 15, we estimate avoided
cost benefits for Chesapeake Bay ranging
from about $349 million to $1.3 billion.

Long Island Sound has established a goal of
reducing nitrogen loadings by approximately
48 million pounds by 2015.  Point source
controls are anticipated to  be the  primary
source  of  these reductions.   Numerous
sewage treatment plant upgrades are slated
for the region, many of which are currently
under construction. We use data from the
Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection and New York  Department of
Environmental Conservation.  The marginal
cost figures yield an estimate  of avoided costs
that ranges from about $26 to $102 million
per year.

In  1996, the Tampa Bay Estuary Program
(TBEP)  adopted   a  five-year   nutrient
management goal that caps  annual nitrogen
loadings  at  1992-1994 levels.   Nitrogen
loading to Tampa Bay is expected to  increase
seven percent by the year 2010 as a result of
population growth and related commercial
and residential development. To offset this
growth and maintain current nitrogen levels,
the TBEP has  asked  local governments,
agencies, and industries to  reduce  total
nitrogen  loadings   to    the   Bay    by
approximately 84 tons  (168,000 pounds) per
year by the  year 2000.  The result of this
planning effort is the Nitrogen Management
Action Plan (TBEP, 1998).   This plan lists
the  projects undertaken  or planned  by
industry, local governments,  and agencies
                                                E-27

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
        that will contribute to meeting the nitrogen
        management  goal  for 2000  and beyond.
        These projects, which together surpass the
        nitrogen reduction goal for Tampa Bay, are a
        combination of point and non-point source
        control measures.   The  non-point  source
        control projects include  urban stormwater
        retention ponds, wetlands restoration, and
        land acquisition. The point source projects
        focus on advanced  treatment technologies
        such as BNR at (publically owned treatment
        works (POTWs). For example, one project,
        proposed for implementation after the year
        2000, will involve  additional  treatment  of
        effluent from a POTW prior to reuse in the
        regional water supply.  We estimate annual
        avoided costs for Tampa Bay ranging from
        about $11 million to $68 million.

    These three estuaries represent only a portion of
the total estuarine area affected by nitrogen deposition
in the United States.  The Chesapeake Bay and Long
Island Sound account for roughly 20 to 25 percent of
the East Coast estuarine watershed area addressed by
the National Estuary Program,  and Tampa Bay is a
small fraction  of the total  Gulf Coast estuarine
watershed area.  As a result, our estimates reflect only
a partial analysis of the national impact of nitrogen
deposition.

    Results for Total East Coast
    Estuarine Area

    To  extrapolate the results of this analysis to  all
East Coast estuaries, we assume all  estuaries along the
Atlantic Coast have binding nitrogen budgets. We
then use  the same geographic information  system
(GIS) approach we used in our analysis of Chesapeake
Bay, Long Island Sound, and Tampa Bay to estimate
total nitrogen deposition and  the associated loadings
to estuaries located along the Atlantic Coast.  This
approach allows us to estimate  nitrogen loadings in
the year  2010 with and without   CAAA  emissions
controls.  Since watershed specific nitrogen control
program  information  is  not  available  for  each
watershed, we extrapolate BMP  cost  and nitrogen
    reduction data from the three case studies across all
    East Coast watersheds.10

        Although  we  simplistically assume that  each
    estuary has a nitrogen budget,  the total East Coast
    displaced cost analysis does not include all estuaries
    along the Atlantic Coast, since some estuaries are not
    sensitive to nitrogen loadings.  Certain estuaries are
    able to process large amounts of nutrients (nitrogen
    and phosphorus) without problems, while others are
    unable to  process  even low  amounts of nutrients.
    Rather than rely on nitrogen levels to determine which
    estuaries to include in  the displaced cost analysis, we
    use a measure of eutrophic susceptibility developed by
    Bncker  et  al. (1999-DRAFT), to  determine  how
    sensitive estuaries are to nitrogen loadings.  Using
    their  eutrophic  susceptibility  classification   (low,
    medium, and high) we  then exclude estuaries with low
    eutrophic  susceptibility  from  the  displaced  cost
    analysis.11

        The total displaced costs for the East Coast is
    simply the sum of the displaced costs for each estuary
    along  the Atlantic Coast classified as moderately or
    highly susceptible to  eutrophication  (see Table  E-
    13).12  The lower-bound estimate of $261.5 million
    represents a point source control strategy. The upper-
    bound estimate of $2,766 million represents a strategy
          The control cost and nitrogen reduction data is available in the
    lEc memorandum to EPA dated August 26, 1999.

        11 This index is based on a variety of factors influencing
    sensitivity of estuaries to eutrophication, including water surface
    area of the estuary, estuary volume, freshwater inflow,  tidal
    cycles, and vertical stratification.

        12 In the North Atlantic Region, Blue Hill Bay, Casco Bay,
    Englishman Bay, Kennebec/Androscoggin River, Merrimack
    River,  Musconguc Bay, Narraguagus Bay, Penobscot Bay, and
    Saco Bay have a low susceptibility to eutrophication and are
    excluded from the displaced cost analysis.  All estuaries in the
    Mid Atlantic  Region are moderately to  highly sensitive to
    eutrophication.   In the  South Atlantic Region, New River,
    Ossabaw Sound, Savannah River, and St. Helena Sound have a
    low susceptibility to eutrophication and are not included in the
    displaced cost analysis.
E-28

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010

TableE-13
Avoided Cost for Atlantic Coast



Watershed
North Atlantic
Cape Cod Bay
Great Bay
Massachusetts Bay
Sheepscot Bay
Sub-Total
Mid Atlantic
Barnegat Bay
Buzzards Bay
Chincoteaque Bay
Delaware Bay
Delaware Inland Bays1
Gardiners Bay
Great South Bay
Hudson River/Raritan Bay
Narragansett Bay
New Jersey Inland Bays
Sub-Total2
South Atlantic
Albemarle Sound
Altamaha River
Biscayne Bay3
Bogue Sound
Broad River3
Cape Fear River
Charleston Harbor
Indian River
North/South Santee Rivers
Pamlico Sounds
St. Andrew/St. Simons Sounds3
St. Catherines/Sapelo Sounds
St. Johns River
St. Marys River/Cumberland Sound
Winyah Bay1
Sub-Total
Total East Coast
1 CAAA N reductions met with agriculture,



Reduction through
CAAA, Millions of
Pounds (2010)

0.51
0.57
1.19
0.13
13.02

0.48
0.78
0.33
12.11
0.18
0.64
1.30
11.15
1.65
1.12
29.74

16.29
7.24
0.78
0.30
0.46
6.59
10.58
0.76
0.32
9.58
1.18
0.28
4.72
0.53
11.63
81.07
123.82
forestry, and urban BMPs



Avoided Cost, 100
Percent from Point
Source ($1000/yr.)

1,282
1,446
3,015
340
6,083

1,202
1,976
824
30,640
459
1,624
3,294
28,197
4,176
2,825
75,219

41,223
18,315
1,973
756
1,160
16,674
26,764
1,926
821
24,225
2,974
721
11,940
1,338
29,415
180,225
261,527
(point source reductions not


Avoided Cost, from
Nonpoint Source First,
then Point Source on
Difference ($1000/yr.)

7,915
19,130
66,887
2,397
96,329

19,688
14,429
3,690
384,002
4,592
13,929
78,682
460,659
65,841
28,314
1,073,826

272,772
182,591
12,136
9,426
7,137
171,805
306,698
36,045
3,671
191,289
18,297
6,525
152,909
8,886
215,612
1,595,799
2,765,954
required).
2 Excluding Long Island Sound and Chesapeake Bay.
3 CAAA N reductions met with agriculture
BMPs (further reductions not required).
E-29

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
of nonpoint source BMPs,  with further  nitrogen
reductions from point sources, if required.13

    This estimate  is based on an extrapolation of
nitrogen  abatement   costs   from   representative
watersheds.  Although this is a broad assumption, it
does provide a gross  estimation of the range and
magnitude of the  CAAA benefits for the Atlantic
Coast as a whole and its component watersheds.
Due to our general assumptions, a  high degree of
uncertainty is associated with this range.  First, we do
not know enough  about the  nature of the  nitrogen
budgets for each estuary and  if those budgets would
be binding.  If nitrogen budgets are not binding, these
regions may have little incentive to reduce  nitrogen
loadings.   Furthermore,  because of the  lack of
watershed specific cost information, we  rely  on
available abatement cost data from the  Chesapeake
Bay and Long Island Sound to represent point source
and nonpoint source  unit abatement costs  for all
watersheds along the Atlantic Coast. The tightness of
the range and accuracy of the displaced cost analysis is
dependant   on  an  accurate  understanding  and
representation  of  the nitrogen abatement  costs
associated with the different point  source control
options and nonpoint source BMPs in each individual
watershed.  Lastly, we use marginal cost figures that
represent averages of the costs associated with certain
control measures.  For example, our agriculture BMP
cost figure  is  a  simple  average of six  different
agriculture  BMPs,  each with a  different  level of
nitrogen reduction and a different cost per pound of
nitrogen reduced.  While  beyond the scope of this
effort, a more refined analysis would use marginal cost
estimates based on the precise  mix of agriculture
BMPs  to be implemented in each watershed and the
cost of each, as determined by local factors within the
watershed.
    13 In our analysis of the total displaced costs  for the
Atlantic Coast, several watersheds meet their CAAA nitrogen
reduction levels without relying on point source controls.
Avoided Damages to Estuarine
Ecosystems

    Theoretically, a modeling system that describes
water  quality changes, including fish population
dynamics as  a function  of nitrogen  input, would
provide an assessment of the  avoided damages from
mitigating nitrogen deposition (Figure E-3). Because
of current modeling and data constraints, however,
the  only means   to  quantify  the   damages  of
eutrophication from nitrogen deposition is through
the use of specific biophysical indicators of estuarine
health. Changes in an indicator, such as aerial extent
of seagrass beds, can measure habitat damage.  Based
on changes in habitat, the change in ecosystem service
flows associated with that habitat can be estimated.
    From an economic perspective, this approach is
useful in cases where habitat is closely related to the
provision of ecological  service  flows, such  as
commercial  and recreational  fishing yields.   Using
seagrass beds as an indicator, we describe the potential
for avoiding estuarine damages through the CAAA.

    Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) is a group of
angiosperms  (plants that bear seeds, as opposed to
algae, which reproduce via cell division) that  form
extensive meadows,  providing  habitat, breeding
grounds,  and nursery for a variety of organisms
including fish,  birds,  shellfish,  and   invertebrates
(Jacobs et al.  1981; Bell  et al. 1989; Howard  et al.
1989; Burkholder et al. 1992; Orth et al. 1994).  SAV
meadows  give   considerable   three-dimensional
structure to the seabed that provides small organisms
with a place to hide from predators, acts  as a sediment
trap, and functions as a breakwater offering natural
shoreline protection (Vermaat et al. 1998). Along with
aerial extent, the density of SAV may be important in
defining the health of the SAV community.

    Though a universal nitrogen-SAV relationship has
not  been derived,  field  data show  that increased
nitrogen loading has been accompanied by extensive
decline in SAV in a variety of estuaries  (Valiela et al.
1997;  Burkholder  et al.,  1992;  Coastlines,  1994;
Vermaat, 1998).  In the  Chesapeake,  SAV acreage
declined from more than 76,000 to about 40,000 acres
                                                E-30

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                         Figure E-3
                Estuary Models and Ecological Impacts of Concern
RADM



Wateished
Model
	 >•

                                                           Water Quality Model
                                                           Dissolved
                                                            Oxygen
                                                           Submodel
                    SAV
                  Submodel
                                                  Changes in
                                                  Dissolved
                                                   Oxygen
             Fishing Benefit
                ofCAA
between 1870 and 1950, concurrent with increased
nutrient loading (Coastlines, 1994).  From 1950 to
1980, when nutrient loading took a sharp upward turn,
the decline continued to a low point of about 21,000
acres.  This decline is quite likely due to shading by
excessive  algal growth  and increased  growth  of
epiphytic  plants  that  also  respond positively  to
increased nitrogen availability (Coastlines, 1994).

    Empirical evidence from Tampa Bay and  the
Chesapeake Bay show that SAV populations will likely
benefit  from reduced nitrogen  inputs to  these
estuaries. In Tampa Bay, there is a notable correlation
between SAV and nitrogen inputs, as described in
Figure E-4.14
    In Chesapeake Bay, it is not possible to identify a
statistically significant relationship between these two
variables  in  isolation because  of  the  large  and
heterogenous   nature  of  the  Chesapeake  Bay.
Embayments vary greatly in physical characteristics
including depth  and  salinity, complicating  the
relationship. Nonetheless, the general trend has been
an increase  in seagrass acreage and a decrease  in
nitrogen loading.  Figure E-15 shows the change  in
SAV acreage over the past two decades.

    Because  the  relationships  we  describe  from
existing  data  are  not  sufficiently  robust to allow
projections of SAV coverage as a function of nitrogen
deposition in our scenarios, we utilize alternative
methods to provide quantitative benefits estimates  in
the following section.
    14 Two factor  analysis of variance  (ANOVA)  analysis
confirms this correlation; see EPA 1999 for more details.
                                                E-31

-------
                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                    Figure E-4

 Nitrogen Load vs. Seagrass Acreage in Tampa Bay
   500      1000      1500
Annual Nitrogen Load (tons/yr)
                                             2000
20000
                  Figure E-5

            Chesapeake Bay SAV
                  1978-1996
                                      D Upper Bay
                                      • Middle Bay
                                      D Lower Bay
                   Year
                       E-32

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Caveats and Uncertainties

    Though it is difficult to directly predict the nature
and  magnitude   of  the  ecosystem  impacts   of
eutrophication, we conclude that continued nitrogen
inputs at current levels will result in deleterious effects.
The major caveats and uncertainties associated with
these analyses follow.

    •    Our  nitrogen loading estimates are derived
        using a highly simplified approach that takes
        into account total deposition and the nitrogen
        retention characteristics of  different land
        uses.  Some  factors  suggest that we  may
        overstate  loadings  because  we  do  not
        consider  the  effects  of nitrogen travel
        through varied distances and heterogeneous
        geography, such as rivers and streams.  For
        example, an additional 20 to 75 percent  of
        nitrogen is retained during transport in rivers
        and streams (Hinga, et al.,  1991).

        Other factors suggest that we may understate
        loadings.  Most significantly, the Geographic
        Information  Retrieval  Analysis   System
        (GIRAS) land use data in our GIS analysis
        were  compiled in the early 1980s. It is likely
        that the current amount of urbanized land is
        greater   than    these    data   indicate.
        Furthermore,  continued  development  of
        forest and other open land suggests that land
        uses  will change significantly in the period
        between now and 2010.  Because nitrogen
        removal in urban land is low, more refined
        land  use  data for future years would likely
        lead to greater estimates of nitrogen loadings.
        We compare our nitrogen loading estimates
        with those of estuary programs and published
        literature for 1990 to verify whether our
        approach generates results that correspond
        with  existing estimates.  For the Chesapeake
        our estimate of 150 million tons falls in the
        middle of existing estimates ranging from  58
        to 159 million tons (EPA 1997e; Patwardhan
        and Domgian 1997; Fisher et al. 1998; Tyler
        1998) for Long Island Sound our estimate of
        27 million tons corresponds with the existing
        estimate of 26 million tons (Stacey 1998), and
        for Tampa Bay our estimate of 3 millions
        tons  is close  to the existing estimate  of 2
        million tons  (TBEP 1998; Zarbuck  et  al.
        1994).

    •   We base our estimates of avoided costs on
        simplified assumptions regarding the control
        measures that would be eliminated as a result
        of reducing atmospheric nitrogen.  The mix
        of nitrogen controls that could be displaced
        will   be influenced  by  state   regulations
        affecting  treatment plants  and non-point
        sources as  well as by  pollution reduction
        goals   for  different sub-basins  in   each
        watershed.    For  example,  water quality
        objectives for pollutants other than nitrogen
        may require controls that we assume could be
        eliminated.
    •   Similarly, we use marginal cost figures that
        represent averages of the costs associated
        with  control  measures.   For example, we
        apply generic non-point source control cost
        estimates  based  on a  mix of  agriculture,
        forestry,  and  urban  best  management
        practices.  While beyond the scope of this
        effort,  a more refined  analysis  would use
        marginal cost estimates based on the precise
        mix  of best  management practices to  be
        implemented in each watershed and the cost
        of each, as determined by local factors  such
        as  levels   of nitrogen  in  soils,  evolving
        agricultural    practices,    and   changing
        development patterns.
Acidification of Freshwater
Fisheries

    During the 1970s and 1980s, "acid rain" came to
be known to the public as a phenomenon that injures
trees, forests, and water bodies throughout Europe
and in some areas of the United States and Canada.
One of the goals of the CAAA was  to address the
problem of acidification of terrestrial  and aquatic
                                               E-33

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
ecosystems  caused by  acidic deposition.   In this
section we evaluate economic benefits accruing to
society as a consequence of reductions in emissions of
sulfur and nitrogen oxides mandated by the CAAA.
In particular, we focus on a quantitative analysis of
benefits derived from a reduction in acidification of
aquatic bodies as they relate  to recreational fishing in
the Adirondacks region of New  York  State.  Our
analysis indicates that by mitigating acidification with
the  regulations  promulgated  under  the  CAAA,
cumulative benefits between 1990 and 2010 can  be
accrued in the range of $67 to $465 million. Using the
results from the acidification estimates, it is also plain
to see that the CAAA may be preventing further
ecological impacts  from  acidification  that  are not
quantifiable  in   economic  terms  using  available
methods. A more comprehensive description of this
analysis is  found in  Economic Benefits Assessment of
Decreased Acidification of Fresh Water Lakes and Streams in
the United States Attributable to the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments, 1990-2010 (lEc, 1999b).

Acidification of Surface Waters and
Ecological Impacts

    Acidification of surface  waters is  frequently
described using two measures. One measure  of
acidification is pH, which is based on the hydrogen
ion (H+) concentration found in surface waters.15 The
pH of a water sample can range from 1  to  14  on a
logarithmic  scale, with  pure water having a pH of
seven. The term acidic usually refers to a pH below
seven, indicating high concentrations of hydrogen ions
(H+). Rain water that is unaffected by anthropogenic
factors (natural rain) is weakly acidic (pH 5.0 -  6.0),
due  to  the presence  of natural weak acids.  With
addition of acids from human activities, however, the
pH of rain can range from 3.5  to 5.0 (NAPAP, 1991,
p. 15).  Most freshwater lakes and streams have a pH
between 6.5 and 8, indicating that surface waters can
be naturally acidic. Only a small percentage of aquatic
ecosystems are naturally acidic with pHs below 6.5,
and concerns about anthropogenic acidification focus
    15The pH of a water sample is equal to the negative log of its
hydrogen ion concentration: pH= 4og[H+].
on the effects that may occur with decreases in pH
below pH 6.5 (EPA, 1995ap. 9).

    The   second  commonly  used   measure  of
acidification is  Acid Neutralizing Capacity  (ANC),
which describes a water body's ability to neutralize
acids added to the water column. Surface waters with
higher  ANC  are   generally  more   resistant  to
acidification and empirically tend  to have higher pH
levels. ANC is measured in micro-equivalents per liter
(ueq/L).  Surface waters with an ANC of less than 200
ueq/L are considered to have a low capacity for
neutralizing acids. Water bodies with an ANC of 50
ueq/L or less have a very low capacity for neutralizing
acids, and water bodies with an ANC of 0 ueq/L or
less have no ability to neutralize acids and are acidic.
These water bodies have no ability to neutralize acids
and tend to be  the most sensitive for long-term pH
depressions below 6.0, which can produce the most
severe effects  on aquatic  life (EPA, 1995a p.  9,
NAPAP 1991 p.15).

    Acidic deposition can  lead  to  two  kinds of
acidification processes, depending on the duration of
acidifying events. First, chronic acidification describes
a situation  in  which  acidic deposition  leads  to
long-term changes in soil and water characteristics,
causing chronically toxic  environmental  effects.
Second, episodic acidification is  a phenomenon in
which surface waters experience short-term (hours to
weeks)  decreases in pH,  usually during  extreme
hydrological  events  such  as storm  discharge  or
snowmelt (EPA, 1995a, p.9, NAPAP, 1991 p. 18). For
acid-sensitive fish species in some lakes or streams,
for example, episodic events can cause  complete
spawning or recruitment failures (EPA, 1995a p.10).

    The most comprehensive survey of surface waters
comes from the National  Surface Waters  Survey
(NSWS), which was conducted as part of the National
Acid Precipitation Program (NAPAP). Based on the
results from the NSWS surveys of lakes throughout
the United States, an estimated 4.2 percent (1,180) of
the NSWS lakes were acidic, defined as having ANC
less than 0 ueq/1 with pH levels in  the range of 5.0 to
5.5. Nearly all of these lakes were  in eastern portions
of the United  States,  located in six  "high-interest
                                                E-34

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
regions". The six areas identified are New England,
the Adirondacks, the mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain, the
mid-Atlantic  Highlands,  Florida,  and  the  upper
Midwest. The NSWS found that acidic deposition is
the dominant source of  acid anions in about  75
percent of the acidic lakes and 50 percent of the acidic
streams in their sample.   Figure  E-6 depicts the
geographic ranges of known acidification.

    The effects  of acidity on aquatic organisms are
determined by a number  of different water quality
variables,  the most important of  which are pH,
inorganic  aluminum, and  calcium.  The  combined
effects of these variables can adversely  affect the
physiology  of  individual  organisms  as  well  as
population-level parameters. The direct effects may
be classified as involving either recruitment failure or
reduced adult survival.   The outcomes on these
impacts are declining acid-sensitive fish populations
and a consequent decline in species richness (SOS/T
13p.l3-126).

Modeling Acidification

    Figure E-7  shows the stages of modeling the
ecological and economic impacts of acidification. This
analysis uses RADM deposition data for the year 2010,
and an extended deposition scenario that we develop
for the year 2040, to demonstrate the possible lagged
effects of the CAAA.  We  use  these  data in  an
acidification model that generates an estimate of the
acidity of lakes in the Adirondacks.  Lake acidity is
input to an economic model that estimates the costs
to anglers  of diminishing lake water quality, and
consequently declining fish populations.

    We use the same emissions and deposition data
for the period 1990 to 2010 as in each of our other
endpoint analyses. The primary difference is  that we
extend the deposition scenarios to 2040 in order to
accommodate for the  lagged physical effects of acid
deposition.  This lag  is  a function  of multiple
watershed and water body characteristics influencing
recovery from prolonged acidic deposition. Results of
various efforts  to  model freshwater acidification
showed that  recovery of acidified water bodies can
take over  50 years, even with substantial (up to  70
percent) reductions in sulfate deposition (Jenkins et al.
1990; Wright et al. 1994), while watershed soils may
require 150-200 years for full recovery (Cosby et al.
1985).

    Because appropriate data are lacking to simulate
the emission  and deposition of acidic  pollutants
between  the years 2010  and  2040, we use two
deposition scenarios for the period 2010-2040:

    •    Constant deposition from 2010 to 2040 at
        levels  projected   for   2010  under  the
        regulations of the CAAA; and,
    •    Constant deposition from 2010 to 2040 at
        levels projected  for  2010  without  the
        regulations of the CAAA.
                                                E-35

-------
Figure E-6
Percentage of Acidic Surface Waters in the National Surface Water Survey Regions
      West
                                                                                                                              New
                                                                                                                            England
                                                                              Mid-Atlantic
                                                                              Coastal Plain
                                                                Southec stern
                                                                  Highla ids
           10%-20%

           >20%
Note:      The National Surface Water Survey was conducted between 1984 and 1986.
Source:    National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). 1990 Integrated Assessment Report.
          November 1991, p. 27.
                                                                  E-57

-------
                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                          Figure E-7

       Acidification of Freshwater Ecosystems
                        SO 2 and NO x
                        Emissions Model
     Deposition Scenario I:
     Full Implementation
     of the 1990CAAA
                           MAGIC
                           Model
Scenario I:
% of Acidified Waterbodies
                           Economic
                           Model(s)
      Scenario I:
      Economic Impact
      of Lake Acidification
Deposition Scenario II:
No Implementation
of the 1990CAAA

 Scenario II:
 % of Acidified Waterbodies
  •
Critical pH
Threshold for Fish
Scenario II:
Economic Impact
of Lake Acidification
                  Scenario II - Scenario I =
                  Economic Benefit of CAAA
                               E-37

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Using these deposition scenarios, we estimate the
extent of acidification in the Adirondacks. To do this,
we use the Model of Acidification of Groundwater in
Catchments  (MAGIC).    MAGIC  is  a  lumped
parameter model that was originally developed to
project  the  long-term  effects  (i.e.,  decades  to
centuries) to surface water caused by acidic deposition
(Cosby et al, 1985a, 1985b).  NAPAP and the Acid
Rain Program of EPA  use MAGIC extensively in
analysis of acidification in the Eastern United States
(Church et al, 1989; Church et al, 1992; EPA,  1995),
the  results  of  which  have  been   rigorously
peer-reviewed and used in previous policy analyses.
The data that MAGIC produces describe the extent of
acidification (i.e., pH and ANC levels) that will occur
in a sample of sensitive lakes in the Adirondacks as a
function of acidic deposition levels.

    As mentioned earlier, capacities of watersheds to
retain  deposited  sulfur  or  nitrogen  containing
compounds  are  among  the most important factors
influencing  surface  water   acidification.   Because
increasing stages of nitrogen  saturation are likely to
lead to decreasing nitrogen-retention capacities, it is
necessary to consider these effects in our modeling
approach. MAGIC, however,  currently does not
explicitly  represent detailed  cycling  or processes
affecting the rate of nitrogen uptake and release
because processes that  control the transition of a
watershed to a state of nitrogen saturation leading to
surface water acidification are not well understood
(Van Sickle  and Church, 1995).   Instead, we use a
sensitivity analysis  of  two  boundary  conditions,
representing a  nitrogen-saturated watershed  and a
watershed where terrestrial ecosystems continue to
utilize the majority of deposited nitrogen.

    Our  means to  assess the economic  impact of
acidification  is to measure the change in social welfare
that results from reducing the quality of available lakes
for recreational fishing.  In order to accomplish this,
we must determine the water chemistry parameters at
which declines  in recreational fish populations are
perceptible by anglers.  As mentioned earlier in this
memorandum, the toxicity of low levels of pH to fish
species depends on a variety of factors, including the
concentration of inorganic aluminum and calcium in
the water column as well as specific sensitivities of
locally occurring fish species. The level of pH is not a
precise indicator of the habitability of a lake for fish.
But because the full complement of relevant water
chemistry variables  for lakes in  the region is not
available, we are forced to work with pH  as a proxy
for habitability.  In order to  accommodate for the
variable effects of pH due to other water chemistry
variables, we derive a range of  pH values where
negative effects  on fish species are empirically known
to occur. We summarize these results in Table E-14.
    Table E-14
    Summary of pH-Based Effects Threshold
                                               pH Effects Threshold
                                               	(Low End)	
                      pH Effects Threshold
                            (High End)
    Range for All Fish Species
      4.2
5.8
    Range of Mean Values for All Species
      4.8
5.3
    Range of recreationally important
    species (weighted average)
      4.6
5.4
                                                E-38

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Our review of the  empirical effects literature
demonstrates the difficulty in discerning a single pH
threshold that could ever adequately characterize the
ability of a water body to sustain recreational fishing.
The most rigorous use of the available data might
employ species-specific thresholds and apply these
thresholds to  individual  lakes  in  the  economic
modeling domain.  Unfortunately, information on the
prevalent recreationally important species present in
the sample of lakes modeled by MAGIC, as well as in
the larger domain of lakes to which  these  results
would be extrapolated, is not currently available.  We
therefore adopt a range of estimates of a pH threshold
for acidification of a lake of 5.0 to 5.4.  The range is
consistent with a reasonable approximation of effects
noticeable to anglers.   Knowledge  of effects  with
certainty would imply a more conservative assumption
of a lower pH, perhaps consistent with the low end
weighted average for recreationally important species,
reported in the last row of Table E-14.  We therefore
report acidification results for an extreme low end
threshold estimate of pH 4.6, but do  not interpret
those results as providing useful central estimates for
a study specifically concerned with recreational fishing.

    The final  step  in  our analysis  is to  use an
economic model  that  monetizes the impacts  to
recreational  fishing under  each  of the acidification
scenarios.  This involves the selection of an economic
model  that  appropriately  covers  the  effects  of
acidification of multiple sites over the geographic area
that is impacted, and the proper integration  of the
water  quality  information.   The  ideal  for  this
application is  a random utility  model (RUM) that
allows for the substitution among sites and fisheries as
water quality parameters change, an essential feature
when estimating recreational benefits.

    Very few models of this  type exist, and fewer
cover a region of high acidification that is impacted by
the CAAA. Efforts by Englin et al (1991), Mullen and
Menz (1985), and Morey and  Shaw  (1990) advance
this line of inquiry by relating regional acid deposition
to recreational fishing damages, but Montgomery and
Needelman  (1997) are the first  to use direct water
quality measures in conjunction with a random utility
model16.  The  estimation proceeds  in  three steps.
First, a site-choice model determines the impact of
water quality and  other  lake characteristics on  the
choice of a fishing site among the set of all potential
sites. The model estimates the value  of the available
set of lakes to each New York resident. In the second
step, a model predicts whether a New York resident
will choose to fish on a particular day.  Third, based
on the results of the site-choice and fishing decision
models,  it is  possible to  estimate  the change  in
economic welfare caused by altering water quality of
the lakes available to New York residents.

    We use the Montgomery and Needelman model
by inputting MAGIC acidification  estimates  and
simulating the  impact on anglers.  We do  not re-
estimate the econometric model's parameters for this
application due to resource constraints, though it is
important to  note that  the model was  originally
estimated to describe angler response to acidity at pH
6.0, while we assume that anglers respond at a lower
pH level. Data from MAGIC are input to the model
in the form of a percentage estimate of the lakes in the
Adirondacks that fall below a chosen pH level.  The
effect of acidification has a negative impact on  the
utility of anglers that might wish to use that resource.
By simulating the effect on anglers' utility of acidifying
a percentage of lakes within a region, the model can
compute the economic impact of a specific  level of
acidification.    Subtracting the economic value  of
fishing at our baseline level of acidification from that
which would occur if the CAAA were promulgated
provides an  estimate  of the benefits  accrued  to
recreational fishermen from reducing acidification in
the region.

Acidification Results

    We summarize the results of our  acidification
projections  from  MAGIC  in  Exhibit 19.   Each
scenario described in these tables provides an estimate
of the percentage of lakes  in the Adirondacks likely to
suffer  from acidification given  the  deposition and
                                                        16The Montgomery and Needelman model  applies a
                                                     technique developed by Morey, Rowe, and Watson (1993).
                                                E-39

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 nitrogen saturation  parameters  assigned  to  that
 scenario.    The  exhibits  present  the  level  of
 acidification expected given a specific threshold level
 of acidity (pH 4.6, 5.0, or 5.4), covering uncertainty
 associated with the impacts of acidity on a range of
 aquatic species.

     Table E-15 shows  that in the year 2010, the
 CAAA can be expected to reduce the number of lakes
 whose pH falls below 4.6 by zero percent, below 5.0
 by one to four percent, and the percentage of lakes
falling below a pH of 5.4 by five percent.  These
results are obtained by subtracting the acidification
estimates for the year 2010 without the CAAA from
the acidification estimate for 2010 with the CAAA.
Note that we only compare scenarios with consistent
nitrogen saturation parameters. One can not reliably
compare  the  impacts   of  acidification  on   a
nitrogen-saturated watershed  in  one  deposition
scenario with a non-saturated watershed in another
deposition scenario.
Table E-15
Acidification Results - 2010
Year

1990
(Base Year)
2010



Status of CAAA Level of N
Saturation

No CAAA
Regulations
Promulgated
With CAAA No Saturation
Saturated
Without CAAA No Saturation
Saturated
Range of Benefits from CAAA in
2010
Percentage of Lakes Acidified at
Selected pH Levels
pH4.6
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
pHS.O
5%
2%
5%
6%
6%
1%-4o/o
pH5.4
20%
18%
17%
23%
22%
5%
     Acid deposition between  1990 and  2010 also
 contributes to lagged acidification impacts after 2010.
 MAGIC estimates  that a  significant amount  of
 acidification between 2010 and 2040 is avoided by the
 CAA. This is an area that requires further research in
 order to fully quantify these impacts.

 Economic Results

     As acidification of the Adirondacks is reduced by
 the CAAA, economic benefits accrue to society.  In
 annual  terms, the economic benefits of the CAAA in
 2010 are summarized in Table E-16.  Following the
presentation used for the acidification data, the range
of annual benefits from the CAAA is $12 million to
$49 million using an effects threshold of pH 5.0, and
$82 to $88 million for an effects threshold of pH 5.4.
These results correspond to previous analyses (Englin
et al, 1991; Mullen and Menz, 1985; Morey and Shaw,
1990) that find annual benefits to the Adirondacks of
halving utility emissions  in the millions  to tens  of
millions of dollars.  We do not provide an economic
assessment of acidity in 2040, as the behavioral model
is  not  sufficiently  robust  to  estimate  economic
impacts 50 years into the future.
                                                 E-40

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 TableE-16
 Annual Economic Impact of Acidification in 2010
 (Millions of 1990 Dollars)
Year

1990
(Base Year)
2010



Range of CAAA
Status of
CAAA

No CAAA
Regulations
Promulgated
With CAAA

Without CAAA

Benefits in 2010
Level of N
Saturation


No Saturation
Saturated
No Saturation
Saturation

Economic Impact of Acidification
at Each pH Threshold
pH5.0
$61
$24
$61
$73
$73
$12-$49
pH5.4
$320
$281
$261
$363
$349
$82-$88
    We calculate the cumulative economic benefits
from the CAAA by summing the difference between
the  discounted  annual   economic  impact   of
acidification with and without the CAAA  for every
year from  1990  to 2010.17     We perform  this
calculation for the minimum and maximum values for
each of the three pH thresholds  for survival of
recreational fish species, assuming a straight  line
increase in the level of acidification between 1990 and
the 2010 level for each scenario.  We present the
results as a cumulative  net  present value calculated
with 1990 as  the  base  year (i.e. costs  in  2010 are
discounted over 20 years). As indicated in Table E-17,
the range of cumulative potential benefits  from the
CAAA between 1990 and 2010 is from $67 to $465
million.
    "The formula is £ (
      Where: c   =  economic  impact in the baseline, or
            counterfactual case;
            f  = economic impact with the  CAAA, or the
            factual case;
            t = the year, where 1990 is year 1;
            r = the social discount rate, in this case we use 5%.
                                                 E-41

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    TableE-17
    Cumulative Economic Benefits of Acidification from 1990 to 2010
    (Millions of 1990 Dollars)	
                              Economic Impact of Acidification at Each pH Threshold
                                                  pHS.O
                           pH5.4
    CAAA Benefit Minimum
 $67
$433
    CAAA Benefit Maximum
$271
$465
Avoided Cost of Liming

    An additional factor that must be considered in
light of  the  context of economic  damages  from
acidification is  the  possibility of mitigating  these
damages  by  local  means.    In the  case  of  the
Adirondacks, acidic  lakes are systematically limed in
order to  raise  pH  and improve  habitability  for
recreational fish species, which can be stocked after
liming.  This alternative is costly for local resource
managers,  and  difficult  to   conduct  in   most
Adirondack lakes with limited access, but it does serve
to  locally mitigate  the  damages caused by  acid
deposition.  Naturally, damaged aquatic ecosystems
can not be entirely replaced by liming and restocking,
but impacts to recreational fishing may be minimized.
Currently a limited number  of lakes are limed in the
Adirondacks. In this section we examine the economic
implications of this practice and demonstrate that
liming will be necessary both with and without the
CAAA.
support brook trout regardless of the pH of the water;
or, liming of the water would be too expensive, due to
its remote location.19

    It is not possible to predict the number of lakes
that the New York Department  of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) would choose to lime and
restock in 2010 based on the available data, but we can
estimate  the  potential costs and impacts  if the
program remains constant from 1990 to 2010, or if it
grows at NYSDEC's proposed rate of two additional
lakes per year. In 1990 approximately 25 percent of
the region's lakes suffered a pH below 6.0, according
to MAGIC, and NYSDEC limed and monitored 32
lakes and  restocked 30. MAGIC estimates that the
same percentage of lakes will maintain a pH below 6.0
in 2010, both with and without the CAAA.  Table E-
18  presents the cumulative costs associated with
liming lakes in the region from 1990 to 2010.
    The  goal of liming in the Adirondacks  is to
mitigate the effects of acidification by the addition of
acid neutralizing products in  selected  waters to
maintain  and/or restore  brook trout populations.
Waters may be considered for liming and re-stocking,
if the pH drops below 6.O.18  The present liming
program is limited in scope due to policy constraints,
environmental regulations, and factors affecting the
economic feasibility. With a few exceptions, lakes are
typically not limed, if any of the following applies: the
water is considered naturally acidic; the flushing rate is
greater than two times a  year; the water will not
    18Personal communications with Larry Straight, Rick Costanza
(NYSDEC, Region 5), and Bill Gordon (NYSDEC, Region 6).
    19NYSDEC, 1990 and personal communications with Larry
Straight, Rick Costanza (both at NYSDEC, Region 5), and Bill
Gordon (NYSDEC, Region 6).
                                               E-42

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    TableE-18
    Cumulative Cost of Ph Stabilization from 1990 to 2010
    (Millions of 1990 Dollars)
Number
of Lakes
Program Remains 32
Constant
Program Grows by 72
Two Lakes per Year
Cost of
Liming
$0.11
$0.16
Cost of Monitoring
$0.07
$0.10
Cost of
Stocking
$0.23
$0.35
Total Cost
$0.40
$0.61
    Under the current plan to lime lakes with a pH
below 6.0, this practice  will continue under both
scenarios  of our analysis - with and without  the
CAAA.  Therefore, liming costs will be incurred
regardless of regulatory efforts.  What we  can  not
determine is the impact that liming may have on our
avoided damages analysis. It is possible that liming
lakes with the greatest recreational potential will offset
the majority  of economic impacts of acidification,
though due to the structure of our economic modeling
approach it is not possible to test this hypothesis at
present.  On the other hand, it is important to note
that liming is feasible only on lakes where access is
very easy, and therefore is limited in the scope of its
impact.  Furthermore, as previously stated, liming is a
stop-gap measure that is  both temporary and not a
complete substitute for restoring natural  ecosystem
conditions.

Caveats and Uncertainties

    The  impacts of acid deposition  in the eastern
United  States include both terrestrial and aquatic
ecosystem damages.  Many of these  effects  are
difficult  to measure,  and most are  impossible to
monetize given current methods. The result is that
our analysis treats a very narrow definition of the
impact of acidification. A far more broad definition
would include costs associated with damaging the
integrity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, many of
which are not quantifiable at this time.  Nevertheless,
our   case   study   of  the  Adirondacks   region
demonstrates that the CAAA is generating substantial
economic benefits  in  just  the narrow  scope  of
recreational  fishing.  Our analysis  states  that by
mitigating the impacts to recreational fisheries from
acidification with the regulations promulgated under
the CAAA, benefits can be accrued in the hundreds of
millions of dollars.

    The  limitations that affect these estimates are
caused by data and computational constraints at each
stage  of the simulation process.  We detail each of
these  limitations below, and indicate the directional
bias these limitations may create in our final benefits
estimates.

Emissions, Deposition, and
Acidification Estimates

    Each  of the  models  that  contribute to  the
acidification  estimates  (i.e.  the  emissions model,
RADM, and MAGIC) has been rigorously tested.  For
example, MAGIC estimates of acidification have been
tested extensively including the following procedures:
individual process formulations in the  model have
been tested against laboratory experiments  with soils;
model hindcasts of historical lake chemistries in the
Adirondacks have been made and compared  with
values inferred from lake  sediment records;  and,
predictions  of  the effects from whole-watershed
manipulations have  been  compared  to  observed
effects.   Nevertheless, it is well documented that
MAGIC   estimates   suffer   from   unquantified
uncertainty, parameterization, and validation problems
(EPA, 1995).

    It is beyond the scope  of this report to  dissect
MAGIC, RADM, or the emissions projections to
identify  factors  that  might  affect  their  results.
Furthermore,  it  is not possible to  quantify  the
cumulative uncertainty that propagates in the linking
                                               E-43

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
of these models to provide acidification estimates. It
is sufficient to note that the acidification estimates
generated by MAGIC should be treated with proper
caution, applying sensitivity analysis to any further
modeling work that uses these data as input. Several
limitations are detailed below.

    •   We consider the potential effects of nitrogen
        saturation on lake acidification by performing
        sensitivity   analysis   of   two   boundary
        conditions, representing a nitrogen-saturated
        watershed and a watershed with complete
        nitrogen uptake. While this approach allows
        us to  estimate the range of effects nitrogen
        saturation may  have  on  acidification  of
        surface waters, it does, however, not account
        for the fact that nitrogen  saturation  is  a
        continuous  process  leading to  increased
        leaching  of nitrogen  compounds  as  a
        watershed progresses through the various
        stages of nitrogen saturation (see for example:
        Stoddard, 1994).

    •   The sample of lakes simulated by MAGIC
        must be extrapolated to the entire population
        of lakes in the region.  In order to simulate
        the complex hydrological,  biological, and
        chemical  dynamics of lakes, intensive  data
        collection is  required, forcing the developers
        of MAGIC to limit the number of simulated
        lakes to only 33.  This sample represents lakes
        with   an   ANC   of  less   than   400
        microequivalents per liter (jjEq/L).  Lakes
        with greater ANC are believed  not to be
        vulnerable   to   acidification  from   acid
        deposition.   The  results   from  MAGIC
        therefore are only applicable to those lakes
        with ANC less than 400 uEq/L, but we have
        no assurance that the sample of 33 lakes is
        representative  of the  distribution  of lake
        ANC levels  below 400  uEq/L in  the total
        population.  In addition, we are forced to use
        pH 7 as a proxy for ANC 400 uEq/L where
        ANC data is not available.  Though pH and
        ANC are  correlated,  there is  significant
        variance in this relationship.
    Ecological Factors

    In the ecological assessment two major limitations
arise. It is  not possible to address  either of these
limitations with sensitivity analyses, so it is important
to keep in mind that results may be biased by these
factors.

    •   Acidic episodes may significantly affect fish
        populations.   They   are,  however,  not
        considered in our analysis  due  to significant
        limitations of our ability to model episodic
        events.

    •   It is well documented that pH is not the only
        factor that determines fish survival, although
        we  do  use  it as  the  single  indicator  for
        ecological health.    This  overlooks  the
        importance of other components of water
        chemistry such  as aluminum  and calcium
        concentrations.  This is necessary because
        there  is insufficient data for our  geographic
        region to develop a sufficiently sophisticated
        ecological-economic   model   that   would
        consider all these variables. Because we test
        several pH thresholds at which anglers might
        perceive  declining  fish populations, this
        simplification of ecosystem dynamics should
        not bias our final economic estimates.

    Economic Estimates

    The economic model  is also  subject to  some
uncertainty that may bias our monetary results.  Again,
it is not possible to address  all  of these  limitations
with sensitivity analyses, so it is important to keep in
mind that results may be  biased by  these factors.

    •   This analysis includes only day trips to sites
        within three hours of the angler's  home. We
        take no account of people  who would come
        and spend several days fishing at a site.  By
        excluding these people we likely understate
        the  costs of increased acidity.
                                                E-44

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        This  model treats every day as a potential
        fishing day, and assumes that each fishing
        occasion  is  independent  of  all  others.
        Neither  assumption  is  realistic.     The
        implication  is  that our  measure  of the
        seasonal costs are likely biased upward.

        Montgomery   and  Needelman  do  not
        compute a confidence interval for the value
        estimates  of lake acidification in their study.
        This  could result in an  overestimate of the
        economic impact of acidification as we can
        not determine  that the  value estimates are
        significantly different from zero.

        Even though this study  offers a much more
        comprehensive  set of alternative fishing sites
        than  most recreational  fishing studies, we
        were  unable  to   account for  rivers  and
        streams, or for lakes and ponds in nearby
        states.  To the extent that these alternative
        sites are substitutes for New York lakes, our
        welfare measures may overstate the costs of
        acidification.

        We assume that anglers  perceive the effects
        of acidification  at a pH threshold lower than
        that at which the random utility model was
        estimated. This is a conservative approach
        which potentially  underestimates the total
        impact of acidification, but overestimates the
        benefits of the CAAA because the difference
        between  the percentage  of lakes  that are
        acidified in our baseline and CAAA scenarios
        is larger at lower threshold pH levels.
Timber Production Impacts
from Tropospheric Ozone

    The purpose of this section is to evaluate the
prospective benefits of improved commercial timber
growth through the reduction of tropospheric ozone
concentrations    attributable    to    the    CAAA.
Tropospheric ozone (O3) is a secondary pollutant that
is  created in the atmosphere  by a photochemical
reaction among nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs).  Documented scientific
evidence suggests that elevated ozone concentrations
in the troposphere disrupt ecosystems by damaging
and slowing the growth of vegetation. We examine
one aspect of these impacts in this analysis, reduced
commercial timber growth, and find the cumulative
impacts from 1990 to 2010 to be $1.87 billion.

Ecological Effects of Ozone

    In terms of forest productivity and ecosystem
diversity, ozone may be the pollutant with the greatest
potential for regional-scale forest impacts (NAPAP,
1991). Studies have demonstrated repeatedly that
ozone concentrations commonly observed in polluted
areas can have substantial impacts on plant function
(see U.S.EPA 1996; De Steiguer 1990; Pye 1988 for
summaries).

    Like  carbon dioxide  (CO2) and  other gaseous
substances,  ozone enters plant tissues primarily
through  apertures in leaves in a process  called
stomatal uptake. To  a lesser extent, ozone can also
diffuse directly through surface  layers to the plant's
interior (Winner and  Atkinson 1986). Once ozone
reaches the interior of plant cells, as a highly reactive
substance, it inhibits or  damages essential cellular
components  and  functions,   including  enzyme
activities, lipids, and cellular membranes, disrupting
the plant's osmotic (i.e., water)  balance and energy
utilization patterns (U.S.EPA 1996; Tingey and Taylor
1982). Damage to plants is commonly manifested as
stress specific symptoms such as chlorotic or necrotic
spots,  increased leaf senescence (accelerated leaf
aging) and reduced photosynthesis.  All these factors
reduce a  plants'  capacity to  form  carbohydrates
(U.S.EPA 1996), which  are the primary  form of
energy storage and transport in plants.  Reduction of
carbohydrate production  and disruption of carbon
allocation patterns in turn can impact the growth rates
of trees, shrubs, herbaceous vegetation and crops.

    In this section we focus on the economic impacts
of reducing commercial timber  growth on the U.S.
economy.  Timber supply is a direct ecological service
flow affected by tropospheric ozone and is therefore
                                               E-45

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
an  ideal  quantitative  example of  the  benefits of
controlling  tropospheric   ozone   in   the   U.S.
Nevertheless, it is important to note that this benefit
represents  only  a  small  portion  of  the  overall
ecological  benefits  of  reducing the  impacts of
tropospheric ozone on ecosystems across the nation.

Modeling Timber Impacts from Ozone

    In this  section we  describe our methods for
quantifying the impacts  of tropospheric ozone on
commercial timber production. The assessment of the
benefits of regulating tropospheric ozone  involves
three major steps:

    •   Estimation of ambient ozone concentrations
       under a regulatory  and a non-regulatory
       scenario;
    •   Estimation  of the growth changes  from
       ozone exposure on commercial forests;
    •   Estimation  of  the  economic  impact of
       changes in commercial timber growth.

    We describe the completion of each of  these
steps, the models we use and their input data. Upon
completion of these steps it is possible to compare the
tropospheric ozone concentrations, ecological effects,
and resultant  economic  impacts over the period
1990-2010 both with and without the CAAA. The net
difference between ecosystem effects and economic
impacts with and without the CAAA represents the
benefits accrued to society from the implementation
of the CAAA.

Step 1: Estimating Ambient Ozone
Concentrations

    In order to  simulate the impacts of ozone on
commercial forest productivity we must  estimate the
ambient ozone concentrations at which forests are
exposed both with and without the regulations of the
CAAA. We accomplish this using historical ambient
ozone data for 1990, and projected ozone data for the
years 2000 and 2010. We use historical hourly ozone
concentrations from EPA's Aerometric Information
Retrieval System (AIRS).20 AIRS is a comprehensive
database that contains  ambient air quality monitor
data for the contiguous U.S.  To estimate future year
concentrations of ozone we use the Urban Airshed
Model (UAM-V), a three-dimensional photochemical
grid model that calculates concentration of pollutants
by simulating the physical and chemical processes in
the atmosphere.

Step 2: Ecological Effects

    We use  the  PnET-II model  to  estimate the
impacts on timber growth of elevated ambient ozone.
The model assesses the average change in productivity
for softwood and hardwood  forests in each of nine
timber growing regions defined by the U.S. Forest
Service (see following section).  The strength of PnET
II is that it provides a means  to use a geographically
transferable  method to  assess  forest stand-level
estimates  of the impacts of ambient ozone on
productivity.    For the  purposes  of a  national
assessment, this provides a significant advantage over
alternative  existing  methods  based on plant-level
models  (e.g.  the tree grow model  (TREGRO)) or
expert opinion  surveys  (e.g.  .  Pye  et  al.  1998;
deSteiguer 1990). The disadvantages of the model
include: the use of photosynthetic rates as an indicator
of ozone impacts rather than a mechanistic measure
of respiratory change;  potential bias created when
scaling net primary productivity  (NPP) changes in
plants to the forest stand level; and the use of an
ozone measure that may be overly sensitive to changes
in ambient concentrations (D4021). We discuss the
major facets of the model's construction below.

    The PnET-II model is  a monthly time  step,
canopy- to stand-level  model of forest carbon and
water  balances   based  on   several  generalized
relationships  (e.g. maximum net photosynthesis as a
function of  foliar nitrogen content).  Carbon and
water  balances   are   linked  in   that  potential
evapotranspiration is determined as a function of leaf
gas exchange rates  and  the atmospheric  vapor
                                                       20 See "www.epa.gov/airs",
                                                       21 The D40 measure represents the cumulative ozone dose
                                                   above a threshold concentration of 40 ppb.
                                               E-46

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
pressure   deficit    (i.e.   humidity).       Actual
evapotranspiration is determined from a comparison
of potential evapotranspiration with available soil
water, which is affected by precipitation, snow melt,
direct evaporation from canopy surfaces, soil water
holding  capacity and a  fast  flow fraction  that
represents macropore flow to below the rooting zone.

    The model simulates a multi-layered forest canopy
that includes gradients in available light, specific leaf
weight and hence, leaf level carbon gain.   Annual,
whole-canopy carbon gain is allocated to leaves, wood
and  roots  after   calculations  for growth  and
maintenance respiration costs.  The model has been
successfully validated for forest production and water
balances at a number of temperate and boreal forest
sites.   For a full description  of model  algorithms,
inputs, assumptions, sensitivity analyses and validation
exercises, see  Aber and Federer (1992), Aber  et
al,.(1995) and Ollmger et al. (1998).

    PnET-II uses an algorithm to allow prediction of
ozone   effects   on  forest growth  that   relates
ozone-induced reductions  in net photosynthesis  to
cumulative ozone  uptake  (Ollinger et al. 1997).
Uptake is determined for ozone concentrations above
40 ppb and is affected by ozone exposure levels and
leaf gas exchange rates.  Application at sites located
across  the northeastern US   show an  interesting
interaction between ozone and  water  availability
whereby the occurrence of drought stress  reduced
ozone damage via reductions in stomatal conductance,
and hence, ozone uptake.

Step 3: Economic Impacts

    To  monetize the ecological effects  of  elevated
ambient ozone on commercial timber production it is
necessary to estimate the market changes that result
from reduced timber growth rates. We use the USDA
Forest Service Timber Assessment Market Model
(TAMM) to analyze the changes in timber inventories
that would result under each of our ozone exposure
scenarios, and the consequent changes in harvests,
prices and regional  demand for timber.  Using  the
inventory and market computations, TAMM estimates
the overall economic welfare  impact of changes in
forest growth rates, in terms of changes in consumer
and producer surplus. Previous peer-reviewed EPA
analyses of changes in timber productivity (U.S.EPA
1997) use this same model.

    There are three stages to the economic estimation.
First  forest  growth rate information generated by
PnET-II is provided to the forest inventory tracking
component of TAMM, called Aggregate Timber Land
Assessment   System   (ATLAS).     Growth  rate
information  is  provided  for  each of  the  forest
production regions defined by TAMM.  (We do not
simulate changes  in  the Canadian  regions for this
analysis.) Second, ATLAS generates an estimate of
forest inventories in each major region, which in turn
serves as input to the market component of TAMM.
In the  third stage,  TAMM  estimates  the  future
harvests and market responses in  each  region.  A
detailed description of TAMM's structure  is found in
Adams andHaynes (1996).

Ecological Results

    P-Net II partitions NPP of forest trees according
to tissue type. Changes in NPP for wood tissue result
in changes in tree growth rates.  On the whole, P-Net
II estimates that commercial timber growth rates are
improved as a result of reduced tropospheric ozone
exposure  attributable   to  the   CAAA.    The
improvement in growth rates by the year 2010 ranged
from negative 0.56 percent to 10.91 percent. Table E-
19 summarizes the estimated changes in growth rates,
by region, for the entire U.S.
                                               E-47

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
TableE-19
Difference in
Region
PN W-E
PN W-W
S. West
N. Rocky
S. Rocky
S. Central
S. East
N. Central
N. East
Commercial Timber Growth
Rates With and Without The CAAA
Difference in 2000
Softwoods
1.68%
1.17%
0.84%
2.67%
4.77%
4.54%
5.40%
1.80%
4.27%
Hardwoods
1.58%
0.42%
1.77%
0.40%
2.25%
4.80%
5.65%
5.74%
6.68%
Difference
Softwoods
2.11%
-0.56%
-0.14%
4.46%
4.14%
7.93%
10.38%
4.36%
9.58%
in 2010
Hardwoods
1.25%
1.13%
1.59%
2.05%
3.88%
8.41%
10.91%
9.22%
11.49%
    It  is important to note that the difference in
growth rates gradually grows from zero percent in
1990 to the values presented for 2000, and then 2010.
In  other words,  the difference  in growth  rate
estimated for 2010 is not experienced over the entire
1990-2010 modeling period.

Economic Impacts

    TAMM  estimates that  there  is a measurable
difference in timber harvests attributable to ozone
exposure under our two scenarios.  At the outset of
our modeling period, early 1990s, virtually no change
is measured in forest  harvest volumes.  This is an
expected result because  increases  in growth rates
should not substantively affect timber volume over so
short a period of time. By the end of our modeling
period, late 2000s, increased growth rates over the
previous decade (s) begin to affect overall forest yields
in the form of harvestable timber. This is observed in
Figure  E-8 as an  increasing annual benefit  estimate
over the modeling period.

    The  shape of the benefits time-series reveals a
production shift in one region of the United  States as
a result of increased timber availability.  This shift
produces a spike in economic surplus for a period of
three  years.   Although  this  change  is  small in
percentage terms  relative to total economic surplus
generated by the timber sector it contributes to a large
portion of the benefits estimate over the 1990-2010
period.

    The cumulative value  of annual benefits is
calculated as the  sum  of the annual differences in
consumer and producer surplus  from commercial
timber harvests under our  CAAA and no CAAA
ozone exposure scenarios from 1990 to 2010.  We
discount annual benefits to 1990 dollars using a five
percent discount rate. The total cumulative benefits
estimate is $1.87 billion.

Caveats and Uncertainties

    In interpreting results from this analysis, several
points  should  be  considered.   First, large-scale
analyses of complex ecosystem processes are typically
conducted  with  simulation models because  it is
impossible  to  conduct  large-scale  manipulation
experiments that  would  provide  similar  predictive
capabilities. This brings with it inherent uncertainties
in that there may be little or no data with which to
validate model predictions.  In the  case of ozone
effects  on  forest  production,  the  absence  of
controlled, whole-forest fumigation studies across the
range of climatic, vegetation and pollution conditions
experienced across  the  U.S. makes  it  presently
impossible to validate all model predictions. In this
                                                E-48

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
            Figure E-8
            Annual Economic Welfare Benefit of Mitigating Ozone Impacts on
            Commercial Timber:  Difference Between the Pre-CAAA and Post-CAAA
            Scenarios
                                                     Year
analysis,  we have  combined  established  empirical
relationships  between ozone exposure  and plant
physiological function in a peer-reviewed model that
is based on sound forest growth processes. As such,
the resulting model predictions should be viewed as a
set  of  refined   hypotheses,  but  nevertheless,
hypotheses that have not been thoroughly tested.

    Second,  while   ozone  has   repeatedly  been
identified as an important environmental stress agent
affecting forest vegetation, it is not the only such
factor  to which forests  are  currently exposed at
regional  to global  scales.  Human activities have
profoundly affected global cycles of carbon, nitrogen
and a number of other elements in ways that may be
at least as important as ozone. Because a number of
changes (e.g. elevated CO2 and increased atmospheric
nitrogen deposition) have significant potential to cause
large-scale fertilization effects, growth predictions that
include ozone effects alone should be  viewed as
incomplete.
Ozone Modeling
       Because it is not possible to model ozone
       levels throughout the  country  during the
       months of October through April during
       future years, it is necessary to employ another
       method to obtain estimates for ozone levels
       during these months. We assume that ozone
       levels during these months for 2000 and 2010
       will be identical to the levels during the same
       months of 1990. Thus, any differences in
       timber production under the two scenarios of
       CAAA  promulgation  and no  CAAA
       promulgation will be driven solely by ozone
       differences during the  warmer part of the
       year that   comprises the  majority of the
       growing season.

       It is important to note that ozone monitoring
       is not complete, with coverage especially low
       in forested regions  of the  United States.
                                               E-49

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
        Only two percent of ozone monitors are in
        forested areas  (U.S.EPA  1996).  We work
        with   the  best  possible  estimates   of
        tropospheric  ozone  concentrations   but
        identify   this  as  a  significant  area   of
        uncertainty in this analysis.
Ecological Modeling
        Preliminary  model  results  revealed  an
        interesting  and  unexpected   interaction
        between ozone, drought stress and carbon
        allocation.  On moist, productive sites, ozone
        resulted primarily in decreased wood growth
        because the simulated trees can afford to lose
        wood  without  reducing more  important
        tissues  which  are  given  higher  allocation
        priority in the model  (leaf  and root).   On
        progressively  colder or  drier sites,  ozone
        exposure causes reductions in all plant tissues
        because plants are  already stressed enough
        that additional reductions in carbon gain must
        come  from all  plant pools.   Complex
        interactions among ozone, drought and this
        carbon   allocation    dynamic   produced
        unexpectedly variable results, which, in some
        cases  caused  an  increase  in growth  in
        response  to ozone.   Although  these  are
        interesting   and   biologically    feasible
        interactions, in the absence of any real data in
        this area, it is  impossible to determine  the
        extent to which they actually occur.
Economic Modeling
        There are two important  caveats to  the
        economic  modeling.   First, we  generalize
        changes in growth rates for entire forest types
        across  potentially  heterogeneous regions.
        TAMM is capable of modeling timber growth
        and harvest with greater precision, breaking
        down  forests  into   many  species  and
        age-classes  and by county.  We do not
        anticipate that increasing the precision  of
        growth rate data on a national scale would
        substantially alter our results.
        The second caveat is economic benefits may
        be  underestimated  by using  so short  a
        modeling period. It is evident from the data
        we present that improved growth takes years
        to  affect actual  harvests.   Therefore,  the
        complete benefits of improved growth during
        1990 to  2010 will not be accrued until after
        2010.  By not  including these years  in  our
        analysis  we can  not  fully  account for  the
        commercial  timber  benefits   of  ozone
        mitigation over the period of our analysis.

Carbon Sequestration Effects

    It is possible to extend the analysis of  timber
growth  rates  to account  for  the  differences  in
temporary and long-term carbon sequestration under
each of our ozone scenarios. This is accomplished by
linking  two  USDA  Forest  Service  Models   to
TAMM/ATLAS to  generate estimates  of carbon
sequestered in standing forest, and carbon sequestered
in commercial forest products. We briefly summarize
those steps here.

    TAMM/ATLAS provides an  estimate  of  the
standing timber  stock  and the commercial  timber
harvests that will occur  under each of our ozone
exposure  scenarios.   Using this  information  we
estimate the respective volumes of carbon sequestered
in each  scenario using  the  forest  carbon  model
(FORCARB)   and   harvested   carbon    model
(HARVCARB).

    FORCARB contains a set of stand level carbon
budgets  that relate the timber growth and yield output
from ATLAS to trends in total ecosystem carbon over
the course of stand development.   These include
carbon sequestered in trees, woody debris, understory
vegetation, and the forest floor. Using these data,
FORCARB estimates the total carbon sequestered in
commercial forests  at  any  point  in time.   This
information provides a useful baseline for the rate of
forest carbon sequestration that can be  expected
under different  ozone  exposure scenarios.  For  a
complete   description   of  FORCARB   and  its
application see Turner et al. (1993)  and Turner et al.
(1995).
                                               E-50

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The age of natural forests and the management
regime of commercial forests largely determine the
fate  of forest carbon.  In natural  forests, carbon
sequestration is temporary, with sequestered carbon
eventually   returning   to  the   nutrient   cycle.
Alternatively, harvested timber is transformed into
commercial  products that alter  the  life  cycle  of
sequestered carbon. Using the HARVCARB model,
we use harvest information from TAMM to track the
lifecycle  of  timber.   The  ultimate  fate of this
sequestered  carbon depends on  the  efficiency  of
timber conversion  (i.e. how much timber becomes a
product),  and   the  durability   of that  product.
HARVCARB   estimates  the   long-term  carbon
sequestration resulting from timber harvests under
each  of our scenarios.   A  full  description  of
HARVCARB is found in Row and Phelps (1990).

    Forest   ecosystems help  mitigate  increasing
anthropogenic   carbon   dioxide   emissions   by
sequestering carbon from the atmosphere, converting
atmospheric  carbon  into biological  structures  or
substances needed in physiological processes. Some air
pollutants, however, may adversely affect the potential
of forests to sequester carbon by slowing down the
rate of biomass accumulation of sensitive forest tree
species. This may affect the global carbon cycle and
may contribute to anthropogenically induced changes
in the earth's climatic conditions.

    Using output  from  TAMM/ATLAS, timber
inventories can be converted into estimates of carbon
sequestered in commercial forests by a forest carbon
model (FORCARB).    FORCARB estimates  the
carbon storage in each of four ecosystem components:
trees; forest understory, forest floor, and soil.  The
model uses forest carbon storage and flux estimates
based on ecological analyses of each  of the forest
ecosystem components. The details of these studies
and their synthesis into the  FORCARB model can be
found in  Birdsey  (1992a, 1992b) and Heath and
Birdsey (1993).  Heath and Birdsey (1995) provide a
technical description of integrated simulations using
TAMM/ATLAS and  FORCARB.  Of the carbon
sequestered in forests, some portion is subsequently
harvested as  timber  and processed into  wood
products, paper, and biomass fuel. We use a harvest
carbon model (HARVCARB)  to estimate the life-cycle
of harvested forest timber and thereby adjust  the
forest carbon sequestration estimates of FORCARB.
HARVCARB  relies  on  a range  of assumptions
approximately  50  percent  of  harvested  wood
ultimately becomes a wood or paper product,  the
remainder  becomes  waste  from  the production
process.  Of the final wood and paper products, a
small percentage become durable  products  or  are
landfilled and decompose at a rate of less than one
percent a year (Row and Phelps, 1990). Wood that is
either  manufactured into a durable product  (e.g.
permanent building construction material, furniture)
or materials that are landfilled (e.g. paper) contribute
to long-term carbon sequestration.  The remainder of
the harvested wood  mass (e.g. biomass fuel, non-
durables  that are not landfilled) is re-released to  the
environment and therefore is not included  in  the
volume of carbon estimated to be sequestered in
forests.

    We find that forest carbon sequestration increases
with improved  air quality under the CAAA.  This
result corresponds with the intuition that forests tend
to grow faster when tropospheric ozone exposure is
reduced.    Carbon flux,  or annual  forest  carbon
sequestration minus forest harvest losses (excluding
long-term carbon sequestration in forest products) is
also greater under  the CAAA than under our No-
CAAA air quality scenario. We summarize our results
in Table E-20.
                                               E-51

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table E-20
 Differences in Carbon Flux (millions of metric tons/year)
                                        1990-1999
                          2000-2010
 Forest Flux
 8
28
 Land Use Change
 Cumulative Fate of
 Removals
> 1
> 1
 TOTAL FLUX
                               29
    Forest carbon flux attributable to the CAAA
represents approximately four to sixteen percent of
anticipated total carbon flux in U.S. forests between
1990-2010.

    In the event of a binding international carbon
mitigation agreement, the implication of this result is
that substantial costs of carbon mitigation may be
avoided by improved forest growth attributable to the
CAAA.  Though it is  not possible to evaluate the
monetary value of the avoided cost at this time due to
uncertainty  regarding  the  actual cost  of carbon
mitigation, it will be  possible to estimate the value
using the data in this analysis  once reliable carbon
mitigation costs become available.

Caveats and Uncertainties

    Additional caveats  and uncertainties associated
with the  estimation of  carbon  sequestration in U.S.
commercial forests include the following:

    •  FORCARB  estimates   are  based  on  a
       synthesis of a variety of empirical studies of
       the four ecosystem components (soil, forest
       floor, understory, and trees). The total error
       of the  composite of  these studies  is not
       treated explicitly as a modeling output.

    •  FORCARB also estimates the carbon storage
       and flux for a variety of forest types based on
       a synthesis of empirical studies. The error
       associated with  extrapolating these  data
       across a variety of forest ecosystem types is
       not explicitly treated.
               HARVCARB utilizes data on the life span of
               durable wood products that is over 50 years
               old,  originally compiled by the Internal
               Revenue Service for purposes of calculating
               depreciation of these products. Though the
               authors of HARVCARB state that this data
               continues   to   be  reliable,   changes   in
               construction, product and their uses most
               likely biases these data. No estimate is made
               of the magnitude or direction of this bias.
       Aesthetic Degradation of Forests

           The purpose of this section is  to evaluate the
       prospective benefits of forest aesthetic improvements
       associated with improved air quality attributable to the
       CAAA.  In order to assess these benefits, we first
       evaluate the known changes in visible injuries  over
       time. Available scientific methods and data on the
       visual appearance of forest stands and their impact on
       perceived forest aesthetics, however,  make it difficult
       to precisely describe changes in forest  aesthetics.
       Nevertheless, it  is possible to  describe  a range of
       visual impacts that may be caused by air pollutants
       and their potential effect on forest aesthetics. Second,
       we assess the economic value associated with  such
       aesthetic changes.  The focus of much of this work
       tends  to be site-specific,  describes the aesthetic
       impacts of a number of causal factors, and utilizes a
       variety of experimental methods making it difficult to
       generalize  results.  We  conclude  that  air  quality
       improvements attributable to the CAAA should result
       in improved forest health, possibly providing aesthetic
                                               E-52

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
value to society in the range of billions of dollars. A
more detailed description of this analysis is found in
Characterising the Forest Aesthetics benefits Attributable to
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments,  1990-2010 (TEC,
1999c).

Forest Aesthetic Effects from Air
Pollutants

    Air pollution can cause a wide variety of visual
injuries to forest  stands, ranging in severity from
subtle injuries (e.g., minor leaf discoloration) to severe
forest decline (e.g., extensive defoliation and death of
trees). The severity of symptoms depends on many
factors including the atmospheric concentration of air
pollutants, the  sensitivity  of tree  species  to air
pollution and the  presence of other environmental
stress factors (Fox  and Mickler,  1995; Eagar  and
Adams, 1992; Olson et al, 1992; Smith, 1990).

    Many   CAAA-regulated   air   pollutants  are
associated with visual symptoms, including, but not
limited to, tropospheric ozone, sulfur dioxide  and
hydrogen fluoride, the three major pollutants known
to have caused significant visual injuries  to forest trees
in the  past  (NAPAP,  1987). Other air  pollutants
known to potentially cause visual injuries to plants are
strong mineral acids, precursors of which are also
regulated by the CAAA  (NAPAP, 1987). In addition,
there are a variety of other air pollutants potentially
affecting the visual appearance of plants,  including
heavy metals such  as lead and mercury  (EPA, 1997d;
Gawel  et al., 1996; Smith,  1990;  NAPAP, 1987);
nitrogen  oxides;  ammonia;  peroxyacetyl nitrate;
chlorides; and ethylene (Smith, 1990; NAPAP, 1987;
Jacobson and  Hill, 1970).  However, very limited
information is presently available on visual damages
caused  by these pollutants.  Tables  E-21 and E-22
summarize the known visual impacts of air pollutants
on forests and their geographic extent.

    As  a consequence of  complex natural  forest
dynamics, lack of extensive long-term monitoring
networks, and  difficulties in establishing cause  and
effect relationships, it is not possible to quantify the
extent of visual forest injuries caused by air pollutants
or  changes  that  may  have  occurred  since  the
implementation  of the  CAAA.     In  addition,
mechanisms that induce  threats to forests may operate
on such a long-term scale that benefits in the visual
appearance of forests may not be exhibited during the
period of our analysis.
                                                E-53

-------
                                                                                               The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-21
Typical Impacts of Specific Pollutants on the Visual Quality of Forests
                           Geographic Extent
                          Direct/Indirect Injuries
                                                Major Types of Visual Injuries
Ozone
Area or regional effects
  Direct injuries         Foliar injuries (e.g., pigmented stipple), increased needle/leaf abscission, premature
                       senescence of leaves. Pattern, size, location, and shape of foliar injuries to indicator
 	species can be specific for ozone.	
                                                       Indirect Injuries         Increased susceptibility to visual injuries that may result from other adverse
                                                                              environmental factors, such as insect attacks. For example, increased needle/leaf
                                                      	abscission, elevated mortality rates, and/or changes in species composition.	
Acidic Deposition
Area or regional effects
 Indirect Injuries        Increased susceptibility to visual injuries that may result from other adverse
                       environmental factors, such as climatic factors. For example, increased needle/leaf
                       abscission, elevated mortality rates, and/or changes in species composition.

                       Acidic deposition can also cause direct foliar injuries. Acids are, however, more likely
                       to indirectly affect the visual appearance of forest trees, unless exposure levels are
	very high.	
Sulfur Dioxide
 Point source pollution
  Direct Injuries         Foliar injuries including leaf/needle discoloration and necrosis. Pattern, size, location,
                       and shape of foliar injuries to indicator species can be specific for sulfur dioxide. At
                       high concentrations, elevated mortality rates of sensitive species and changes in
                       species composition may occur.

                       Sulfur dioxide may also cause indirect injuries. Indirect injuries, however, are not well
                       documented.
Hydrogen Fluoride
 Point source pollution
  Direct Injuries         Foliar injuries including leaf/needle discoloration and necrosis. Pattern, size, location,
                       and shape of foliar injuries to indicator species can be specific for sulfur dioxide. At
                       high concentrations, elevated mortality rates of sensitive species and changes in
                       species composition may occur.

                       Hydrogen fluoride may also cause indirect injuries. Indirect injuries, however, are not
                       well documented.
                                                                        E-54

-------
                                                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-22
Forests Affected by Regional Pollution
Affected Forest Type
/ Species
Mixed Conifer Forest /
Ponderosa and Jeffrey
Pines

Region
San Bernardino
Mountains,
California
Sierra Nevada,
California
Major Air
Pollutants
Ozone and nitrogen
containing
substances
Ozone
Documented Visual
Injuries
Foliar injuries include
chlorotic mottle, tip
necrosis, premature
senescence of
needles, and
increased needle
abscission. Elevated
mortality rates and
changes in species
composition have
occurred.
Foliar injuries include
chlorotic mottle, tip
necrosis, premature
senescence of
needles, and
increased needle
abscission.
Suspected Mechanisms of Injury
Direct ozone-induced foliar injuries. Heavy bark
beetle attacks facilitated by drought, ozone, and
nitrogen containing air pollutants.
Ponderosa and Jeffrey pine have shown air
pollution-related symptoms of decline probably
since the mid 1950s.
Direct ozone-induced foliar injuries.
The Sierra Nevada contains the largest forest area
in the world with documented damage from a non-
point source pollutant but ozone exposure and
injuries are not as severe as in the San Bernardino
Mountains. Visible ozone-induced foliar injuries
Sources
EPA1996a; Miller,
1992; Stolteetal.,
1992; NAPAP,
1991; Miller and
McBride, 1998
EPA, 1996a;
Peterson and
Arbaugh, 1992;
NAPAP, 1991;
Miller and Millecan,
1971
                                                                               were first documented in the early 1970s.
                                                                 E-55

-------
                                                                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Affected Forest Type
/ Species
Spruce-Fir Forest/
Red Spruce

Region
High elevation
areas in the
northern
Appalachians.
High elevation
areas in the
southern
Appalachians.
Major Air
Pollutants
Acidic deposition
(esp. acidic cloud
water), and ozone
Acidic deposition
(esp. acidic cloud
water) and ozone
Documented Visual
Injuries
Foliar dieback, bud
injury, foliar loss,
Elevated mortality
rates.
Crown thinning and
pockets of high red
spruce mortality have
been detected on a
few mountain sites.
Ozone-induced foliar
injury.
Suspected Mechanisms of Injury
Acidic deposition increases the susceptibility of red
spruce to winter injury (freezing).
A dramatic increase in the frequency of winter injury
in red spruce stands occurred in the late 1950s and
1 960s, coincident with a significant increase in the
emissions of precursors of acidic deposition.
Acidic deposition leads to nutrient imbalances
through accelerated foliar leaching and soil
acidification. Soil acidification is characterized by a
loss of soil nutrient cations and occurrence of toxic
aluminum levels. Also: direct foliar injuries caused
by ozone.
Sources
EPA, 1995a;
Johnson et al.,
1992; DeHayes,
1992;
NAPAP, 1991
EPA, 1995a;
Johnson et al.,
1992; Johnson and
Fernandez, 1992;
Cook and Zedaker,
1992; NAPAP,
1991
Eastern Hardwood
Forest / Sugar Maple
Northeastern US
and Canada
Acidic deposition
and ozone
Crown thinning,
branch dieback,
elevated mortality
rates
Acidic deposition leads to nutrient imbalances
through accelerated foliar leaching and soil
acidification. Soil acidification is characterized by a
loss of soil nutrient cations and occurrence of toxic
aluminum levels.
During 1980s sugar maple declined in many stands
in the northeastern US and Canada. Involvement of
acidic deposition in sugar maple decline has not
been demonstrated but cannot be ruled out.
USFS, 1995b;
EPA, 1995a;
NAPAP, 1991
                                                                     E-56

-------
Figure E-9
U.S. Major Forest Types Affected by Air Pollution-Induced Visual Injuries
                                                                                                         White Mountains (NH)

                                                                                                     Green Mountains (VT)
                                                                                                      Adirondacks (NY)
     Sierra
     Navada
      (CA)
     San Bernadino
     Mountains (CA)
 Mt. Rogers (VA)
 i
 Mt. Mitchell (NC)
Great Smoky
Mountains
              Eastern Spruce/Fir Forest
            J  Eastern Hardwood Forest
             Sierra and Los Angeles Basin Ecosystem
        Note: Only areas affected by non-point pollution are shown. Scientific certainty varies with location.  Direct ozone-induced
              injuries also occur in several other locations not indicated (e.g., Southern Forests, Berraug et al, 1995).
              Sources: NAPAP, 1991 and White and Cogbill, 1992.
                                                                  E-57

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Despite limitations in detecting trends in forest
health and associated causal agents, it is possible to
identify areas in the US that contain forests known or
suspected to experience visual   injuries.   Forests
affected by high concentrations of air pollutants in the
vicinity of point sources may provide useful  case
studies because cause and effect relationships may be
easier to  establish and visual injuries  can be severe
enough  to  cause  significant aesthetic impacts.  In
particular, point  sources  can lead to well-defined
concentration gradients in the prevailing downwind
direction causing corresponding gradients  of visual
injuries (Smith,  1990; NAPAP, 1987).

    In   contrast,   concentrations  of   regionally
distributed  air  pollutants (e. g.,  ozone  and acidic
deposition),  can  be  fairly  uniform  over  large
geographic  areas.  Visual  symptoms  can be more
intense in the vicinity of urban areas or industrial  sites
but may  not be limited to these regions  (NAPAP,
1987) making it more difficult to establish cause-and
effect relationships. Despite difficulties in establishing
cause-and-effect relationships,  all identified forest
ecosystems   likely   to   have    experienced    air
pollution-induced visual injuries in recent history are
affected by regionally distributed air pollutants.

Economic Value of Changes
in Forest Aesthetics

    Though studies that attempt to estimate the value
of changing aesthetics are limited in  number and
scope, they do suggest  that people  value forest
aesthetics and change outdoor recreational behavior
according to the quality of forest health in recreational
areas. The shear volume of forest-based recreation in
the United States suggests that improvements in forest
aesthetics could result in substantial benefits.  For
example,  the United States Forest Service reports that
recreation  visitor  days  to  national forests  have
increased over the last ten years from 250 million to
over 350 million. With the  potential magnitude  of
aggregated individual preferences in mind, we review
several studies  that relate individual preference for
forests with  respect to overall appearance and attempt
to extend these analyses to those regions where forests
are most  affected by air pollution.
    Peterson  et  al.  (1987)  used  the  contingent
valuation  (CV)  method  and a  hedonic property
valuation  model to estimate willingness to pay to
avoid  ozone-induced  forest  damage in the  Los
Angeles  area.   This contingent  valuation survey
involved two samples: one made up of recreationalists
in the greater Los Angeles area, and the second made
up  of individuals who  owned property within the
boundaries  of the  San  Bernardino  and  Angeles
National Forests.  Each group was shown a set of
photographs depicting varying degrees of vegetative
damage. Mean WTP by recreationalists and residents
were  found to  be approximately $43 and $137 per
household per year, respectively. The hedonic analysis
revealed a significant and positive WTP to avoid
homes located in forested areas  exhibiting ozone
damage.   Using these two methods, total damages
resulting from  the current levels of ozone induced
forest injury were estimated to be between $31 and
$161  million per year. The study authors rejected a
significant percentage of responses as "protest" or
"inconsistent" bids (40 percent), which would indicate
that many respondents may not have understood or
accepted  the  scenario  and the  commodity being
valued.  Apart from  this, the  study  also does not
address a series of concerns related to the application
of CV to assess nonuse values.  First, the survey
instrument  did  not include reminders  of budget
constraints or substitute goods and services.  Second,
the survey did not clearly define the commodity.  The
WTP scenario  did  not  clearly indicate how forest
damages were to be mitigated.

    Walsh et al. (1990)  interviewed 200 individuals
representing the general population of Colorado and
were  shown three color  photographs representing
three levels  of forest quality.  The mid-level quality
was said to  represent the present state of the forest
(100 to 125 live trees measuring more than six inches
in  diameter at  breast  height  (dbh)  per acre).
Respondents were asked their WTP to prevent the
lowest state (zero to 50 live trees measuring more than
six inches dbh per acre)  and attain the highest state
(125 to 175 trees  per acre in this size  class).  All
respondents were  informed  beforehand that the
damage being valued was due  to pine  beetle  and
spruce  budworm  infestations.   Mean  WTP  per
respondent was estimated to be $47. An evaluation of
the Walsh et al (1990) study reveals  several  notable
                                                E-58

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
strengths. The survey included reminders of budget
constraints, and the authors ensured that respondents
were familiar with the commodity being valued and
were accustomed to paying for access to recreation
sites with good forest quality.  Only five percent of the
responses were rejected as "protest" or "large" bids.
Weaknesses of the study include a small sample size
(198), inconsistency between results  solicited using
different question formats (iterative bidding vs. direct
question), and potential biases attributable to framing
the question as  one of the most  important  issues
affecting Colorado residents and the possibility of a
"warm glow" affect concerning payment for a social
cause.

    Holmes  et  al  (1992)  used a CV  survey to
determine  WTP  to  protect threatened spruce-fir
forests in Southern Appalachia from insect and air
pollution damage. In this study, residents within 500
miles  of Asheville,  NC were  surveyed  about their
willingness to pay to eliminate damages to regional
spruce-fir forests.  The authors  used  two survey
formats, discrete choice and payment cards.  The
mean willingness to pay for protecting the spruce-fir
forests was $20.86 using the payment card method,
and $99.57 using the discrete choice method. The
study  ensured  that   the  sample  had  adequate
knowledge of the commodity being valued, and the
overall sample size was large.  Unfortunately, several
weaknesses arise from the fact that the  sample was
divided into  two groups in order to test different
survey formats.  The study used a small sample size
for each  of  the tested methods  (232 and 236,
respectively). The number of protest bids was small
(7 to  10 percent), indicating that  the  respondents
understood the function of the survey, but the final
results generated by the two different methods were
substantially different.  This study was  later revised in
Holmes and  Kramer (1996), where the results were
published as  mean willingness to pay of $36.22 for
forest users, and $10.37 for nonusers.

Extending Economic Estimates to a
Broader Area

    These studies provide an incomplete picture of
the total benefits that could be obtained by eliminating
visual damages to forests associated with air pollution
in the  country.   As an illustrative calculation, we
    extend the range of valuation estimates provided in
    Peterson (1987); Walsh et al. (1990); and Holmes and
    Kramer  (1996) to the  major regions of affected
    landscape in the United States. We do not estimate
    aesthetic value as a function of forest damage from
    varying levels of air pollution, but rather provide an
    estimate of the values placed on avoiding damages
    characteristically experienced during the 1980s in the
    United States.

        In Table E-23 we present the results from the
    three studies.  We base our calculations of benefits on
    the value per household of avoiding forest damages
    multiplied by the number of households in the study
    region.

        In Table  E-24 we present  the results of  an
    illustrative calculation that extends  the "market" for
    this commodity to a broader group of households.
    The annual value of avoiding the forest damages is the
    product of the range of household values in Table E-
    23 and the total number of households in the states
    most affected by air pollution.
E-59

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-23
Summary of Monetized Estimates of the Annual Value of Forest Quality Changes

Study
Peterson et

Aesthetic
Change Valued
Ozone damage to
Value of
Change per
Household
(Current
Dollars)
$6.31-$32.70N

Value of
Change per
Household
(1990 Dollars)1
$7.26-$37.62

Total Annual Value of
Change for Region
(Current Dollars)
$27-$140 million
Total Annual
Value of
Change for
Region (1990
Dollars)1
$31-$161million
 al. (1987)    San Bernardino
             and Angeles
             National Forests
 Walsh et al.  Visual damage to
 (1990)       Colorado's Front
             Range
$47
$61.68
$55.7 million
$73.09 million
 Holmes and  Visual damage to        $10.81           $10.37
 Kramer      spruce-fir forests       nonusers        nonusers
 (1996)       in southern
             Appalachia          $36.22 users      $34.76 users
                                    NA
                                        NA
 Note:    i.) Values adjusted using all item Consumer Price Index, Economic Report of the President, 1998. Years for current dollar
         estimates: Peterson et al, 1987; Walsh et al, 1983; Holmes et al, 1991.
         ii) Based on 4.3 million households in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Bernardino counties.
	iii) Assumes 2.5 million households in North Carolina and 1.8 million in Tennessee.	

 Table E-24
 Illustrative Value of Avoiding Forest Damage in the United States
 (1990 Dollars)
Affected States
System Included
Sierra Nevada CA
and Los
Angeles Basin
Eastern Spruce ME, VT, NH,
Fir and MA, NY, PA,
Selected WV, TN,
Eastern KY, NC, VA
Hardwood
Notes: i.) Household data from 1990
discount rate.
Value per
Household
$7.26-$37.62
$7.26-$37.62
Census; ii) Total Value
Estimated Total
Households1 Annual Value"
10. 4 million $75.5 million -$391.2
million
23.2 million $168 million - $872.8
million
Cumulative
Value
(1 990-201 Of1
$1.02 billion -
$5.27 billion
$2.27 billion -
$11. 75 billion
= Households x Value per Household; iii)Assumes a 5 percent real
    The results of existing work in this area suggest
 that improvements in air pollution controls result in
 positive changes  in  the aesthetic quality  of forest
 stands. Pollutant control provisions of the 1970 CAA
 and the 1977 CAAA, for example, may have resulted
 in  a  significant decrease or elimination of forests
 visually affected in the vicinity of emission sources.
 Further  reductions  in  air   pollution  emissions
 mandated by  the 1990 CAAA  should  result in
 additional  improvements  in   forest  health  and
                associated economic benefits derived from improved
                forest aesthetics.

                    Our illustrative calculation of the regional effects
                of improving the aesthetic quality of forest stands
                (Table E-24) likely overstates the extent of market for
                this commodity. Estimates presented in Table E-23,
                however, based on a more conservative application of
                the extent of market for this commodity, provide a
                better basis to estimating the order of magnitude of
                                                 E-60

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
this category of effects of air pollution on ecosystem
health. Considering only the Peterson et al. and Walsh
et al. studies, conducted in two areas that have been
shown in previous assessments  to  be affected by
accumulated air pollution damages, estimates of the
total annual value of improvements  in the aesthetic
quality of forests are  in the $100 million to $250
million range.

Caveats and  Uncertainties

    To quantitatively assess the effects of air pollution
emission  reductions  on  forest  aesthetic  benefits,
considerable amounts   of  high-quality  data  are
required.  These  data  include  extensive long-term
monitoring  networks  producing  consistent  and
comparable  information over time frames as long as
several decades.  In  addition, injuries  captured by
monitoring networks have to be linked to the causal
agent(s),  a task that is currently associated with high
factors of uncertainty. Only  rarely, if ever,  is air
pollution the only factor negatively  affecting forest
health. Typically,  a variety of adverse environmental
factors   act  synergistically   to  induce  injuries,
considerably limiting our ability to detect air pollution
as  one  of the  factors causing  injury  and  to
quantitatively assess the amount of injuries attributable
to air pollutants.

    There are caveats to the use of benefits transfer in
this  context.  The application of this method is
intended  to provide an order of magnitude estimate of
the benefits associated with avoided aesthetic damages
to forests in the  United  States.  More  sophisticated
estimation methods will be required if a truly accurate
estimate  of value, especially  the marginal  value  of
incremental changes, is to be derived. Following is a
summary of the caveats to using this approach.

    •  The impacts that we value are not equivalent
       to those avoided through the implementation
       of the CAAA, they are historical effects.  A
       comprehensive   assessment   of  forest
       aesthetics-related benefits  associated with
       improvements in air quality is limited by
       significant factors of uncertainty occurring in
       both the  natural science component of the
       assessment  and the  economic  analysis.
       Factors  of uncertainty  in natural sciences
        include difficulties detecting trends in forest
        health in general, attributing changes in forest
        health to specific factors such as air pollution,
        and   establishing   valid   dose-response
        relationships  of  forest  exposure  to  air
        pollutants and resulting visual injuries.

        The  types of aesthetic deterioration in  the
        original studies  are not necessarily the same
        as those experienced in other regions. The
        nature of forest aesthetic deterioration will
        vary  (e.g. the yellowing of conifer needles vs.
        gypsy moth defoliation of hardwoods) as will
        the intensity.

        We do not fully assess the range of potential
        substitutes for the  aesthetic health of regional
        forests to each household.   Having ready
        substitutes could  lower the value a specific
        household might place on aesthetic quality of
        regional forests.

        The distinction  between marginal values  for
        forest health and  average value is not made.
        As marginal  values  for  changes in forest
        health diverge  from the assumed  average
        value in this analysis, the estimates develop
        bias.

        We   assume  that differences  in  average
        regional income do not affect estimates.
Toxification of Freshwater
Fisheries

    The  purpose of this section is to assess, from
1990 through 2010, the ecological benefits likely to
accrue as  a consequence  of  reductions  in  the
emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), as
mandated by the CAAA. Title III of the CAAA lists
189 chemicals considered to be HAPs.  Ideally, a
comprehensive economic analysis of the ecological
benefits  of CAAA-mandated reductions in  HAP
emissions would include analyses for all service flows
potentially  affected  by  the  emissions  of HAPs.
However, a broad quantitative analysis of all these
benefits  is  not yet scientifically possible.  What is
                                                E-61

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
possible is a qualitative analysis of the likely benefits of
reduced HAP emissions for recreational fishing. A
more detailed description of this analysis is found in
Economic Benefits  of Decreased Air Toxics  Deposition
Attributable to the  1990 Clean Air Act Amendments,
1990-2010 (lEc 1998d).

Impacts of Toxic Air Emissions

    Five HAPs, mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins,
and DDT were responsible for nearly 95 percent of
the fishing advisories extant in 1995  (EPA 1996b).
The   use  of  three  of these  compounds  (PCBs,
chlordane, and DDT) was effectively illegal  in the
United States  prior to 1990 (EPA 1992a), and there
are  currently  no  plans  for  additional  CAAA
regulations of these  compounds (Federal  Register
Unified Agenda 1998). The remaining two HAPs,
mercury and dioxins,  are therefore the focus of this
analysis.

    Because   the  ecosystem  responses  to  toxic
contamination are poorly understood, and observable
service flow impacts  are difficult to model, we use
fishing advisories as a measure of the extent of toxic
contamination. In addition, we can characterize the
economic impact of HAPs emissions based on altered
fishing behavior caused by toxic contamination of
freshwater fisheries.  It is important to note  that
fishing   advisories   alone  do  not  provide  a
comprehensive   view   of   impacts   of  toxic
contamination on ecosystems, and  more expansive
measures should be examined in future research.

    Fishing advisories are issued by state and tribal
agencies when the levels of toxins in the tissue of fish
exceed limits  established by both state  and federal
authorities.  Fishing advisories generally take one of
four forms:

    •   Advisory for any consumption by the general
        population;
    •   Advisory  for pregnant  women,  nursing
        mothers, and children;
    •   Advisory  for limitation  on  consumption
        based on size of fish and  frequency of
        consumption; and
    •   Advisory for  limitation on consumption for
        specific sub-populations.
    According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(1998), the total number of advisories in the U.S. in
1997 was 2,299, increasing five percent from 1996.
The  number  of  water  bodies  under   advisory
represents 16.5 percent of the nation's total lake acres
and 8.2 percent of total river miles. In addition, 100
percent  of  the  Great Lakes  waters and  their
connecting waters and a large portion of the nation's
coastal waters are  also  under advisory. The total
number of advisories in the U.S. has steadily increased
for mercury and dioxin.

    Mercury is  responsible for  approximately  75
percent of all fish consumption advisories in effect in
1995 (EPA 1996b). Mercury from point sources, as
opposed  to mercury deposited  from the atmosphere,
may be responsible for many of these advisories. The
lakes and streams with advisories are concentrated in
the northern portions of Minnesota and Wisconsin, as
well as in Florida, Missouri, Indiana, Ohio, North
Carolina and New England  (EPA 1997a, 1997d).
Judging by fish consumption advisories, fish mercury
levels do not appear to  be a widespread problem in
the remainder of the United States, and EPA (1997d)
found that the typical consumer eating purchased fish
is   not  at  risk   of  methylmercury  poisoning.
Approximately three  percent  of fish consumption
advisories in effect in 1995 were due to the presence
of dioxins (EPA 1996b), and in  1996, 18 states had
one or more water bodies under advisement because
of dioxin levels in fish (EPA 1997a). Dioxins from
point sources may be responsible for many of these
advisories.

    Several limitations to the fish advisory data exist.
First, many lakes, rivers and streams have not been
analyzed  for toxicity, and it is possible that advisories
eventually will be issued for these water bodies. Table
E-25 summarizes the sampling intensity for toxicity
through  1997.  Second, current levels of toxics in
watersheds may result in future  toxification of healthy
water bodies, even in the absence of additional future
HAP deposition. Therefore, the current set of fish
advisories   underestimates    the   magnitude   of
toxification  from air deposition to date. Third, the
protocol  for fishing advisory issuance may vary from
                                                E-62

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
   Table E-25
   Summary of National Data on Toxicity Sampling for Fishing Advisories
       Water Body
Percentage of Water
Bodies Assessed for
   Contaminants
Percentage of Assessed Water Bodies
           Under Advisory
Lakes
(acres)
11.36
78.61
   Rivers and Streams
   (miles)
                2.41
                               29.58
   Source: EPA1997a
state to state, removing any consistent basis on which
to judge the levels and causes of fisheries' toxicity for
each state.

Illustration of Economic Cost to Anglers

    The economic welfare implication of water quality
changes to recreational fishing are well studied. Most
literature in this field focuses on  the  impacts  of
deteriorating water quality in a specific fishery. More
recently, economic models are appearing that address
the  social welfare cost of water quality deterioration in
multiple fisheries within a region.  Such an approach
accounts for choices made by fishermen concerning
travel to, and the attributes of (e.g., fish  advisories),
multiple  fisheries.  Random  utility models  (RUM)
                        provide the computational method for these regional
                        analyses.

                           Montgomery and Needelman (1997) were the first
                        to use direct water quality measures in conjunction
                        with  a RUM approach  to  analyze the economic
                        impacts of toxification on regional anglers. Using data
                        from the New York Department of Environmental
                        Conservation   (NYDEC),    Montgomery    and
                        Needelman identify  23 water bodies  with toxicity
                        advisories among 2,561 lakes and ponds in the state.
                        Using water quality data and geographic location of
                        both water bodies and anglers, the authors estimate
                        the economic cost of the toxification within the state.
                        The results are presented in Table E-26.
    Table E-26
    Estimates of the Welfare Cost of Toxification in New York State
    (1990 Dollars)
Compensating
Level of Toxicity Variation per Trip
Toxic Contamination $1.23
Site Closed Due to Toxic $1 .69
Contamination
Compensating Compensating
Variation per Capita Variation per Capita
per Day per Season
$0.37 $51.51
$0.50 $70.92
Source: Montgomery and Needelman 1997
                                              E-63

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    The results  from Montgomery and Needelman
indicate  that the economic welfare implication of
existing toxic contamination is substantial for New
York State, as described below:

    $0.37/person/day x  17,990,000 people x  140
    fishing days/season =  $931,882,000/season.

In perpetuity,22  the value of eliminating toxicity in
New York State, using a five percent discount rate, is
calculated to be $18,637,640,000.

    Clearly, the  results using these assumptions are
very large. Applications of this model for purposes of
estimating the effects of air  toxics deposition on
recreational fishing requires further investigation of
the assumptions in this model.

    Jakus et  al.  (1997) conducted a similar  RUM
analysis of toxification  of reservoirs in Tennessee.
Data from the Tennessee Valley Authority showed
fishing advisories for two of 14 reservoirs in central
Tennessee, and  six of 14  reservoirs in the eastern
portion of the state. Again, using water quality data
and the geographic locations of both water bodies and
anglers, Jakus et al.  (1997) estimated the economic
impact of the fish consumption advisories.  Anglers
living in central Tennessee suffered a $17.92 per trip
per season loss  from the advisories, and anglers in
eastern Tennessee  suffered  a $38.27 loss  (1990
dollars). Therefore, considering an angler population
of 146,450 individuals, the impact of this  level of
toxification  into perpetuity,  using a  five  percent
discount rate, is approximately $65.96 million.

    These results indicate that  fish advisories impose
substantial economic cost on  anglers in  the United
States.  Measuring the marginal changes in toxification
that would occur in the absence of the CAAA is not
possible, but it  is plausible to state that  continued
HAP emissions impose a cost on society if they result
    22 A perpetuity is a stream of benefits, accrued over an infinite
time horizon. A simplified formula for calculating a perpetuity of
equal benefits accrued annually, in which the first payment is
received at the end of year one, the second payment is received at
the end of year two, etc., is:  (Nominal Value  of Benefit) /
(Discount Rate)
in the issuance  of additional fish advisories.  Any
efforts to minimize these emissions, including the
CAAA, may generate corresponding benefits.

    If air deposition of toxics results in statewide
fishing advisories (e.g., Connecticut, Washington D.C.,
Illinois,  Maine,  Massachusetts,   Missouri,  New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
Ohio, Vermont), substitution away from recreational
fishing for other activities may begin to occur.  No
models are available to estimate the economic impact
of a large-scale  substitution away  from recreational
fishing.  The  RUM approach does not adequately
capture the magnitude  of ubiquitous  toxification
because  the  models measure only the  choice to
participate in  the  activity  and  not the  welfare
implications of participation  in alternative activities,
nor do they account for the  industries that provide
supplies  and  services  to anglers  in  the   region.
However, the economic cost of statewide advisories
could be substantial.

    Although Montgomery and Needelman (1997)
and Jakus et al. (1997) examined only two areas of the
country - New York State and part of Tennessee -
their work demonstrates  that HAP emissions have a
measurable economic cost when the consequence of
these emissions  is  the issuance of fish advisories for
recreational fisheries.  While it is not possible to
measure  the differences in HAP deposition and the
marginal ecological impacts that will result from the
CAAA, it is clear that continued emissions of HAPs
will result in further toxification of aquatic resources,
and  reductions  in  HAP  emissions may  provide
economic benefits.

    The toxification of freshwater ecosystems in the
United States by mercury and dioxins is  a problem,
and  emissions  of  mercury  and  dioxins   to  the
atmosphere contribute significantly to the problem.
Quantifying the magnitude of ecosystem effects of air
toxics deposition is not yet possible, but it is clear that
the deposition of air toxics to  some ecosystems, such
as freshwater recreational fisheries, can result in
measurable economic costs.
                                                 E-64

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Caveats and Uncertainties

    Because of limitations in the currently available
data and  models,  a  comprehensive quantitative
analysis of the ecological benefits of reduced mercury
and dioxin emissions  for recreational fishing is not
possible. However, such an analysis may be possible
in the foreseeable future.

    •    The potential  for mercury and dioxins to
        persist for long  periods  of time  in the
        environment is a confounding factor in this
        analysis. Because these pollutants can persist
        in  aquatic  ecosystems for  decades,  even
        though  the   CAAA may   reduce  their
        emissions, it is possible that the  status of
        toxified ecosystems may not be significantly
        affected during the time frame of the analysis
        (i.e., through 2010).

    •    In  addition,  the  persistent  nature  of
        toxification presents challenges with  respect
        to how benefits are discounted over time. In
        those cases where recovery from toxification
        will take  a number  of years, the benefits
        accrued by society will be diminished in terms
        of their present value. In other words, if all
        air emissions ceased, many fish consumption
        advisories would remain  in place until the
        fisheries recovered.  If this recovery period
        were  to  extend  for  several decades, the
        present value of economic benefits from the
        eventual retraction of advisories could be
        reduced dramatically.   In  a cost-benefit
        decision analysis,  these benefits might not
        justify the costs of HAP regulations.  In this
        case,   an     inter-generational   benefits
        assessment, where discounting is not applied,
        would be required.

    •    The global nature of mercury pollution is
        another confounding factor   Because  a
        significant  portion  of mercury  deposited
        within the U.S. comes from the global pool,
        a decrease in U.S. emissions may be offset by
        increases in emissions in other countries. If
        this should  occur, it might be difficult to
        detect or predict actual changes in the toxicity
        of   U.S.   aquatic   ecosystems,  despite
        reductions in U.S. emissions.

        To  quantitatively assess   the  effects  of
        mercury and dioxin emission reductions on
        recreational fishing, more and better data and
        models are required.   The most pressing
        research needs in this area are a model that
        can predict the national fate and transport of
        dioxin, and models that can, on a national
        scale, convert mercury and dioxin deposition
        quantities to amounts  of the  contaminants in
        fish.   Data to verify these models  is also
        highly desirable.

        Even if it were currently possible to perform
        the analysis discussed here, it would likely
        capture only  a  fraction of all  the benefits
        attributable   to   CAAA-mandated   HAP
        emissions reductions.  The  analysis focused
        entirely on two HAPs and on one endpoint.
        Neither the potential benefits of reductions
        in  the emissions of other HAPs nor other
        endpoints were considered.
Conclusions and Implications

    Our analysis has identified four major categories
of air pollutants that affect ecological structure and
function: sulfur compounds, nitrogen compounds,
tropospheric ozone, and hazardous air pollutants.
Each of these pollutants is scientifically documented
as a cause of ecosystem degradation due to acute and
chronic exposure.  Sulfur and nitrogen compounds
contribute  to episodic and chronic acidification  of
aquatic and terrestrial  ecosystems, while the chronic
deposition  of nitrogen compounds alone may cause
harmful eutrophication to  terrestrial  and aquatic
ecosystems. Tropospheric ozone disrupts the normal
functioning of plants, leading to acute, visible damages
to terrestrial ecosystems, and chronic exposure at
levels that do not produce acute damages may result
in reduced growth rates and eventually alter ecosystem
nutrient cycling.   Finally, hazardous  air  pollutants
deposited across the landscape are accumulating in
aquatic  organisms  and subsequently entering both
                                                E-65

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
aquatic  and  terrestrial foodchains.   Though  the
ecological impacts are not fully understood, the long-
term effects of introducing hazardous air pollutants to
ecosystems may be slow to manifest and irreversible
in nature.

    Ecological effects can occur at different levels of
biological organization. Most effects  that are currently
quantifiable are understood  at  the  individual  or
population level, perhaps because of the feasiblity of
conducting controlled experiments at this level. For
example, research on the effects of ozone  on timber
began with experimental research on the response of
seedlings and leaves of mature trees to elevated levels
of ozone. Only recently have modeling efforts begun
to consider interactions of factors at the community
level, taking into account the dynamics of competitive
relationships   among  tree   and  plant   species.
Experimental research continues to  progress toward
a better understanding of the full range of ecological
impacts  including  effects  at  the ecosystem  level.
Continued consideration of these higher-order effects
of pollutants on ecological systems is necessary for a
more complete understanding of  the benefits  of
pollution control.

    Because  the chronic  ecological effects  of air
pollutants  may  be poorly understood, difficult  to
observe, or difficult to discern from other influences
on dynamic ecosystems, our analysis  focuses on acute
or readily observable impacts.  Disruptions that may
seem inconsequential in the short-term,  however, can
have hidden, long-term effects through a series  of
interrelationships that can be difficult or impossible to
observe, quantify,  and model. This factor suggests
that many  of our qualitative and quantitative results
may underestimate the overall, long-term  effects  of
pollutants on ecological systems and resources.

Summary of Quantitative  Results

    Although   the  effects  of  air pollutants  on
ecological systems are likely to be widespread, many
effects may be poorly understood and lack quantitative
effects characterization methods and supporting data.
In addition, many of our quantitative results reflect an
incomplete geographic scope of analysis; for example,
we generated monetized acidification results only for
the  Adirondacks region of New  York State.  As  a
result, quantitative  results we  generate  for the
purposes of estimating the benefits of the CAAA
reflect only a small portion of the overall impacts of
air pollution on ecological systems. Our quantitative
overview of effects  nevertheless suggests  that the
overall impacts of air pollution are far greater than
those quantified.
                                                E-66

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table E-27
Summary of Monetized Ecological Benefits (millions 1990$)
Geographic Range of Primary
Scale of Annual Impact Central
Description Air Economic Estimates in Estimate
of Effect Pollutant Estimate 2010 for 2010
Freshwater Sulfur and Regional $12 to $88 $50
acidification nitrogen (Adirondacks)
oxides
Reduced tree Ozone National $190 to $1000 $600
growth - Lost
commercial
timber
TOTAL MONETIZED ECONOMIC BENEFIT $200 to $1,100 $650
Primary
Central
Cumulative
Impact
Estimate
1990-2010
$260
$1,900
$2,200
Key Limitations
- Captures only
recreational
fishing impact
- Incomplete
geographic
coverage leads to
underestimate of
benefits
- Uncertainties in
stand-level
response to
ozone exposure
- Uncertainty in
future timber
markets
- Partial estimate
that omits major
unquantifiable
benefits
categories; see
text
Note: Estimates reflect only those benefits categories for which quantitative economic analysis was supported. A comprehensive
total economic benefit estimate would likely greatly exceed the estimates in the table. Range of estimates for timber assessment is
based on variation in annual point estimates for 2005 through 2010.	
                                                  E-67

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Despite  these  limitations, it  is  important to
recognize the magnitude of the monetized ecological
benefits  that we could estimate  and reflect those
results in the overall estimates of benefits generated
in the larger analysis.  Table E-27  provides a tabular
summary of the results documented  earlier in  this
appendix. It is not possible to  indicate the degree to
which  ecological benefits are underestimated,  but
considering the magnitude of benefits estimated for
the select endpoints considered in our analysis,  it is
reasonable to conclude that a comprehensive benefits
assessment  would  yield  substantially greater  total
benefits estimates.

Recommendations for Future Research

    Previous sections of this appendix have discussed
several  areas  for  future  research related  to  the
individual research  and analytic efforts  conducted.
From  a broader perspective, there are three  key
research needs to improve benefits assessments of this
type:

    •   Exemplary  assessments that  incorporate a
        greater emphasis on ecosystem structure and
        function rather than specific service flows;
    •   Assessments   with   broader  geographic
        coverage of impacts categories  assessed in
        this report;  and
    •   More sophisticated treatment of uncertainty
        and    complexity,    including    careful
        consideration  of  the   irreversibility   of
        ecosystem impacts.

    Assessing Changes in  Ecosystem
    Structure and Funtion

    A major limitation of our quantitative analysis is
that by focusing on  individual acute and chronic
impacts it is possible to lose sight of ecosystem-level
changes to structure and function.  These ecosystem-
level changes could eventually lead  to  large-scale
impacts far greater in degree and geographic extent.
Determining the appropriate ecological level of
analysis is crucial to properly account for ecological
benefits  that  may  accrue   from  environmental
regulations.  While quantifying the decrease in impacts
on species  attributable  to  air pollutant control is
analytically  tractable,  the  impact   of  pollutant
reductions on ecosystem structure and function may
be a more appropriate measure that can be further
explored in future analyses.

    Changes in ecosystem structure and function may
not be obvious to the lay person, and the ultimate
effects of such changes in ecosystems are sometimes
unpredictable  in  scale  and  nature.   Ecosystems
affected  by  humankind  may   respond   in   a
discontinuous manner around critical thresholds that
are boundaries  between  locally  stable  equilibria.
Complexity  in  ecosystems prevents analysts from
using  linear  methods to  "add  up"  the  discrete
ecological effects of  pollution. Understanding the
complex cause  and  effect relationships  between
pollution and deterioration of ecosystem structure and
function is fundamental to making  adequate policy
decisions that will protect ecological resources. The
isolation of service  flows may often  imply  an
oversimplified cause and effect relationship between
pollution and the provision of the service flow, when
more often the service flow is affected by complex
non-linear  relationships   that  govern ecosystem
structure and function. The result is that ecosystem
impacts may not be adequately assessed by analyses
that focus on specific service flows.

    One potentially fruitful approach  to assessing
impacts on the ecosystem scale would be to more
adequately model a wide range of ecosystem functions
that do not necessarily contribute  to human welfare.
Assessments at the watershed scale might provide an
appropriate  level  of  detail to  more adequately
characterize some of these intermediate service flows.
This  type of research effort would  require close
cooperation  between  air  pollution  specialists,
ecologists, and economists to be most useful within
the context of benefit-cost analyses such as this one.

    Broader Geographic Scale

    Several of the ecological analyses  conducted to
support the first prospective section 812 report are
limited by  their partial geographic  coverage.  For
example, while nitrogen deposition  is  an important
contributor  to  eutrophication in a wide range  of
Eastern and Gulf Coast estuaries, resource, time, and
data availability constraints, as well as  limitations in
our  ability to  reasonably apply  an  avoided cost
                                                E-68

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
approach, prevented EPA from conducting a national
economic assessment for this category of impacts. In
this and many other effects  categories, extension of
the methods applied here to new geographic areas
could greatly enhance the comprehensiveness of the
physical effects and economic impact estimates.

    Alternative Treatment of Uncertainty

    At present  a  variety  of economic schools of
thought are converging on  quantitative analysis of
environmental  impacts that integrate uncertainty,
irreversibility and  ecological complexity.   Efforts
within the field of "ecological economics" to develop
structured appraisals of uncertainty associated with
environmental management and procedural rationale
for decision  making  have  yielded  a  variety of
theoretical proposals. Drepper and Mansson (1993)
argue  that most aspects of uncertainty are compressed
into the discount rate for policy analysis, resulting in
the inappropriate use of a constant positive discount
rate  for environmental  existence  values.    These
existence  values,   they  argue,   may  be   more
appropriately  assigned  negative  discount   rates.
Faucheux and  Munda (1997) advance a  similar
criticism of the unified discount rate and posit that a
differentiated discount rate  be applied to multiple
aspects of a policy decision according to the  implied
uncertainty of each aspect. This quantitative approach
evolves into a multi-criteria decision framework that
departs   from  conventional cost-benefit analysis.
Alternatively,  Hinterberger  and  Wegner   (1997)
abandon quantitative analysis  as a futile exercise due to
ecosystem complexity in favor of simply applying the
precautionary principal of  reducing  any  and all
environmental impacts that have uncertain outcomes.

    In the resource economics literature, discussion of
alternatives   to  cost-benefit  analysis  when the
magnitude  of benefits or costs are uncertain have
focused on  the  concept of  quasi-option value (see
Freeman 1993 for a summary). The term was coined
by Arrow and Fisher (1974) to describe the potential
welfare   gain   of   altering   the   timing  of
development/preservation decisions under uncertainty
and when at least one of the choices involves an
inrreversible commitment of resources (either spent or
preserved). While  much of the  quasi-option  value
literature  suggests  that  adopting  this  type  of
framework would  lead  to greater  environmental
protection, Freeman  (1993)  argues  that it is  also
possible  that the  information  gained  by some
incremental development  of ecological resources
might be the only way to reduce uncertainty and gain
information about the magnitude of the trade-offs
involved in preventing ecological exposures.  It is
nonetheless important to recognize that option and
quasi-option  value  should  not  be  considered as
additional  components of willingness-to-pay, but
rather a value of altering decision making practices
(e.g.,  the value of moving  from  a  benefit-cost
framework based on expected value to a framework
that better considers the value of information gained
over time and the irreversibility of certain effects).

    The main implication of this body of work is that
cost-benefit analysis  may well underestimate the value
of  both  the  costs  and  benefits  of  uncertain,
irreversible environmental outcomes from public
policy.   From the  cost  perspective,  regulating a
pollutant   that  may  have   no   environmental
consequence may cause economic losses that reduce
unknown investment and growth opportunities in the
future.  From the benefits perspective, the value of
preserving  ecosystem integrity  may  include  the
mitigation  of irreversible damage to a  variety of
service flows previously not associated with simplified
dose-response relationships between pollution and
ecosystems.   Applications  of these principles in
economic  assessments,  including  more   rigorous
assessments  of option  and  quasi-option  value,
probabilistic analysis of multiple scenarios, and value
of  information  approaches have the  potential to
greatly increase  the utility of uncertain ecological
assessment  results  for the  purposes  of  making
environmental policies.
                                                E-69

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Aber, J.D., Nadelhoffer, K.J., Steudler, P., and Melillo, J.M., 1989. Nitrogen Saturation in Northern Forest
        Ecosystems. BioScience, 39(6): 378-386.

Arrow, K.J. 1968. Optimal capital policy and irreversible investment. (In ed. J.N. Wolfe) Value, Capital and
        Growth" Aldine: Chicago.

Arrow, K.J. and A.C. Fisher. 1974. Environmental preservation, uncertainty, and irreversibility. Quarterly
       Journal of Economics 88: 312-319.

Asman, W.A.H., and S.E. Larsen. 1996. Atmospheric Processes, (Ch. 2) Eutrophication in Coastal Marine
        Ecosystems Coastal and Estuarine Studies, 52: 21-50. American Geophysical Union.

Ayers, H., Hager,}., and Little, C.E., 1997. An Appalachian Tragedy. Air Pollution and Tree Death in the Eastern
        Forests of North America. (Eds. Ayers, H., Hager,}., and Little, C.E.) Sierra Club Books:, San
        Francisco.

Baden, S.P., L.O.  Loo, L. Pihl, and R. Rosenberg. 1990. Effects of eutrophication on benthic communities
        including fish: Swedish West Coast. Ambio 19(3): 113-123.

Baggetta, A.M. 1998. List of Dioxin-Producing Industry Sectors Gets Tentative OK From Peer Review
        Panel. EnvironmentalReporter 29(7):377'-37'8.  }une 12.Bartell, S.M., R.H. Gardner, and R.V O'Neill.
        1992. Ecological Risk Estimation. Lewis Publishers: Chelsea, MI.

Bell, J.D., and D.A. Pollard. 1989. Ecology offish  assemblages and fisheries associated with seagrasses.
       Aquatic Plant Studies Vol. 2: 565-609. (Eds. A.W.D.  Larkum, A}. McComb, and S.A. Shepherd)
        Elsevier: Amsterdam.

Birdsey, R.A., 1992a. Carbon storage and accumulation in United States forest ecosystems. Gen. Tech. Report WO-59.
        Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

Birdsey, R.A., 1992b. Changes in forest carbon storage from increasingforest area and timber growth. In: Forest and
        Global Change. Volume One: Opportunities for Increasing Forest Cover. (R.N. Sampson and D.
        Hair, eds.) Washington, DC 1992. p.23-39.

Birdsey, R.A., and L.S. Heath, 1995. Carbon changes in U.S. forests. In: Productivity of America's Forests and
        Climate Change (Joyce, L.A., ed.), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, General Technical
        Report RM-271.

Binkley, D., T.D. Droessler, and}. Miller, 1992.  Pollution impacts at the stand and ecosystem level. (In eds.
        R.K.Olson, D. Binkley, and M. Boehm) The Response of Western Forests to Air Pollution,. Ecological
        Studies 97. Springer-Verlag: New York, p. 235-258.

Black, F, and M. Scholes. 1973. The Pricing of Options  and Corporate Liabilities. Journal of Political Economy,
        81: 637-659.

Boesch, D.F.  1997. "The Cambridge Consensus" Forum on Land-Based Pollution and Toxic
        Dinoflagellates in Chesapeake Bay. W.H. Bell and D.A. Nemazie, Rapporteurs.

                                                 E-70

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Boesch, D.F., D.M. Anderson, R.A. Homer, S.E. Shumway, P.A. Tester, and T.E. Whitledge.  1997.
        "Harmful algal blooms in coastal waters: Options for prevention, control and mitigation" An
        assessment conducted for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and The National Oceanic and
        Atmospheric Administration Coastal Ocean Program.

Bonsdorff, E., E.M. Blomquist, J. Mattila, and A. Norkko.  1997. Coastal eutrophication: Causes,
        consequences, and perspectives in the archipelago areas of the northern Baltic Sea. Estuanne Coastal
        & Shelf Science 44(Suppl A): 63-72.

Boring, L.R., W.T.  Swank, J.B. Waide, and G.S. Henderson. 1988. Sources, fates, and impacts of nitrogen
        inputs to terrestrial ecosystems: review and synthesis. Eiogeochemistry 6: 119-125.

Boynton, W.R., J.H. Garber, R. Summers, and W.M. Kemp.  1995. Inputs, transformations, transport of
        nitrogen and phosphorus in Chesapeake Bay and selected tributaries. Estuaries 18: 285-314.

Brown, T.C., 1987. Production and cost of scenic beauty: Examples for a ponderosa pine forest. Forest
        Science 33(2): 394-410.

Brown, T.C.and T.C. Daniel, 1984.  Modeling Forest scenic beauty: Concepts  and applications to ponderosa
        pine. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-256. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
        Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Bruck, R.I., Robarge, W.P., and McDaniel, A., 1989. Forest decline in the boreal montane ecosystems of the
        southern Appalachian Mountains. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 48: 161-180.

Buhyoff, GJ. and J.D. Wellman, 1980. The specification of a non-linear psychophysical function for visual
        landscape dimensions./. Leisure Res 12(3): 257-272.

Buhyoff, G.J., J.D.  Wellman, and T.C. Daniel, 1982. Predicting scenic quality for mountain pine beetle and
        western spruce budworm damaged forests. Forest Science 28(4): 827-838.

Buhyoff, G.J., R.B. Hull IV,J.N. Lien, and H.K. Cordell, 1986. Prediction of scenic quality for southern pine
        stands. Forest Science 32(3): 769-778.

Buyoff, G. J., and W. A. Leuschner. 1978. Estimating psychological disutility from damaged forest stands.
        Forest Science, 28(3).

Buhyoff, G.J., W.A. Leuschner, and J.D. Wellman, 1979. Aesthetic impacts of southern pine beetle damage.
       Journal of Environmental Management 8:261-267.

Buhyoff, G. J., and J. D. Wellman, 1980. The specification of a non-linear psychological function for visual
        landscape dimensions. Journal of Eeisure Research, 12(3).

Burkholder, J.M., H.B. Glasgow Jr., C.W. Hobbs. 1995.  Fish kills linked to a toxic ambush-predator
        dinoflagellate: distribution and environmental conditions. Marine Ecology Progress Series 124: 43-61.

Burkholder, J.M., K.M. Mason, H.B. Glasgow, Jr. 1992.  Water-column nitrate enrichment promotes decline
        of eelgrass Zostera marina, evidence from seasonal mesocosm experiments. Marine Ecology Progress
          TO-81: 163-178.

                                               E-71

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Burkholder, J.M., G.B. Glasgow, and J.E. Cooke. 1994. Comparative effects of water column nitrate
        enrichment on eelgrass Zostera marina, shoalgrass Halodule wrightii, and widgeongrass Ruppia
        Marine Ecology Progress Series 105:121-138.

Bytnerowicz, A., and N.E. Grulke. 1992 . Physiological effects of air pollutants on western trees. (In eds.
        R.K. Olson, D. Binkley, and M. Boehm) The Response of Western Forests to Air pollution. Ecological
        Studies 97. Springer-Verlag: New York, p. 183-234.

Camacho, Rodolfo, Chesapeake Bay Program Nutrient Reduction Strategy Reevaluation, Financial Cost Effectiveness of
        Point and Nonpoint Source Nutrient Reduction Technologies in the Chesapeake Basin, December 1992.

Canela, M.C.  and W.F. Jardim. 1997. The Fate of Hg° in Natural Waters. /. Bra??. Chem. Soc. 8(4): 421-426.

Carroll, G. 1998. Are our coastal waters turning deadly. National Wildlife April/May.42-46.

Chesapeake Bay Program, 1997 Nutrient Reduction Reevaluation Summary Report, obtained online at
        www.chesapeakebay.net/bayprogram/pubs/97rpt.

Chichilnisky,  G and G. Heal. 1998. Economic Returns form the  Biosphere. Nature 392: 629-30.

Church, M.R., K.W. Thornton, P.W. Shaffer, D.L. Stevens, B.P.  Rochelle, G.R. Holdren, M.G.Johnson, JJ.
        Lee, R.S. Turner, D.L. Cassell, D.A. Lammers, W.G. Campbell, C.I. Liff, C.C Brandt, L.H. Liegel,
        G.D. Bishop, D.C. Mortenson, S.M. Pierson, and D.D. Schmoyer. 1989. Direct/'Delayed'Response
        Project: Future Effects ofEong-term Sulfur Deposition on Surface Water Chemistry in the Northeast and Southern
        Blue Ridge Province. EPA/600/3-89/026a-d, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
        DC.

Church, M.R., P.W. Shaffer, K.W. Thornton, D.L. Cassell, C.I. Liff, M.G. Johnson, D.A. Lammers,JJ. Lee,
        G.R. Holdren, J.S. Kern, L.H. Liegel, S.M. Pierson, D.L. Stevens, B.P. Rochelle, and R.S. Turner.
        1992. Direct/Delayed Response Project: Future Effects ofEong-term Sulfur Deposition on Stream Chemistry in the
        Mid-Appalachian Region of the Eastern United States. EPA/600/R-92/186, U.S. Environmental
        Protection Agency, Washington, DC.

Coastlines. 1994. Seagrasses as a primary indicator of water quality, obtained online,
        http://www.epa.gov/docs/OWOW/estuaries/coastlines/fall94/seagrasses.html(June 1998).

Coggins, J.S. and C.A. Ramezani. 1998. An Arbitrage-Free Approach to Quasi-Option Value. Journal of
        Environmental Economics and Management35: 103-125.

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. 1998. Nitrogen Removal Program: Eong Island Sound.

Connelly, N.A., B.A. Knuth and T.L. Brown. 1996. Sportfish Consumption Patterns of Lake Ontario Anglers
        and the Relationship to Health Advisories. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16: 90-101.

Cook, E.R., and Zedaker, S.M., 1992.  The dendroecology of Red Spruce decline. (In eds. C. Eagar, and M.B.
        Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United States, Ecological  Study 96. Springer-
        Verlag: New York, p.192-234.
                                                E-72

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Correll, D.L., and D. Ford. 1982. Comparison of precipitation and land runoff as sources of estuarine
       nitrogen. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 15: 45-56.

Cosby, B.J., G. Hornberger, J. Galloway. 1985a.  Time scales of catchment acidification: a quantitative model
       for estimating freshwater acidification. Environmental Science and Technology 19 (1144-1149).

Cosby, B.J., G.M. Hornberger, J.N. Galloway, and R.F. Wright. 1985b.  Modeling the effects of acid
       deposition: Assessment of a lumped parameter model of soil water and streamwater chemisty. Water
       Resources Research 21: 51-63.

Costa, J.E., B.L. Howes, A.E. Giblin, and I. Valiela. 1992. Monitoring nitrogen and indicators of nitrogen
       loading to support management action in Buzzards Bay. p. 499-431; (In eds. DH McKenzie, DE
       Hyatt, and VJ McDonald) Ecological Indicators. Elsevier Applied Science:: New York.

Costanza, R., L. Wainger, C.  Folke, K. Maler. 1993. Modeling Complex Ecological Economic Systems.
       BioScience 43: 545-555.

Crocker,  T. D., 1985.  On  the value of the condition of a forest stock. Land Economics, 61(3).

Daily, G. 1997. Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Daily, G., P. Matson and P. Vitousek.  1997. Ecosystem services supplied by soil. (In ed. G. Daily) Nature's
       Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press: Washington, DC.

Dame, R.F.  1993. Bivalve filter feeders in estuarine and coastal ecosystem processes, Vol. G33. Springer Verlag: Berlin.

Dame, R.F., J.D. Spurrier,  and T.G. Wolaver.  1989. Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous processing by an
       intertidal oyster reef. Marine Ecology Progress Series 54:249-256.

Dame, R.F. R.G. Zingmark,  and  E. Haskin. 1984.  Oyster reefs as processors of estuarine materials. Journal
       of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 83: 239-247.

Dame, R.F., R.G. Zingmark, L.H. Stevenson and D. Nelson.  1980.  Filter feeder coupling between the
       estuarine water column and benthic subsystems (In ed. V.C. Kennedy)  Estuarine Perspectives.
       Academic Press: New York, pp. 521-526.

Day, J.W., A.S. Hall, W.M. Kemp, and A. Yanez-Arancibia. 1989. Estuarine Ecology. Wiley-Interscience: New
       York.

DeHayes, D.H., 1992. Winter injury and development of cold tolerance of Red Spruce. (In eds. C. Eagar and
       M.B. Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United States, Ecological Studies 96.
       Springer Verlag: New York, p. 295-337.

Delaware Bays NEP. 1996 Personal communication with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.
       As cited in Valigura  et al.

De Steiguer, J., J. Pye, C. Love. 1990.  Air Pollution Damage to U.S. Forests. Journal of Forestry, Aug 90, p. 17-
       22, 1990.
                                                E-73

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Desvousges, W.H., V. Kerry Smith, and A. Fisher. 1987. Option Price Estimates for Water Quality
        Improvements: A Contingent Valuation Study for the Monongahela River. Journal of "Environmental
        Economics and Management 14: 248-267.

Diana, S.C., C. A. Bisogni, K. L. Gall. 1993. Understanding Anglers Practices Related to Health Advisories
        for Sport-Caught Fish. Journal of Nutrition Education 25(6): 320-328.

Dixit, A.K and R.S. Pindyck. 1994. Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.

Doering, P.H. 1989.  On the contribution of the benthos to pelagic production. Journal of Marine "Research 47:
        371-383.

Drepper, F.R. and B.A. Mansson. 1993. Intertemporal valuation in an unpredictable environment. Ecological
        Economics 7: 43-67.

Duarte, C.M. 1995. Submerged aquatic vegetation in relation to different nutrient regimes. Ophelia 41:87-112.

Eagar, C., and M.B. Adams, 1992.  Ecology and Decline of "Red Spruce in the Eastern United States. Ecological
        Studies 96. Springer Verlag: New York, 1992.

Elks, R.D., Director of Water Resources, Greenville Utilities Commission, Greenville, NC.

Englin, J.E., T.A.  Cameron, R.E. Mendelsohn, G.A. Parsons and S.A. Shankle. 1991. Valuation of Damages to
        Recreational Trout Fishing in the Upper Northeast Due to Acidic Deposition, Prepared for the National Acidic
        Precipitation Assessment Program, Washington, D.C. by Pacific Northwest Laboratory. PNL-7683.

Engstrom, D.R. and E.B. Swain.  1997.  Recent Declines in Atmospheric Mercury Deposition in the Upper
        Midwest. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31:960-967.

Faucheux, S., G. Froger, G. Munda. 1997. "Toward an integration of uncertainty, irreversibility, and
        complexity in environmental decision making." In eds. J. van den Bergh, J. van der Straaten, Economy
        and Ecosystems in Change, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Federal Register.  1998. Unified Agenda. 63(80), Book 3. April 27.

FDA  (U.S. Food and Drug Administration). 1994.  Action Levels for Poisonous or Deleterious Substance in
        Human Food and Animal Feed. Industry Activities Staff Booklet. Obtained online,
        http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fdaact.html July 30, 1998.

Fisher, D., J. Ceraso, T. Mathew, and M. Oppenheimer.  1988.  Polluted Coastal Waters: The Role of Acid "Rain.
        Environmental Defense Fund: New York.

Fisher, D.J., and M. Oppenheimer. 1991. Atmospheric Nitrogen Deposition and the Chesapeake Bay
        Estuary. Ambio 20(3-4):102-108.

Fitzgerald, W.F. 1995. Is Mercury Increasing in the Atmosphere? The Need for an Atmospheric Mercury
        Network (AMNET). Water, Air, and Soil "Pollution 80:245-254.
                                                E-74

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Flowers, P.J., HJ. Vaux, P.D. Gardner, and T. J. Mills, 1985. Changes in recreation values after fire in the northern
        rocky mountains. Research Note PSW-373, USD A.

Frankel, O., A Brown, and J. Burdon. 1995. The Conservation of Plant biodiversity. Cambridge University Press:
        Cambridge.

Freeman, M., 1997. On Valuing the Services and Functions of Ecosystems. (In eds. Simpson, R.D. and N.L.
        Christensen, Jr.) Ecosystem Function & Human Activities. Chapman & Hall: New York.

Freeman, M., 1993. The Measurement of Environmental and Resources Values: Theory andMethods Resources for the
        Future: Washington, DC.

Fogel, M.L., and H.W. Paerl.  1994.  Isotopic tracers of nitrogen from atmospheric deposition to coastal
        waters. Chemical Geology 107:233-236.

Folke, C., C. Holling, and C. Perrings. 1994. biological Diversity, Ecosystems andHuman Welfare. Beijer Institute,
        Stockholm.

Fox, S., and R.A. Mickler, 1995. Impact of Air Pollutants on Southern Pine Forests Ecological Studies 118.
        Springer Verlag: New York.

Gawel, J.E., B.A. Ahner, AJ. Fnedland & F.M.M. Morel, 1996. Role  for heavy metals in forest decline
        indicated by phytochelatin measurements. Nature 381, p.  64-65.

Gray, J.S. 1992. Eutrophication in the sea. (In eds. G.  Colombo, I. Ferrari, VU Ceccherelli, and R Rossi)
        Eutrophication and "Population Dynamics. Olsen and Olsen, Fredensburg, Denmark, pp. 3-15.

Greening, H., Science Director. 1998. Tampa Bay National Estuary Program, personal communication.

Hammitt, W. E. et al, 1994. Identifying and predicting visual preferences of southern appalachian forest
        recreation vistas. Eandscape and Urban "Planning, 29 (2): 171-183.

Hanifen, J.G., W.S. Perret, R.P. Allemand, and T.L. Romaire. 1998. "Louisiana's fishery-independent data:
        potential impacts of hypoxia" On-line Hypoxia Conference Proceedings.
        Http://pelican.gmpo.gov/gulfweb/hypoxia/.hypoxia.html  (June 1998).

Hansson S., and L.G. Rudstam. 1990. Eutrophication and Baltic fish communities. Ambio 19(3): 123-125.

Heath, L.S., and R.A. Birdsey, 1993.  Carbon trends of productive temperate forests of the conterminous United States.
        Water, Air, and Soil Pollution.  In Press.

Heimlich, R. Forthcoming.  Wetlands and Agriculture: Private Interests and Public Benefits. Office of Policy,
        Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

Henry, C. 1974. Investment decisions under uncertainty: The irreversibility "effect". American Economic Review
        64: 1006-1012.

Heywood, V, Baste, and KA Gardner.  1995. Introduction, pp.1-19. Global Biodiversity Assessment UNEP',
        Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

                                                E-75

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Hinga, K.R., A.A. Keller, and C.A. Oviatt.  1991.  Atmospheric deposition and nitrogen inputs to coastal
        waters. Ambio 20(6): 256-260.

Hinga, K.R., H. Jeon, and N.F. Lewis.  1995. Marine Eutrophication Review NOAA Coastal Ocean Program
        Decision Analysis Series No. 4. NOAA Coastal Ocean Office, Silver Spring, MD. Parts 1 & 2.

Hinterberger, F., G. Wegner. 1997. Limited knowledge and the precautionary principle: On the feasibility of
        environmental economics. (In eds. J. van den Bergh, J. van der Straaten) Economy and Ecosystems in
        Change, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Hollenhorst, S. J., S. M. Brock, W. A. Freimund, and M. J. Twery, 1993.  Predicting the effects of gypsy moth
        on near-view aesthetic preferences and recreation appeal. Forest Science, 39(1): 28-40.

Holmes, T., R. Kramer, M. Haefele.  1992. Economic Valuation of Spruce-Fir Decline in the Southern
        Appalachian Mounains: A Comparison of Value Elicitation Methods. Presented at the Forestry and
        the Environment: Economic Perspectives Conference, March 9-11,  1992 in Jasper, Alberta, Canada.

Howard, R.K, GJ. Edgar, and P.A.  Hutchings. 1989. Fauna! assemblages of seagrass beds. (In eds. A.W.D.
        Larkum, AJ. McComb, and S.A. Shepherd) biology ofSeagrasses. Aquatic Plant Studies Vol. 2..
        Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 536-564.

Howarth, R.W. 1988. Nutrient limitation of net primary production in marine ecosystems. Annual Reviews in
        Efl?%19:89-110.

Howell, P., and D. Simpson. 1994. Abundance of marine resources in relation to dissolved oxygen in Long
        Island Sound. Estuaries 17(2): 394-402.

Hudson, R.J.M., S.A. Gherini, W.F. Fitzgerald, and D.B. Porcella. 1995. Anthropogenic Influences on the
        Global Mercury Cycle: A Model-Based Analysis. Water, Air,  and Soil Pollution 80:265-272.

Hull,]. 1997. Options, Futures, and other Derivative Securities. Third Ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

HydroQual. 1996. "Water Quality Modeling Analysis of Hypoxia in  Long Island Sound Using LIS  3.0" Job
        Number NENGOO35. HydroQual Inc.  Mahwah, NJ.

Industrial Economics (lEc). 1998a. Overview of Ecologicallmpacts ofAirPollutants Regulated by the  1990 Clean Air
        Act Amendments. Prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc.  for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.

Industrial Economics (lEc). 1998b. Methods for Selecting Moneti^able Benefits Derived from Ecological Re sources as a
        Result of Air Quality Improvements Attributable to the 1990  Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990-2010. Prepared
        by Industrial Economics, Inc.  for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.

Industrial Economics (lEc). 1998d. Economic Benefits of Decreased Air Toxics Deposition Attributable to the 1990
        Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990-2010.

Industrial Economics (lEc). 1999a. Benefits Assessment of Decreased Nitrogen Deposition to Estuaries in the  United
        States Attributable to the 1990  Clean Air Act Amendments,  1990-2010. Prepared by Industrial Economics,
        Inc. for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.
                                                E-76

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Industrial Economics (lEc). 1999b. Economic Benefits Assessment of Decreased Acidification of Fresh Water Lakes and
        Streams in the United States Attributable to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990-2010. Prepared by
        Industrial Economics, Inc. for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.

Industrial Economics (lEc). 1999c. Characterising the Forest Aesthetics Benefits Attributable to the 1990 Clean Air
        Act Amendments, 1990-2010. Prepared by Industrial Economics, Inc. for B. Heninger, EPA Office of
        Policy.

Industrial Economics (IEc), 1999d. Prospective Carbon Sequestration Benefits of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
        (CAAA), 1990-2010. Prepared by Industrial Economics Inc. for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.

Industrial Economics (IEc), 1999e. Characterising the Commercial Timber Benefits from Tropospheric O^pne Reduction
        Attributable to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, 1990-2010. Prepared by Industrial Economics Inc.
        for B. Heninger, EPA Office of Policy.

IRIS. 1997. Integrated Risk Information System.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
        http://www.epa.gov/ins/ July 30,1998Jacobs, R.P.W.M., D. Hartog, B.F. Braster, and F.C.
        Carriere. 1981. Grazing of the seagrass Zostera no/tiibj birds at Terschelling (Dutch Wadden Sea).
        Aquatic Botanylfr. 241-259.

Jacobson, L.L. and A.C. Hill, 1970.  Recognition of air pollution injury to vegetation: A pictorial atlas.  Air Pollution
        Control Association: Pittsburgh.

Jakus, P.M., M. Downing, M. Bevelhimer, J.M. Fly. 1997. Do Sportfish Advisories Affect Reservoir Angler's
        Site Choice? Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 26 (2).

Jaworski N.A., R.W. Howarth, and LJ. Hetling. 1997. Atmospheric deposition of nitrogen oxides onto the
        landscape contributes to coastal eutrophication in the northeast United States. Environmental Science
        and Technology 31: 1995-2004.

Jenkins, A., P.G. Whitehead, BJ. Cosby and H.J.B. Birks. 1990.  Modeling long-term acidification: a
        comparison with diatom reconstructions and the implications of reversibility.  Phil. Trans. R. Soc.
        Eondon 5327(433-440).

Johansson, J.O.R. 1997. Seagrass in Tampa Bay: Historic Trends and future expectations. (In ed. S.F. Treat)
        Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium (Tampa B-A-ST-S) 3: Applying Our Knowledge, Tampa Bay
        Regional Planning Council.

Johansson, J.O.R. and R.R. Lewis III. 1992. Recent improvements in Hillsboro Bay, a highly impacted
        subdivision of Tampa Bay, Florida, USA. Science of the To tal Environment Supplement 1992. Elsevier
        Science BV, Amsterdam.

Johnson, A.H., S.B. McLaughlin, M.B. Adams, E.R. Cook, D.H.  DeHayes, C. Eagar, I.J., Fernandez, D.W.
        Johnson, RJ. Kohut, V.A. Mohnen,  N.S. Nicholas, D.R. Peart, G.A. Schier, and P.S. White. 1992.
        Synthesis and conclusions from epidemiological and mechanistic studies of Red Spruce decline. (In
        eds. C. Eagar and M.B. Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United States. Ecological
        Studies 96.  Springer Verlag New York, p. 385-411.
                                                E-77

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Johnson, D.W., and G.E Taylor, Jr., 1989.  Role of air pollution in forest decline in eastern North America..
        Water, Air, and Soil Pollution. 48: 21-43.

Johnson, D.W. and Fernandez, I.J., 1992. Soil mediated effects of atmospheric deposition on eastern U.S.
        spruce-fir forests. (In eds. C. Eagar and M.B. Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern
        United States, Ecological Studies 96. Springer Verlag: New York, p. 235-270.

Johnson, J.D., A.H. Chappelka,F.P. Hain, and A.S. Heagle, 1995.  Interactive effects of air pollutants with
        abiotic and biotic factors on southern pine forests. (In eds. S. Fox, and R.A. Mickler) Impact of Air
        Pollutants on Southern Pine Forests, Ecological Studies 118. Springer Verlag: New York, p. 281-314.

Johnson, J.E., W. D. Heckathorn, Jr., and A.L. Thompson.  1996. Dispersal and Persistence of 2,3,7,8-
        Tetrachlorodibenzo-^dioxin (TCDD) in a Contaminated Aquatic  Ecosystem, Bayou Meto,
        Arkansas. Trans. Amer. Fisheries Soc. 125:450-457.

Jordan, T.E., D.L. Correll, J. Miklas, and D.E. Weller. 1991.  Nutrients and chlorophyll at the interface of a
        watershed and an estuary. Limnology and Oceanography 36(2): 251-267.

Karr, J.R. and D.R. Dudley.  1981. Ecological perspective on water quality goals. Environmental Management 5:
        55-68.

Kauffman,J. 1980. Effect of a Mercury-Induced Consumption Ban on Angling Pressure. Fisheries 5(1): 10-
        12.

Kemp, WM, R.R. Twilley, W.R. Boynton, and J.C. Means. 1983. The decline of submersed vascular plants in
        upper Chesapeake Bay: Summary of results concerning possible causes. Marine Technology Society
              '17:78-89.
Kerr, S.R. and R.A. Ryder.  1992.  Effects of cultural eutrophication on coastal marine fisheries: a
        comparative approach. Science of the Total Environment Suppl. 599-614.

Kittel, T.G.F., N.A. Rosenbloom, T.H. Painter, D.S. Schimel, H.H. Fisher, A. Grimsdell, VEMAP
        Participants, C. Daly, and E.R.  Hunt, Jr. 1996. The VEMAP Phase I Database: An Integrated Input
        Dataset for Ecosystem and Vegetation Modeling for the Conterminous United States. CD ROM and
        World Wide Web (URL=http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/vemap/).

Leuscher, W.A. and R. L. Young., 1978. Estimating the southern pine beetle's impact on reservoir campsites.
         Forest Science, 24(4).

Levin, L. 1997. Risk Approaches  for Water-Borne Exposure to Atmospherically Deposited Trace
        Substances.  The Environmental Professional 19:43-47.

Levin, S.A., M.A. Harwell, J.R. Kelly, and K.D. Kimball.  1989. Eco toxicology: Problems and Approaches, Springer
        Verlag, N.Y.

Leffler, M. 1997.  Harmful algal blooms on the move. Maryland Marine Notes 15(4).

Linker, L. 1997. Using RADM and water quality models of Chesapeake Bay. Atmospheric Deposition of Pollutants
        to the Great Waters, SETAC Publication.

                                                E-78

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Limburg, R.H., S.A. Levin, and C.C. Harwell. 1989. Ecology and environmental impact assessment: lessons
        learned from the Hudson River (USA) and other estuarine experiences.
                 '22:255-280.
Long Island Sound Study Program. 1994. The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, The
        Long Island Sound Study.

Long Island Sound Study. 1993. Hypoxia and Nutrient Enrichment — Assessment of Conditions and
        Management Recommendations.

Lucotte, M., A. Mucci, C. Hillaire-Marcel, P. Pichet, and A. Grondin. 1995.  Anthropogenic Mercury
        Enrichment in Remote Lakes of Northern Quebec (Canada).  Water, Air and Soil Pollution 80:467-476.

Mason, R.P., W.F. Fitzgerald, and F.M.M. Morel. 1994.  The Biogeochemical Cycling of Elemental Mercury:
        Anthropogenic Influences. Geochim. et Cosmochim. Acta 58(15): 3191-3198.

MacDonald, H.F. and K.J. Boyle. 1997. Effect of Statewide Sport Fish Consumption Advisory on Open-
        Water Fishing in Maine. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17: 687-695.

Massachusetts Bays National Estuaries Program. 1996. Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan,
        and Program Fact Sheet No. 6.

McBnde, J.R., P.R. Miller, and R.D. Laven.  1985. Effects of Oxidant Air Pollutants on Forest Succession in
        the Mixed Conifer Forest Type of Southern California. In: Air Pollutants Effects On Forest Ecosystems,
        Symposium Proceedings, St. P., p. 157-167.

McMahon, G., M.D. Woodside. 1996. Nutrient mass balance for the Albemarle-Pamlico drainage basin,
        North Carolina and Virginia, \99Q.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 33(3): 573-590.

McLaughlin, S.B., Andersen, C.P., Hanson, P.J., Tjoelker, M.G., and Roy, W.K. 1991. Increased dark
        respiration and calcium deficiency of red spruce in relation to acid deposition at high elevation
        southern Appalachian mountain sites. Can. J. for Res. 21: 1234-1244.

Michaels, A.F., D. Olson, J.L. Sarmiento, J.W. Ammerman, K. Fanning, R. Jahnke, A.H. Knap, F.  Lipschultz,
        andJ.M. Prospero.  1996.  Eiogeochemistty 35(1): 181-226.

Miller, P.R.,  1973. Oxidant-induced community change in a mixed conifer forest. Advances in Chemistry Series
        122: 101-117.

Miller, P.R.,  1983. O^pne effects in the San Bernardino National Forest.  In: Proceedings: Air pollution and the
        Productivity of the Forest. Izaak Walton League and Penn State University, pp 161-197.

Miller, P.R.,  1992. Mixed Conifer Forests of the San Bernardino Mountains.  (In eds.R.K.Olson, D. Binkley,
        and M. Boehm)  The Response of Western Forests to Air Pollution Ecological Studies 97. Springer-Verlag:
        New York, p. 461-500.

Miller, E.K., and AJ. Friedland. 1994. Lead Migration in Forest Soils: Response to Changing Atmospheric
        Inputs. Environmental Science & Technology 28(4):662-669.
                                               E-79

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Miller, P.R., and J.R. McBnde, 1975.  Effects of air pollutants on forests. (In eds. J.B. Mudd, and T.T.
        Kozlowski) Responses of Plants to Air Pollution. Academic Press: New York, p.196-235.

Miller, P.R., and J.R. McBride, 1998. Air pollution impacts in the montane forests of southern California: The San
        Bernardino case study. (DRAFT). Publication expected in: Ecological Study Series 134. (P.R. Miller,
        and J.R. McBride, eds.) Springer Verlag: New York.

Miller, P.R., O.C. Taylor, R.G. Wilhour, 1982. OxidantAir Pollution Effects on a Western Coniferous Forest
        Ecosystem. Corvallis, OR: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research
        Laboratory; EPA-600/D-82-276.

Montgomery, M. and M. Needelman. 1997. The Welfare Effects of Toxic Contamination in Freshwater Fish.
        Land Economics 13(2): 211-23.

Morey, E.R. and W.D. Shaw. 1990. An Economic Model to Assess the Impact of Acid Rain: A
        Characteristics Approach to Estimating the Demand for and Benefits from Recreational Fishing.
        Advances in Micro-Economics 5: 195-216.

Mullen, J.K., and F.C. Menz. 1985. The Effects of Acidification Damages  on the Economic Value of the
        Adirondack Fishery to New York Anglers. American Agricultural Economics Association, Feb: 112-119.

Musser, W. N., R. Ziemer, and F. C. White, 1982.  Trade-offs between nonmarket and market land use: Crop
       production, forestry and outdoor recreation. Research Bulletin 270, The University of Georgia College of
        Agricultural Experiment Stations.

Nabhan, G., S. Buchmann. 1997. "Services Provided by Pollinators." In  ed. G. Daily. Nature's Services: Societal
        Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

NAPAP, 1987.  Diagnosing Injuries to Eastern Forest Trees. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program.
        Forest Response Program. National Vegetation Survey.

NAPAP, 1991.  National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program.  1990  Integrated Assessment Report. National Acid
        Precipitation Program. Office of the Director, Washington DC.

National Research Council. 1993.  Managing Wastewater in coastal Urban Areas: Committee on Wasteivater
        Management for Coastal Urban Areas, National Academy Press: Washington, DC.

Naylor, R., P. Ehrlich. 1997. Natural Pest Control Services and Agriculture. (In ed. G. Daily) Nature's Services:
        Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

NCLAN. 1988. Assessment of Crop Loss from Air Pollutants. (Eds. Walter W. Heck, O. Clifton Taylor and
        David T. Tmgey)  Elsevier Science Publishing Co.: New York,. Pp. 1-5. (ERL,GB 639).

NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce. 1993. Natural Resource Damage  Assessments Under the Oil
        Pollution Control Act of 1990, 57 FR 23067, June 1, 1992.

NOAA. 1998. Reporting on the State of Our Coasts, http://www.enn.com/enn-news
        archive/1998/02/021398/coastrpt.asp (Feb, 1998).
                                                E-80

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
NESCAUM (Northeast States and Eastern Canadian Provinces). 1998. Mercury Study: A Framework for Action.

New York Statewide Angler Survey 1996. Report 2: Angler Preferences, Satisfaction, and Opinion on Management
        Issues. New York State, Department of Environmental Conservation. Division of Fish, Wildlife and
        Marine Resources. Albany, New York. April, 1998.

Newell, R.I.E. 1988. Ecological changes in Chesapeake Bay: Are they a result of over-harvesting the
        American Oyster, Crassostrea virginicd?  In Understanding the Estuary: Advances in Chesapeake Bay Research
        Conference Proceedings, Chesapeake Bay Consortium, Baltimore, MD.

Nixon, S.W.  1990. Marine eutrophication: a growing international problem. Ambio 19(3): 101.

Nixon, S.W.  1995. Eutrophication: a definition, social causes, and future concerns. Ophelia 41: 199-220.

Nixon, S.W., L.S. Granger, D.I.  Taylor, P.W. Johnson, and B.A. Buckley. 1994. Subtidal volume fluxes,
        nutrient inputs and the brown tide — an alternate hypothesis. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 39:
        303-312.

Nixon, S.W., C.A. Oviatt, J. Frithsen, and B. Sullivan. 1986. Nutrients and the productivity of estuarine and
        coastal marine ecosystems. Journal of the Umnological Society of South Africa 12(1/2): 43-71.

Norton, S.B, DJ. Rodier, J.H. Gentille, W.H.  van der Schalie, W.P. Wood, and M.W. Slimack. 1992. A
        framework for ecological risk assessment at the EPA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11: 1663-
        1672.

Norwood, R. and P. Stacey. 1998.  Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Personal
        Communication.

Nriagu, J.O. and J.M. Pacyna. 1988. Quantitative Assessment of Worldwide Contamination of Air, Water,
        and Soils by Trace Metals. Nature 333:134-139.

Ollinger, S.B., Aber. J.D., and Reich, P.B. 1997.  Simulating ozone effects on forest productivity: interactions
        among leaf-, canopy-, and stand-level  processes. Ecological Applications 7(4): 1237-1251.

Olson, R.K., D. Bmkley, and M.Boehm, 1992. The Response of Western Forests to Air Pollution (R.K. Olson, D.
        Bonkley, and M. B  ohm, eds.).  Ecological Studies 97. Springer Verlag: New York.

Orth, RJ. and K.A. Moore. 1983. Chesapeake Bay: An unprecedented decline in submerged aquatic
        vegetation. Science 22:51-53.

Orth, R.J., M. Luckenback,  and  K.A. Moore. 1994. Seed dispersal in a marine macrophyte: implications for
        colonization and restoration. Ecology 75(7): 1927-1939.

Orth, R.J., R.A. Batiuk, andJ.F.  Nowack. 1994. Trends in the distribution, abundance, and habitat quality of submerged
        aquatic vegetation in Chesapeake Bay audits tidal tributaries: 1971 -1991. USEPA for Chesapeake Bay
        Program. Annapolis, Maryland. EPA 903-R-95-009.
                                                E-81

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Oviatt, C.A., P.H. Doering, B.L. Nowicki, and A. Zoppini. 1993. Net system production in coastal waters as
        a function of eutrophication, seasonally, and benthic macrofaunal abundance. Estuaries 16(2): 247-254.

Oviatt, C.A., A.A. Keller, P.A. Sampou, and L.L. Beatty. 1986. Patterns of productivity during eutrophication:
        a eutrophication experiment. Marine Ecology Progress Series 28: 69-80.

Patwardhan, A.S. and A.S. Donigian, Jr. 1997. Assessment of nitrogen loads to aquatic systems. EPA Project
        Summary USEPA. EPA/600/SR-95/173.

Paerl, H.A. 1993. Emerging role of atmospheric nitrogen deposition in coastal eutrophication:
        biogeochemical and trophic perspectives. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic S cience 50: 2254-
        2269.

Paerl, H.A. and J.L. Pinkney. 1997. Hypoxia, anoxia, and fish kills in relation to nutrient loading in the Neuse
        River Estuary: Why was 1995 a 'bad' year? Unpublished.

Paerl, H.W. 1997. Coastal eutrophication and harmful algal blooms: importance of atmospheric deposition
        and groundwater as 'new' nitrogen and other nutrient sources, limnology and Oceanography 42(5, part
        2): 1154-1165.

Paerl, H.W., C. Aguilar, and M.L. Fogel. 1997. Atmospheric nitrogen deposition in estuarine and coastal
        waters: biogeochemical and water quality impacts. Chapter 22 (Id ed. J.E. Baker) Atmospheric
        Deposition of Contaminants to the Great Lakes and Coastal Waters, SET AC 15th Annual Meeting
        Proceedings  30  Oct.-3 Nov. 1994. SET AC Press, Pensacola, FLA.

Paerl, H.W. and M.L. Fogel. 1994. Isotopic characterization of atmospheric nitrogen inputs as sources of
        enhanced primary production in coastal Atlantic Ocean waters. Marine Biology 119: 635-645.

Paerl, H.W.,J. Rudek, and M.A. Malin. 1990. Simulation ofphytoplankton production in coastal waters by
        natural rainfall inputs: nutritional and trophic implications. Marine Biology 107: 247-254.

Pearl, H.W. 1988. Nuisancephytoplankton blooms in coastal, estuarine, and inland waters. Limnology and
        Oceanography  33(4, part 2):  823-847.

Paquet, J., and L. Belanger, 1997.  Public acceptability thresholds of clear cutting to maintain visual quality of
        boreal balsam fir landscapes. Forest Science, 43(1): 46-55.

Peart, D.R., N.S. Nicholas, S.M. Zedaker, M.M. Miller-Weeks, and T.G. Siccama, 1992.  Condition and recent
        trends in high-elevation Red Spruce populations. (In eds. C. Eagar, and M.B. Adams) Ecology and
        Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United States Ecological Study 96.p.125-191.

Peine,J.D.,J.C. Randolph, andJJ. Presswood,Jr. 1995. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Air Quality
        Management within the Class I Area of Great Smokey Mountains National Park,.
        Management 19(4): 515-526.

Pelley, J. 1998.  What is causing toxic algal blooms? Environmental Science and Technology 26A-30-A.
                                                E-82

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Peterson D.L., and MJ. Arbaugh, 1992.  Coniferous forests of the Colorado front Range. Part B: Ponderosa
        Pine second-growth stands. (In eds. R.K.Olson, D. Binkley, and M. Boehm) The Response of Western
        "Forests to Air pollution Ecological Studies 97. Springer-Verlag: New York, p. 433-460.

Peterson, D. G., et al., 1987. Improving Accuracy and Reducing Cost of Environmental Benefit Assessments. Draft
        report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, by Energy and Resource Consultants, Boulder,
        CO.

Petersen, G., J. Munthe, and R. Bloxam.  1995.  Numerical Modeling of Regional Transport, Chemical
        Transformations and Deposition Fluxes of Airborne Mercury Species. (In eds. Baeyerns, W., R.
        Ebinghaus, O. Vasilev).  Global and Regional Mercury Cycles: Sources, Fluxes and Mass Balances.  NATO
        Advanced Science Institute (ASI) Series, sub-series 2. Environment, Vol. 21. Kluwer Academic
        Publishers:  Dordrect, The Netherlands, p. 191-217.

Pimentel, D., C. Wilson, C. McCullum, R. Huang, P. Dwen, J.  Flack, Q. Tran, T. Saltman, and B. Cliff.
        Economic and Environmental Benefits of Biodiversity. BioScience'M (11):  747-57.

Porcella, D.B., J.W.  Huckabee, and B. Wheatley, eds.  1995. Mercury as a Global Pollutant: Proceedings of
        the Third International Conference held in Whistler, British Columbia, July 10-14,1994. Reprinted
        from Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 80(1-4).  Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The
        Netherlands.

Postel, S. and S. Carpenter. 1997. Freshwater Ecosystem Services. (In ed. G. Daily) Nature's Services: Societal
        Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington, DC.

Price, KS, D.A. Flemer, J.L. Taft, G.B. Mackiernan, W. Nehlsen, R.B. Biggs, N.H. Burger, D.A.   Blaylock.
        1985. Nutrient enrichment of Chesapeake Bay and its impact on the habitat of striped bass: A
        speculative  hypothesis. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114 (1): 97-106.

Prospero, J.M., and  D.L.  Savoie.  1989.  Effects of continental sources on nitrate concentrations over the
        Pacific Ocean. Nature 339: 687-689.

Pye, J.M., Impact of ozone on the growth and yield of trees: A review. Journal of Environmental Quality 17:347-
        360,1988.

Rahel, F.J., and Magnuson, J.J., 1983. Low pH and the Absence of Fish Species in Naturally acidic Wisconsin
        lakes: Inference for Cultural Acidification. Can.]. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40: 3-9.

Randall, A., 1984. Benefit estimation for scenic and visibility services. (In eds.G.L. Peterson and A. Randall)
        Valuation of Wildland Resource Benefits. Westview Press: Boulder, CO.

Regier, H.A., P. Tuunainen, Z. Russek, and L.E. Persson. 1988. Rehabilitative redevelopment of the fish and
        fisheries of the Baltic Sea and the Great Lakes. Ambio 17: 121-130.

Rendell, A.R., CJ. Ottley, T.D. Jickells, and R.M. Harrison. 1993.  The atmospheric input of nitrogen species
        to  the North Sea. Tellus 45B: 53-63.
                                                E-83

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Research Triangle Institute (RTI). 1996.  Risk Assessment Support to the Development of Technical Standards for
        Emissions from Combustion Units Burning Hazardous Wastes: Background Information Document. Prepared for
        Industrial Economics, Inc. EPA Contract # 68-W3-0028.

Ribe, R.G., 1990. A general model for understanding the perception of scenic beauty in northern hardwood
        forests. Landscape Journal, 9(2): 86-101.

Richardson, K, 1996. Conclusion, Research, and Eutrophication Control. (In eds. BB Jorgensen and K
        Richardson) Eutrophication in Coastal Marine Ecosystems Coastal and Estuarine Studies Vol. IV, American
        Geophysical Union, pp. 243-269.

Richardson, K. and B.B. Jorgensen. 1996. "Eutrophication: definition, history and effects  (In eds. BB
        Jorgensen and K Richardson) Eutrophication in Coastal Marine Ecosystems Coastal and Estuarine Studies
        Vol. IV, American Geophysical Union, pp 1-20.

Ridker, R.G. and J.A. Henning, 1967. Determinants of residential property values with special reference to
        air pollution. Review of Economics and Statistics, 49: 246-257.

Rosseland, B.O.  and Staurnes, M., 1994. Physiological Mechanisms for Toxic Effects and Resistance to
        Acidic Water: An Ecophysiological Approach. (In eds. Steinberg and R.F. Wright) Acidification of
        Freshwater Ecosystems: Implications for the Future. Chapter 16. C.E.W. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 1994.

Rosenberg, R. 1985. Eutrophication - future marine coastal nuisance? Maine Pollution Bulletin 16:227-231.

Row, C. and R.B. Phelps. 1990. Tracing the Flow of Carbon through U.S. Forest Product Sector. Prepared
        for the 19th World Congress, International Union of Forestry, Research Organizations, Montreal,
        Canada, August 11, 1990.

Rowe,  R., C. Lang, L. Chestnut, D. Latimer, D. Rae, S. Bernow, D. White. 1995.  The New York Electricity
        Externality Study, Vol. 1: Introduction and Methods. Prepared by Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc. for the
        Empire  State Electric Energy Research Corporation (ESEERCO), Proj. No. EP91-50.

Rowe,  C. and R.B. Phelps, 1990.  Tracing the Flow of Carbon through U.S. Forest Product Sector. Presented at the
        19th World Congress, International Union of Forestry Research Organizations, Montreal, Canada.

Ruddell, E. J., and J. H. Gramann, 1989.  The psychological utility of visual penetration in near-view forest
        scenic-beauty models. Environment and Behavior, 21(4):393-412.

Rudis,  V.A., J.H. Gramann, EJ. Rudell, and J.M. Westphal, 1988.  Forest inventory and management-based
        visual preferences models of southern pine stands. Forest Science 34(4): 846-863.

Ryther, J.H., and W.M. Dunstan. 1971. Nitrogen, phosphorus and eutrophication in the coastal marine
        environment. Science 171:  1008-1112.

Sarasota Bay National Estuarine Program notes cite Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc. (1992). Point-/non-
        point-source pollution-loading assessment. Phase 1. Final Report to Sarasota Bay National Estuary
        Program.
                                                E-84

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Schier, G.A., and K.F. Jensen, 1992. Atmospheric deposition effects on foliar injury and foliar leaching in
        Red Spruce.  (In eds. C. Eagar and M.B. Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United
        States Ecological Studies 96. Springer Verlag: New York, p. 271-294.

Schroeder, H.W. and T.C. Daniel, 1981. Progress in predicting the perceived scenic beauty of forest
        landscapes. Forest Science 21 (I}: 71-80.

Short, F.T., G.E. Jones, and D.M. Burdick. 1991. Seagrass decline: problems and solutions. (In ed. HS
        Bolton) Coastal Wetlands Proceedings of Coastal Zone '91 Conference. American Society of Civil Engineers,
        New York, p. 439-453.

Short, F.T., D.M. Burdick, and J.A. Kaldy III, 1995. Mesocosm experiments quantify the effects of
        eutrophication on eelgrass, Zostera marina. Eimnology and Oceanography 40(4):740-749.

Short, F.T. and D.M. Burdick. 1996. Quantifying eelgrass habitat loss in relation to housing development and
        nitrogen loading in Waquoit Bay, Massachusetts. Estuaries 19:730-739.

Shuyler, L. 1995. Cost Analysis for Nonpoint Source Control Strategies in the Chesapeake Basin.
        Unpublished.

Sigal, L.L. and G.W. Suter, 1987.  Evaluation of Methods for Determining Adverse Impacts of Air Pollution
        on Terrestrial Ecosystems. Environmental Management 11: 675-694.

Smayda, TJ. 1990. Novel and nuisance phytoplankton blooms in the sea: evidence for a global epidemic (In
        eds. E. Graneli) Toxic Marine Phytoplankton Elsevier Science Publishers: Amsterdam, Netherlands, p.
        29-40.

Smith, W.H., 1990. Air Pollution and Forests: Interaction EetmenAir Contaminants and Forest Ecosystems. 2nd
        edition, Springer Verlag:  New York.

Smith, V.K.  1987. Uncertainty, Benefit-Cost Analysis, and the Treatment of OptionVahie. Joarna/of
        EnvironmentalEmnomics and Management 14: 283-292.

SOS/T  9, 1990. Current Status of Surface Water Acid-Ease Chemistry. Baker, L.A., Kaufmann, P.R., Ross-Todd,
        B.M., and Beauchamp, JJ. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program. State of Science and
        Technology Report 9.

SOS/T  10, 1990. Watershed and Eake Processes Affecting Chronic Surface Water Acid-Ease Chemistry. Turner, R.S.,
        Cook, R.B, Miegrot, H.V.Johnson, D.W, Elwood, J.W, Bncker, O.W, Lindberg, S.E,
        Hornberger, G.M. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program. State of Science and
        Technology Report 10.

SOS/T  12, 1990. Episodic Acidification of Surface Waters Due to Acidic Deposition. Wigington, P.J., Davies, T.D.,
        Tranter, M., and Eshleman, K.N.  National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program. State-of-
        Science/Technology Report 12.
                                                E-85

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
SOS/T 13, 1990. Biological Effects of Changes in Surface Water Acid-Base Chemistry. Baker, J.P., Bernard, D.P.,
        Christensen, S.W., Sale, M.J., Freda,]., Heltcher, K., Marmorek, D., Rowe, L., Scanlon, P., Suter, G.,
        Warren-Hicks, W., and Welbourne, P. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program. State of
        Science and Technology Report 13.

SOS/T 16, 1990.  State of Science/Technology Report 16. In: Summaries of National Acid Precipitation
        Assessment Program State-of-Science/Technology Report 16.

SOS/T 18, 1990. Response of Vegetation to Atmospheric Deposition and Air Pollution. Shriner, D.S., W.W. Heck, S.B.
        McLaughlin, D.W. Johnson, J.D. Joslin, and C.E. Peterson. National Acid Precipitation Assessment
        Program. State-of-Science/Technology Report 18.

SOS/T 27, 1990. Methods for valuing acidic deposition and air pollution effects. National Acid Precipitation
        Assessment Program. State-of-Science / Technology Report 27, Part B.

Sorensen, J.A., G.E. Glass, K.W. Schmidt, J.K. Huber, and G.R. Rapp, Jr.  1990.  Airborne Mercury
        Deposition and Watershed Characteristics in Relation to Mercury Concentrations in Water,
        Sediments, Plankton, and Fish of Eighty Northern Minnesota Lakes. Environ. Set. Technol.
        24(11):1716-1731.

Soule, M. 1991. Conservation: tactics for a constant crisis. Science 253, pp.744-749.

Stacey, Paul E., Report on Nitrogen Loads to Long Island Sound, Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection,
        Draft, April 1998.

Stoddard, J.L., 1994. Long-Term Changes in Watershed Retention of Nitrogen.  (In ed.  Lawrence A. Baker)
        Environmental Chemistry of Lakes and Reservoirs, American  Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 223-
        284.

Stein, E.D., Y. Cohen, and A.M. Winer.  1996. Environmental Distribution and Transformation of Mercury
        Compounds.  Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and  Technology 26(l):l-43.

Stolte,  K.W., D.M. Duriscoe, E.R. Cook, and S.P. Cline.  Methods of assessing responses of trees, stands and
        ecosystems to air pollution.  (In eds. R.K.Olson, D. Binkley, and M.  Boehm)  The Response of Western
        Forests to Air Pollution. Ecological Studies 97.  Springer-Verlag: New York, p.259-332.

Suchanek, T.H., PJ. Richerson, LJ. Holts, B.A. Lamphere, C.E. Woodmansee, D.G. Slotton, EJ. Harner,
        and L.A. Woodward. 1995. Impacts of Mercury on Benthic Invertebrate Populations and
        Communities within the Aquatic Ecosystem of Clear Lake, California.  Water, Air and Soil Pollution
        80:951-960.

Swain,  E.B., D.R. Engstrom, M.E. Brigman, T.A. Henning, and P.L. Brezonik. 1992.  Increasing Rates of
        Atmospheric Mercury Deposition in Midcontinental North America. Science 257:784-787.

Systems Applications International, Inc. 1999. Air Quality Modeling to  Support the Section 812 Prospective Analysis,
        Prepared for EPA.

Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium. 1990. Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium 1995-1999
        Action Plan.


                                                E-86

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. 1994. Estimates of total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total
        suspended solids loadings to Tampa Bay, Florida," Technical Publication #04-94. Prepared by P.E.
        Hans Zarbock, A. Janicki, D. Wade, D. Heimbuch, and H. Wilson. Coastal Environmental, Inc. St.
        Petersburg, Florida, May, 1994.

Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. 1995. Submerged aquatic vegetation distribution in tributaries of
        Tampa Bay," Technical Publication #08-94 Prepared by King Engineering Associates, Inc. 5010 W.
        Kennedy Blvd

Tampa Bay National Estuary Program. 1996. Charting the Course: The Comprehensive Conservation and Management
Tampa Bay Estuary Program. 1998. Tampa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium 1995-1999 Action Plan,
        1998.Tar-Pamlico NSW Implementation Strategy, as revised Feb. 13, 1992.

Tar-Pamlico Association and Hydroqual. 1995. Application of a Coupled Hydrodynamic/Water
        Column/Sediment Model for the Tar-Pamlico River, North Carolina.

Taylor, G.E. Jr., D.W. Johnson, and C.P. Andersen, 1994.  Air pollution and forest ecosystems: A regional to
        global perspective. EcologicalApplications, 4(4): 662-689.

Tedesco, M. 1998. Long Island Sound Study Program, Stamford, CT, Personal Communication.

Tingey, D.T., and G.E. Taylor. 1982. Variation in plant response to ozone: a conceptual model of
        physiological events (In eds.Unsworth, M.H., Omrod, D.P.)  Effects of Gaseous Air Pollution in
        Agriculture and Horticulture. Butterworth Scientific: London, UK, pp. 113-138.

Tomasko, D.A., D.M. Alderson, P. Clark, J. Culter, L.K. Dixon, R. Edwards, E. Estevez, M.G. Heyl, S.
        Lowrey, Y.P. Sheng, and J. Stevely. 1992. Technical synthesis of Sarasota Bay, p. 14.1-14.16 (In eds.
        P. Roat, C. Ciccolella, H. Smithy, and D. Tomasko), Sarasota Bay: Framework for Action. Sarasota
        Bay National Estuary Program.

Tomasko, D.A., CJ. Dawes, and M.O. Hall. 1996. The effects of anthropogenic nutrient enrichment on the
        turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum)  in Sarasota Bay, Florida. "Estuaries 19(2B): 448-456.

Turner, D.P.,JJ. Lee, GJ. Koerper, andJ.R. Barker.  1993. TheForest Sector'Carbon Budget of'the United States:
        Carbon fools and Flux Under Alternative Policy Options. EPA/600/3-93/093, EPA Environmental
        Research Laboratory, Corvallis,  OR.

Turner, D.P., GJ. Koerper, M. Harmon,J. Lee. 1995.  Carbon Sequestration by Forests in the United States.
        Current Status and Projections to the Year 2040. Tellus 47(B): 232-239.

Turner, K., C. Perrings, C. Folke. 1997.  Ecological Economics: Paradigm or Perspective. (In eds. J. van den
        Bergh, J. van der Straaten) Economy and Ecosystems in Change, Edward Elgar:  Cheltenham, UK.

Twilley R.R., W.M. Kemp, K.W. Staver, J.C. Stevenson, and W.R. Boynton. 1985. Nutrient enrichment of
        estuarine submersed vascular plant communities 1. Algal growth and effects on production of plants
        and associated communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series 23:179-191.
                                               E-87

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Tyler, M. 1988. Contributions of Atmospheric Nitrate Deposition to Nitrate Loading in the Chesapeake Bay, Report No.
        RP-1052, Versar, Inc.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1984. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for 2,3,7,8-
        Tetrachlorodi%en%p-p-dioxin. EPA 440/5-84-007.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1990. Air Pollution Emission Standards and Guidelines for
        Municipal Waste Combustors: Revision and Update of Economic Impact Analysis and Regulatory Impact Analysis.
        EPA-450/3-91-003.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1992a.  National Study of Chemical Residues in Fish. Vol.s
        I and II. EPA 823-R-92-008a, EPA 823-R-92-008b.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1992b.  Report on the Ecological Risk Assessment Guidelines
        Strategic Planning Workshop. Risk Assessment Forum  Washington, B.C., EPA/630/R-92/002.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1993. Interim Report on Data and Methods for Assessment of
        2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodiben^p-p-dioxin to Aquatic Eife and Associated Wildlife. EPA-600/R-055.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1994a. Workshop on the Use of Available Data and Methods for
        Assessing the Ecological Risks of 2,3,7.8-Tetrachlorodiben^p-p-dioxin to Aquatic'Eife and Associated Wildlife.
        EPA-630-R-94-002.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1994b.  Medical Waste Incinerators - Background Information for
        Proposed Standards and Guidelines: Analysis of Economic Impacts for Existing Sources. EPA-453/R-94-048a.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1995a. Acid Deposition Standard 'Feasibility Study Report to
        Congress. EPA/430-R-95-001a.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1995b.  National Primary Drinking Water Regulations:
        Contaminant Specific Fact Sheets. EPA 811-F-95-003-T.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1996a. Air Quality Criteria for O^pne and Related Photochemical
        Oxidants, National Center for Environmental Assessment.  Office of Research and Development. U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency, NC. Vol. II, 1996.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1996b.  Update: National Listing of Fish and Wildlife
        Consumption Advisories. Fact Sheet EPA 823-F-96-006. June.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1997a.  Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories - 1997.
        Version 3.0 EPA 823-C-98-001.Obtained online, http://www.epa.gov/OST/fishadvice/ July 30,
        1998.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1997b.  Issue fact sheet on nutrients Report of Annual Meeting
        of National Estuary Program Directors, March 1997. National Estuary Program, Washington, D.C.

United States Environmental Protection Agency.  1997c.  Deposition of Air Pollutants to the Great Waters Second
           art to Congress.  Washington, D.C.
                                                 E-88

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
United States Environmental Protection Agency  EPA, 1997d. Mercury Study Report to Congress. Office of Air
        Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and Development, EPA -452/R-97-003.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1997e.  Benefits of reducing deposition of atmospheric nitrogen in
        estuarine and coastal waters.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1997f. Long Island Sound Study Proposal for Phase III Actions for
        Hypoxia Management. EPA 840/R/97/001.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1998e.  The Inventory of Sources ofDioxin in the United States.
        External Review Draft.  EPA/600/P-98/002a.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1998f, The Costs of Water Pollution Control in the Chesapeake
                   • Basin, Office of Water, September 30, 1998.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Database of Fishing Advisories.

United States Forest Service. 1992. Forest Health Monitoring. Summary Report. New England/Mid-Atlantic 1991.
        United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NE\NA-INF-115-92.

United States Forest Service. 1993a. Forest Health Monitoring. Summary Report. New England'/Mid-Atlantic 1992.
        United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NE\NA-INF-115-R93.

United States Forest Service. 1993b. Forest Health Monitoring. Northeastern Area Forest Health Report

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service. NA-TP-03-93.

United States Forest Service. 1995a. Forest Health Monitoring. ForestHealth Assessment for the Northeastern Area
        1993. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Northeastern Area and Northeastern
        Forest Research Station. NA-TP-01-95.

United States Forest Service. 1995b. Forest Health Monitoring. Forest Health Highlights. Northeastern States

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

United States Forest Service. 1996. Forest Health Monitoring. 1996 Summary Report. Northern Forest Health
        Monitoring. New England/Mid-Atlantic/Lake States (DRAFT). United States Department of Agriculture
        Forest Service.  NE\NA-INF-115-R96.

United States Forest Service. 1997a. Forest Health Monitoring. Summary Report. Northern Forest Health Monitoring.
        New England, Mid-Atlantic/Lake States 1995. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
        NE/NA-INF-115R-97.

United States Forest Service. 1997b. Forest Health Monitoring. Forest Health Highlights for New York and New
        England States. Northeastern States. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

United States Forest Service. 1998. Forest Health Monitoring. Field Methods Guide (National 1998).

United States Forest Service. National Forest Health Monitoring Program. Research Triangle Park, NC.

                                                 E-89

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
United States Forest Service. 1998. http://www.fs.fed.us/news/roads/19980121  qa.html.

Unsworth, R. E., et al., 1992. Approaches to Environmental Benefits Assessment to Support the Clean Air Act Section
        812 Analysis. lEc report to the EPA Office of Policy Analysis and Review.

Valiela, I., G. Collins,]. Kremer, K. Lajtha, M. Geist, B. Seely, J. Brawley, and C.H. Sham.  1997. Nitrogen
        loading from coastal watersheds to receiving estuaries: new method and its application. Ecological
        Applications 1(2): 358-380.

Valiela, I.,J. Costa, K. Forman, J.M. Teal, B.L. Howes, and D. Aubrey. 1990. Transport of groundwater-
        borne nutrients from watersheds and their effects on coastal waters. Biogeochemistry 10:177-97.

Valigura, R.A., W.T. Luke, R.S. Artz, and B.B. Hicks. 1996. Atmospheric nutrient input to coastal areas:
        Reducing the uncertainties. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 9.

Van Sickle,}, and M.R. Church. 1995. Nitrogen Bounding Study: Methodsfor Estimating the Relative Effects of Sulfur
        and Nitrogen Deposition on Surface Water Chemistry. U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.

Vaux, H.J., P.D. Gardner, and  TJ. Mills, 1984. Methods for assessing the impact of fire  on forest recreation. General
        Technical Report PSW-79, USD A, Berkeley, CA.

Velicer, C.M. and B.A. Knuth.  1994. Communicating Contaminant Risks from Sport-Caught Fish: The
        Importance of Target  Audience Assessment. Risk Analysis 14(5): 833-841.

Vermaat et al. 1998. The capacity of seagrasses to survive increased turbidity and siltation: the significance of
        growth form and light use. Ambio 26(8): 499-504.

Vitusek P.M., and R.W. Howarth, 1991. Nitrogen Limitation on Land and in The  Sea: How Can It Occur?
        Biogeochemistry 13: 87-115.

Vollenweider, R.A., R. Marchetti, and R. Viviani, 1990. Marine Coastal Eutrophication: The Response of Marine
        Transitional Systems to Human Impact: Problems and Perspectives for Restoration. Elsevier: New York.

Walsh R. G., R. D. Bjonback, R. S. Aiken, and Donald H. Rosenthal, 1990. Estimating the public benefits of
        protecting forest quality. Journal of Forest Management,?)®: 175-189.

Walsh, R. G., F. A. Ward, and J. P. Olienyk, 1989.  Recreational demand for trees  in national forests. Journal of
                              '/, 28: 255-268.
Watras, C.J., K.A. Morrison, and R.C. Back.  1996.  Mass Balance Studies of Mercury and Methyl Mercury in
        Small Temperate/Boreal Lakes of the Northern Hemisphere. (In eds. Baeyerns, W., R. Ebinghaus,
        O. Vasilev) Global and'Regional'Mercury Cycles: Sources, Fluxes and Mass Balances. NATO Advanced
        Science Institute (ASI) Series, sub-series 2. Environment, Vol. 21. Kluwer Academic Publishers:
        Dordrect, The Netherlands, p.329-358.

White, D.H., and J.T. Seginak. 1994.  Dioxins and Furans Linked to Reproductive Impairment in Wood
        Ducks. /. WildLManage. 58(1):100-106.
                                                E-90

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
White, P.S., and C.V. Cogbill, 1992. Spruce-fir forests of eastern North America. (In eds. C. Eagar and M.B.
        Adams) Ecology and Decline of Red Spruce in the Eastern United States Ecological Studies 96. Springer
        Verlag: New York, p. 3-39.

Williams, S.L., and M.H. Ruckleshaus. 1993. Effects of nitrogen availability and herbivory on eelgrass (Zostera
        marina) and epiphytes. Ecology 74:904-918.

Winner, W.E., 1994. Mechanistic Analysis of Plant Responses to Air Pollution. Ecological Applications 4(4):
        651-661.

Winner, W.E., and CJ. Atkinson. 1986. Absorption of air pollution by plants, and consequences for growth.
        Trends in Ecology and Evolution 1:15-18.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1989.  Environmental Health  Criteria 88: Polychlorinated Dibenzo-
            iioxins and Dibenzofurans. International Programme  on Chemical Safety. Geneva.
World Health Organization (WHO). 1990. Environmental Health Criteria 101: Methylmercury.
        International Programme on Chemical Safety. Geneva.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1998. WHO Experts Re-evaluate Health Risks from Dioxins. Press
        Release WHO/45.  June 3.

Wright, R.F., BJ. Cosby, R.C. Ferrier, A. Jenkins, AJ. Bulger, R. Harriman. 1994. Changes in acidification
        of lochs in Galloway, southwestern Scotland, 1979-1988: The MAGIC model used to evaluate the
        role of afforestation, calculate critical loads, and predict fish status. Journal of Hydrology 161 (257-285).

Zacaroli, A.  1998. Utilities Told to Monitor Mercury Levels in Coal Under EPA Requirement. Environmental
        Reporter 28(48):2629-2630. April 10.

Zarbock, P.A., A. Janicki, D. Wade, D. Higmuch, and H. Wilson.  1994. Estimates of total nitrogen, total
        phosphorus, and total suspended solids loadings to Tampa Bay, Florida. Prepared by Coastal
        Environmental Inc., for the Tampa Bay Estuary Program.

Zimmerman, R., J. Nance, andj. Williams.  1998. On-line Hypoxia Conference Proceedings
        http://pelican.gmpo.gov/ gulfweb/hypoxia/hypoxia.html (June, 1998).
                                                E-91

-------
                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
[This page left blank intentionally.]
               E-92

-------
Effects  of Criteria
Pollutants  on
Agriculture
Introduction

    One  potential  impact  of air  pollutants  on
economic welfare is their effect on agricultural crops,
including annual and perennial species.  Pollutants
may affect processes within individual plants that
control or alter growth and reproduction, thereby
potentially  increasing  or  decreasing  yields  of
agricultural crops.  Possible physiological effects of
pollutants include: decreased photosynthesis; changes
in carbohydrate allocation; increased  foliar leaching;
decreased nutrient uptake; increased sensitivity to
climatic  stress,  pests,  and  pathogens; decreased
competitive  ability;  and  decreased reproductive
efficiency. These physiological effects, in conjunction
with  environmental   factors   and  intraspecies
differences in susceptibility, may affect crop yields.

    Air pollutants that might damage plants include
SO2, NOX, peroxyacetyl nitrate (PAN), and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). These pollutants may
have direct effects on crops, or  they may damage
crops indirectly by  contributing to tropospheric
(ground-level) ozone and/or acid deposition, both of
which damage plants.  Tropospheric ozone is formed
by photochemical reactions involving VOCs and NOX,
while SO2 and NOX cause acidic deposition.

    While  all of these air  pollutants may inflict
incremental stresses on crop plants, in most cases air
pollutants  other than ozone are not a significant
danger to crops.  Based primarily on EPA's National
Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP),1
this analysis  considers ozone  to be the  primary
pollutant affecting agricultural production.
   This analysis estimates the economic value of the
difference in agricultural production between 1990
and 2010 that is projected to result from passage of
the 1990 CAA Amendments (CAAA). The analysis is
restricted to a subset of agricultural commodities, and
excludes those  commodity  crops for which ozone
response data are not available.  Fruits, vegetables,
ornamentals, and  specialty crops are also excluded
from this analysis for a variety of reasons, mostly
related  to the absence of a national level  benefits
model  (for  vegetables  and specialty  crops)  and
difficulties in quantifying the physical impacts of air
quality changes and their associated effect on welfare
(for ornamentals).  To estimate the economic value of
ozone  reductions  under the  CAAA, agricultural
production levels expected from post-CAAA scenario
ozone  conditions  are  first compared with those
expected to be associated with ozone levels projected
under the pre-CAAA scenario.  Estimated changes in
economic welfare are then calculated  based on a
comparison of estimated  economic benefits associated
with each level of production.
Ozone Concentration Data

    For this analysis, the SUM06 index - a cumulative
index  of ozone concentrations  over a specified
threshold (0.06 ppm) — was selected to conform with
the recent  EPA ozone NAAQS benefits analysis.2
The SUM06 index is one  of several cumulative
statistics that emphasize peak concentrations (in this
case by use of a threshold), and may correlate more
closely to crop damage than do unweighted indices.3
     Slimier et al., 1990; NAPAP, 1991.
                                                  2 Abt Associates, 1998.
    3 Lefohn et al., 1988.
                                            F-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    Because crop production data are available at the
county level, the lowest level of aggregation that could
be used  for ozone indices is also the county level.
Therefore, monitor level data needed to be aggregated
to a county level.

    Three  main steps are used  in the process of
estimating the county-level SUM06 values:

    (1)  1990 hourly ozone concentrations obtained
        for all available  monitors from EPA's AIRS
        system.4

    (2)  For each county  centroid, the 1990 hourly
        data from the  closest  set of monitors  are
        temporally-   and   spatially-adjusted  using
        UAM-V modeling  data (as  described in
        Appendix C), and the SUM06 is calculated
        for each monitor for each month.

    (3)  A  distance-weighted   average  SUM06  is
        estimated   for   each  month   from   the
        temporally-  and spatially-adjusted monthly
        values.

    One difference between the agricultural  analysis
and the health analysis  is  the treatment of distance
extrapolation.  The health effects results  in this 812
analyses are calculated first for the population living
within 50 km of monitors, and then  for the whole
country by extrapolating  the  air quality modeling
results to provide universal coverage.  The air quality
modeling results near to monitors are believed to be
more certain than  the  modeling for more  remote
areas. The less certain air quality modeling results is a
very important issue for the agricultural analysis, as the
majority of  the commodity crops  are grown in
locations  some  distance  from ozone  monitors.
Because  only a small portion of cropland is within
50km of an ozone monitor, the agricultural analysis is
not conducted for the  within  50km of a monitor
locations.  The agricultural analysis is only conducted
using  the full  national  extrapolation  of  ozone
modeling results.

Calculation of the  SUM06 Statistic

    The hourly ozone concentrations  are screened to
identify those that equal or exceed  0.06 ppm, and
these values are summed to obtain a  "raw" monthly
SUM06 index:

  day 30 7:59 PM
  2\   ^ ozone.  , for all ozone.   > 0.06 ppm
  j=day\ i=S:OOAM

    In this analysis, the SUM06 statistic was calculated
on a monthly rather than a daily basis, reflecting the
same hours of the day as if daily statistics had been
individually  calculated.   Although a completeness
criterion had been used to select  monitors, there were
still  missing  data for  some  included monitors.
Therefore, this  "raw"  statistic was  adjusted by a
completeness  ratio, the proportion  of hours with
available data to total hours in the period (either 12 in
a day or 360 in a 30-day month), in order to address
missing data as follows:
    raw statistic *
maximum hours per month
   actual hours in month
The assumption implicit in using a completeness ratio
is that the distribution of hourly ozone values for the
missing data is the same as the distribution for the
available data.

October to April Ozone
Concentration Data

    Agricultural crop  seasons extend the May to
September period used in the health analysis, and the
SUM06 index is  cumulative, requiring data for the
entire agricultural season.  To address the need for
SUM06 indices  in months between October  and
April, 1990 monitoring data from AIRS were used —
    4The analysis  reflects the  application of a 50 percent
completion criterion, ensuring that included monitors have at least
12 hours of data for at least half the days in the modeling season.
                                                 F-2

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
no  temporal- or spatial-adjustments were made  to
reflect potential ozone  conditions in future years
outside of the modeling season.5
Yield Change Estimates

    There are several steps  involved in generating
yield change estimates. The first is the selection of
relevant   ozone   exposure-response    functions
(minimum and  maximum)  for  each  crop in  the
analysis.     Ozone data at the  county level  are
transformed into an index suitable for use in  the
selected function(s) to estimate county level predicted
yield losses for both the post-CAAA and pre-CAAA
scenarios. In the next step,  the proportion of each
county to the national production of each crop is
calculated to permit national aggregation of estimated
yield  losses.   Finally, the  post-CAAA   scenario
percentage relative yield loss  (PRYL) is compared to
the minimum and maximum PRYL for the pre-CAAA
scenario.  Each step is discussed in more detail below.

Exposure-Response Functions

    Yield impacts  resulting  from changes in from
ozone concentrations are estimated using exposure-
response  functions that are specific to each crop being
analyzed.  This analysis was  restricted to estimating
changes  in yields  for those commodity crops  for
which consistent exposure-response functions  are
available and that are included in national agricultural
sector models.  Consistent with EPA's ozone NAAQS
benefits  analysis,  we  used National  Crop  Loss
Assessment  Network  (NCLAN)-based exposure-
response  functions that were derived using a Weibull
distribution for available data, and a 12-hour SUM06
ozone index.
    Minimum/Maximum Exposure-
    Response Functions

    Experimental data to evaluate  the response of
crops to ozone has been  collected for a limited
number of crops under the  NCLAN program.  The
objective of this program was to employ a consistent
experimental methodology  to provide comparable
results across crops.   The crops  included in the
NCLAN experiments  are  corn,  cotton,  peanuts,
sorghum, soybeans, winter wheat, potatoes, lettuce,
kidney beans, tomatoes, and hay. For many crops, the
NCLAN program evaluated the effects of ozone on
several different cultivars. Although not necessarily
representative of the full range of variability in crop
response, the results for different cultivars do permit
identification of a range of responsiveness. The most
tolerant and responsive response functions are used to
represent minimum and maximum impacts, within the
limits of available data.

    Use of cumulative exposure-response functions is
relatively recent, and  few  experiments  have  been
designed or  reported in terms of the SUM06 index.
Because the NCLAN  program  used a consistent
protocol and developed a database of experimental
conditions and results for all  of its studies,  U.S. EPA's
Environmental Research Laboratory (ERL) was able
to use original data from NCLAN studies to develop
SUM06 exposure  response  functions  for most
NCLAN crops6  (Lee  and Hogsett, 1996).    In
addition, the agricultural model used in this analysis
does not reflect non-commodity crops such as lettuce,
tomatoes,  potatoes, alfalfa, tobacco, turnips,  and
kidney beans.  Table F-l  presents the exposure-
response functions used in this analysis.  Finally, one
commodity crop, spring wheat, was excluded because
the NCLAN exposure-response  function was only
developed for winter wheat.

    Estimated responsiveness of a given crop to
ozone varies within the NCLAN data. This range of
response is  partially  explained by the  program's
    5AIRS data for all U.S. monitors were screened using the 50
percent completeness criterion for each month. All hourly data
was converted to parts per million and rounded to the nearest
0.0001 ppm.
or hay.
    6Data were not sufficient to develop functions for tomatoes
                                                F-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
evaluation of several cultivars for some crops; ozone
sensitivity varies across cultivars.  In  addition, the
conditions  for  different experiments  varied due to
variations in location, year, and additional treatments
included in some experiments.  No one exposure-
response function can be assumed to be representative
of  all cultivars in use, or of all  environmental
conditions  for crop production. To develop a range
of benefits  estimates  that reflects this variation in
responsiveness, a  minimum responsiveness  and a
maximum responsiveness function were selected for
each  crop.    In actuality,  a number of different
cultivars are planted by producers, and so actual ozone
response  will  be  a  weighted   average  of  the
responsiveness of each cultivar to its ozone condition
and its proportion of total acreage.  It is important to
note that these values do not necessarily bound the
analysis,  since the number of cultivars evaluated by
NCLAN is  small relative to the number grown for
many crops.

    For the crops used in this study, ERL conducted
an  analysis to identify  the  ozone  concentration
required to reduce yields by 10 percent for each crop
cultivar using its 12-hour SUM06 exposure-response
function. For each crop, the function demonstrating
the lowest ozone concentration at a 10 percent yield
loss represents  the  maximum  response,  and the
function with the highest concentration at 10 percent
yield loss represents the minimum response.  Table F-
1 reports the  minimum and  maximum exposure-
response functions  for each crop.  Two crops, peanuts
and sorghum,  did  not  have  multiple  NCLAN
experiments on which to base a comparison of the
responsiveness of different cultivars or the variation
in response with different experimental conditions.

    In this analysis, the maximum and minimum yield
change  results  are   used   to  bound  a  uniform
distribution of possible yield change, recognizing that
this distribution reflects only  known potential yield
losses.  Each percentile change in yield, including the
minimum and the maximum,  is used to estimate a
distribution of possible changes in economic welfare
(see below).
Table F-1
Ozone Exposure-Response Functions for Selected Crops (SUM06)

Ozone Index
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
SUM06
Source: Lee and

Quantity
Max
Max
Max
Max
Max
Max
Min
Min
Min
Min
Min
Min
Hogsett(1996)

Crop
Cotton
Field Corn
Grain Sorghum
Peanut
Soybean
Winter Wheat
Cotton
Field Corn
Grain Sorghum
Peanut
Soybean
Winter Wheat


Median
Experimental
Function Duration (Days)
1-exp(-(index/78)A1.311)
1-exp(-(index/92.4)A2.816)
1-exp(-(index/177.8)A2.329)
1-exp(-(index/99.8)A2.219)
1-exp(-(index/131.4)A1)
1-exp(-(index/27.2)A1.0)
1-exp(-(index/116.8)A1.523)
1-exp(-(index/94.2)A4.307)
same as max (see above)
same as max (see above)
1-exp(-(index/299.7)A1.547)
1-exp(-(index/72.1)A2.353)

119
83
85
112
104
58
119
83
85
112
104
58

Median
Duration
(Months)
4
3
3
4
3
2
4
3
3
4
3
2

                                                 F-4

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Calculation of Ozone Indices

    The SUM06  index is cumulative, and so  is
sensitive both to  the  duration over  which  it  is
calculated  and to the  specific month(s)  within a
growing season that are included in it. For each crop
included  in  NCLAN  ozone  exposure-response
experiments, the period of ozone exposure reflected
only a portion of the crop's growing  season. The
duration of the NCLAN experiments was provided by
ERL, and reflects the duration of the function that
provides  the  median   responsiveness to  ozone
exposure.  Because cropping seasons vary across the
U.S., the ozone index used to calculate county-level
changes in yield due to ozone must reflect the local
season for each crop. To calculate the SUM06 index
for the appropriate growing season, state-level data on
planting and harvesting dates  was used  in this
analysis.7 To calculate the cumulative SUM06 index,
the experimental duration for each crop was  anchored
on that crop's harvest date in each state in order to
most closely  approximate the relevant period  of
exposure for  yield analysis.  The harvest  date was
assumed to be the first day in the month of harvest, so
that the SUM06 index includes the months up to but
not including the harvest month. Because the baseline
and regulatory ozone data were developed as monthly
SUM06 values, for the first month of  the duration
period the proportion of remaining days to days in the
month were used to adjust the monthly SUM06 value.
 The SUM06 index was calculated  using the county
level ozone  data  developed  in  the prior section,
summed for  the  number  of months  of  NCLAN
experimental  duration, with  the  exposure  period
anchored on the usual harvest month for each crop.8
      USDA, 1984. Some states did not have explicit growing
seasons reported for certain crops due to the low production in
these states. In these cases a proxy state growing season was used.
In most of these cases the proxy growing season was taken from
a state with an adjoining boundary within the same geographic
region. Peanut emergence and harvest dates were taken from the
U.S. EPA Pesticide Root Zone Model-2 (PRZM)  data, US EPA
1993.

    8 This analysis required "rounding" some months: if a harvest
date was specified to be from the 15th to  the end of a month, the
W126 index was calculated using that month's data; if the harvest
    The form of the exposure response functions is
an  exponential  function  based  on  a  Weibull
distribution of the original NCLAN data, estimated to
predict a yield loss relative to conditions of "clean air"
(charcoal filtered/zero  ozone)  ,  or a zero SUM06
value. The resulting equation is in the form of:
where:
    SUM06 =
    B,C
predicted relative yield loss
(PRYL), expressed as a decimal
value (i.e., not multiplied by 100 to
report as a percent loss), and
relative to a zero SUM06 (or clean
air) condition
cumulative SUM06 ozone statistic
at a specified level of spatial
representation, in ppm
statistically estimated parameters,
unitless
Calculation of County Weights

    Because the benefits analysis  did not require a
regional  level of  disaggregation  and to  minimize
computational burdens the economic analysis was
conducted at a national level.   Ozone  data and
estimated yield responses, however, were developed at
a county level.  To conduct a national analysis, the
county level yield change estimates were weighted to
develop a single national percent relative yield loss for
each crop  relative to the post-CAAA scenario, for
both the minimum and the maximum yield responses.
Weights  based on 1997 crop production  data9 were
used to represent  all years in this analysis (1990 to
2010).   Because weather  and other conditions may
change the proportion of counties' production to the
total national production in each year, weights based
date was specified to be from the first to the 14th of a month, the
W126 index was calculated using the prior month's data as the
final month in the exposure period.

    9 USDA1998a.
                                                  F-5

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
on a single year may bias the estimates to some extent.
The  weights  were  calculated  by   dividing  the
production level of a crop in a county10 by the sum of
all states' reported production for that crop.11 These
county weights were applied to the percent relative
yield loss results for each county, as discussed below,
to develop a national level yield change estimate.

Calculation of Percent Change in Yield

    There is an issue associated with applying the yield
loss functions to analysis of alternative  regulatory
profiles. The functions provide a predicted yield loss
relative to  "clean" air, while policy analysis needs to
compare policy options  with a baseline, non-zero
ozone condition.  Therefore, the yield change  resulting
from the Clean Air Act Amendments is evaluated as
the yield loss relative to clean air under the CAAA
scenario being evaluated compared to the yield loss
under baseline (no-CAAA) conditions.

     The  change in yields, relative to  "clean air"  is
calculated as:
    To create the national percent change in yield for
each crop, the results of this equation are multiplied
by the county level weights and summed for each
scenario (maximum and minimum) and for each year.
Table F-2 presents the resulting percent yield changes
that were  used as inputs to the economic model.
         PR VT         — PR VT
         rix i LJ Post_CAAA   rix i LJ Pr e_CAAA
and, if yield under clean conditions is 100 percent of
possible yield, then baseline yield in this context is 1
minus baseline yield loss.  Thus the change in yield
under clean  air conditions can be divided  by the
baseline yield, and the change in yields relative to the
baseline can be given as:
  PRYLPost_CAAA -PRYL Pre_CAAA II-PRYLPost_CAAA
       USDA, 1995.
    11 The national total does not include USDA areas designated
"other counties". These areas are groups of counties that for one
reason or another (disclosure rules, low amount of production,
etc.) are not individually listed. Because we did not have ozone
values for these groups, we did not use their production levels in
the calculation of the total national production.
                                                   F-6

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table F-2
 Relative Percent Yield Change
                                  Corn     Cotton    Peanuts    Sorgham   Soybeans
                                  Winter Wheat
2000
2010
Minimum Response
Maximum Response
Minimum Response
Maximum Resoonse
0.01%
0.05%
0.01%
0.10%
1.66%
3.79%
2.84%
6.58%
0.61%
0.61%
1.36%
1.36%
0.01%
0.01%
0.02%
0.02%
0.26%
2.75%
0.42%
4.38%
0.20%
5.07%
0.39%
9.11%
Economic Impact  Estimates

    To estimate the economic benefits of controls on
ozone precursor pollutants implemented pursuant to
the 1990 CAAA Amendments, we evaluated  the
changes in yields resulting from additional, post-1990
controls  in  terms of their effect  on  agricultural
markets.   To  do  this,  yield changes  can  be
incorporated  into an economic model capable  of
estimating  the  associated   changes in economic
surpluses within the agricultural economy, preferably
one that reflects changes in producers' production
decisions and demand substitution  between crops.
This type of dynamic  analysis is needed because even
small changes in yield or price expectations can cause
large shifts in the acreage allocated to specific crops,
and the  degree to which alternative crops will be
substituted (particularly for feed uses).

    The modeling approach used in this  analysis is to
use an econometric model of the agricultural sector,
which estimates demand  and supply under different
production technologies and policy conditions. The
AGricultural Simulation Model  (AGSIM©)  has been
used extensively to evaluate air pollution impacts, as
well as a number of other environmental policy
analyses.  The version of  AGSIM©  used in this
analysis reflects production conditions and projections
for three discrete  periods:  1990, 2000, and  2010.
Projections of the  2000  and 2010 baseline  are
essentially those reported by  USDA/ERS (USDA
1998b).  A few endogenous variables in AGSIM©
were not included in the USDA baseline.  In  those
cases, the 1997 Food and Agricultural Policy Research
Institute (FAPRI) baseline was used (FAPRI 1997) ,12

    The AGSIM© baseline production and price data
serve as the post-CAAA scenario baseline.  Percent
relative yield losses (PRYLs) between the post-CAAA
and  pre-CAAA scenarios  are  the relevant  input
parameter for this analysis, from which AGSIM©
calculates new yield per planted acre values. Based on
these values (as well as on lagged price data, ending
stocks  from the previous year, and other variables),
AGSIM© predicts  acreage, production, supply, and
price parameters for each crop for each year, as well as
calculating yield per harvested acre.  From  these
results and the demand relationships embedded in the
model, AGSIM© calculates the utilization  of each
crop (i.e., exports, feed use, other domestic use, etc.),
as well as the change in consumer surplus, net crop
income, deficiency payments and other government
support payments.  Net surplus is  calculated as net
crop income plus consumer surplus, less government
payments.

    Table F-3 presents the net changes in economic
surpluses in nominal terms for our two target years,
2000 and 2010.  The positive net surpluses are a result
of the increase in yields associated with lower ozone
levels than those predicted to occur under the pre-
CAAA scenario. The annual value of the estimated
agricultural benefits of the CAAA in 2010 ranges
between $7.5 million in the minimum response case to
approximately $1.1 billion in the maximum response
case, with a median response  of $550 million.  It
    12 Documentation for this version of AGSIM can be found
in Abt Associates, 1998.
                                                F-7

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
should be reiterated that this range represents  the
impacts that would occur if all of the acreage planted
to a given crop had an ozone  response  function
similar to  either the minimum available  response
function or the maximum available response  function.
The  available response functions do not necessarily
bracket the true range of potential crop responses, and
it is  unrealistic to anticipate that all acreage will be
planted in cultivars with a uniform response  to ozone
                   exposure.   These considerations  notwithstanding,
                   these values do  indicate the likely magnitude  of
                   agricultural benefits associated with post-CAAA of
                   ozone precursors under the CAAA, but  not the
                   precise value of those benefits.
 Table F-3
 Change in Net Crop Income, Consumer Surplus and Net Surplus
 Under the Post-CAAA Scenario (millions of 1990$)
             Change in Net Crop Income
             Change in Consumer Surplus
                              Change in Net Surplus
             Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Maximum
1990
2000
2010

$0
-$320
-$736

$0
-$1,901
-$4.555

$0
$367
$743
not he includ
$0
$2,763
$5.643
ed in the analvsis d
$0
$46
$7.5
ue to eitl
$0
$862
$1.088
ner exnosure-
Conclusions

    Agricultural benefits associated with post-CAAA
levels of ozone precursors under the Clean Air Act are
likely to be fairly large.  Because it is possible that
over time  producers have  adopted more ozone-
resistant cultivars, it may be appropriate to consider
the lower end of the range of predicted benefits to be
more indicative of the likely total benefits for those
crops  included  in the analysis.    The  estimates
developed in this analysis, however, do not represent
all of the likely benefits accruing to agriculture, in that
many high-value and/or ozone sensitive crops could
                   response  data  limitations  or  agricultural  sector
                   modeling limitations.   The  second  consideration
                   implies that  benefits will  likely be larger  than
                   estimated.   The minimum case may be the most
                   appropriate starting point, however, due to the first
                   consideration: the current crop mix may be biased
                   toward higher ozone responsiveness.  Therefore, we
                   anticipate  that  cumulative  net  present   value
                   agricultural  benefits   from  the  Clean Air  Act
                   Amendments over the period 1990 to 2010 are on the
                   order of $4 billion dollars.
                                                F-8

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Abt Associates. 1998.  Agricultural Benefits Using AGSIM for the NOx SIP Call.  Prepared for U.S.
       EPA/OAQPS. September.

FAPRI. 1997. U.S. Agricultural Outlook. FAPRI Staff Report No. 1-97. Obtained via
       http://www.fapri.missouri.edu.

Lefohn, Allen S. et. al.  1988. A comparison of indices that describe the relationship between exposure to
       ozone and reduction in the yield of agricultural  crops. Atmospheric Environment 22: 1229-1240.

Lee, E.H., W.E. Hogsett.  1996. Methodology for calculating inputs for ozone secondary standard benefits
       analysis: Part II.  Prepared for the U.S. EPA, OAQPS.  March.

National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP).  1991. 1990 Integrated assessment report.
       National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, 722 Jackson Place NW, Washington, D.C. 20503.

Shnner, D.S., W.W. Heck, S.B. McLaughlin, D.W. Johnson, P.M. Irving, J.D. Joslin and C.E. Peterson.
       1990.  Response of vegetation to atmospheric deposition and air pollution.  NAPAP SOS/T Report
       18, In: Acidic Deposition: State of Science and Technology, Volume III, National Acid Precipitation
       Assessment Program, 722 Jackson Place NW, Washington, D.C. 20503.

USDA 1984.  Usual Planting and Harvesting Dates for U.S. Field Crops. Statistical Reporting Service
       Agricultural Handbook No. 628.

USDA.  1998a. Crops County Datasets. National Agricultural Statistics Service.  Electronic files obtained via
       http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/data-sets/crops/9X100/Fl.

USDA 1998b.  USDA Agricultural Projections to 2007.  World Agricultural Outlook Board, Office of the
       Chief Economist. Prepared by the Interagency Agricultural Projections Committee.  Staff Report
       No. WA OB-98-1. Obtained via http://www.econ.ag.gov/briefing/ baseline.

U.S. EPA.  1993. PRZM-2.  A model for predicting pesticide fate in the crop root and unsaturated soil
       zones. User's  manual for Release 2.0. EPA/600/R-93/046.
                                               F-9

-------
                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
[This page left blank intentionally.]
               F-10

-------
Stratospheric  Ozone
Assessment
Introduction

   This appendix describes the assessment of costs
and benefits of Title VI  of the Clean Air Act
Amendments (CAAA).  Provisions under Title VI
limit emissions of  stratospheric ozone-depleting
chemicals.  Cost and benefit estimates of Title VI
provisions are derived from a secondary analysis
that updates key economic valuation components of
previous analyses conducted by EPA's Office of Air
and Radiation, Stratospheric Protection Division.
We chose  to  perform a secondary analysis  for
several reasons: (1)  prior analyses suggest that the
benefits of these programs far exceed the costs,
suggesting a potentially low value of information
from  re-estimating  costs  and benefits  in  new
primary analyses; (2) prior analyses were extensively
peer-reviewed; (3) the costs and benefits of these
provisions are largely separable from  provisions
implemented under other titles of the Clean Air Act
Amendments; and  (4)  developing new primary
estimates would involve considerable time and
expense. We therefore provide a new assessment of
the valuation of benefits to ensure consistency with
other portions of the prospective analysis, but have
not re-assessed the Agency's previous estimates of
stratospheric   ozone    depleter    emissions,
stratospheric ozone loss, changes in exposure to
UV-b radiation, changes in physical effects, or the
costs of Title VI provisions.

   Unlike estimates for other Titles of the CAAA,
we present estimates for Title VI as net present
values of the streams of annual costs and benefits.
The rationale for this type of presentation of costs
and benefits relates  to the long-term nature of the
mechanisms of stratospheric ozone depletion and
measures taken to avoid depletion. Stratospheric
ozone is a global resource, and its formation and
depletion are governed by long-term processes that
may take place over decadal or longer time scales.
Attempting to parse the incremental effects of an
annual reduction in emissions of ozone depleting
substances and estimate its impact  at the unit
emissions level is an extremely difficult, if not
impossible, task and was not attempted for this
exercise.

   For the same reasons, We  conduct a longer
time-scale of analysis than is used in the remainder
of the study. We estimate cost over the period 1990
through 2075, and benefits are estimated over the
period 1990 to 2175. The difference in time scales
for costs  and benefits reflects the persistence of
ozone depleting substances in the atmosphere, the
slow processes of ozone formation and depletion,
and lags in the manifestation of physical effects in
response  to exposure to elevated levels of UV-b
radiation.  The full benefits of emissions reductions
achieved during 1990 to 2075 accrue across many
decades  and several  generations, requiring an
extended time scale for benefits analysis.

   In the next section of the appendix, we provide
a brief history of Title  VI  and its amendments.
Next we summarize the general approaches used to
estimate the costs and benefits in previous analyses,
and we describe our strategy for modifying several
analytical parameters to ensure consistency with the
assessments of other titles of the Clean Air Act.
Finally, we present the adjusted cost and benefits
from 1990 to 2165 and discuss  the uncertainty
associated with the analyses.
History of Stratospheric Ozone
Protection and the CAAA

   The protection of stratospheric ozone is an
international effort, resulting in several multinational
agreements. The United States has both participated
in  the  development  of these  international
                                           G-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
agreements and has created its own reduction and
phaseout schedules for ozone-depleting substances
used  within  its  borders. These  reduction  and
phaseout schedules, codified under Title VI of the
Clean Air Act Amendments,  are often stricter than
the international agreements that preceded them.
Below we briefly  describe  the history  of the
international agreements and their relationship to
the Clean Air Act Amendments.

    The  United States, the  European  Economic
Community, and 23  other  countries  signed the
"Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone  Layer"  (1987  Montreal  Protocol)   on
September 16,  1987.  Thirty-four countries then
ratified this protocol.  The agreement prohibits the
use of chlorofluorocarbons  (CFCs) beyond 1986
usage levels starting in mid-1989 and establishes a
schedule for reducing  the production of CFCs  (i.e.,
a 20 percent reduction in CFC production in 1993
and a 50 percent reduction in 1998). The protocol
also forbids the production of halons beyond 1986
production levels starting in 1992. On  August 12,
1988, the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency
(EPA) published final regulations  to  protect
stratospheric   ozone   and   comply  with  the
requirements of the 1987 Montreal Protocol.1

    After ratification of the  Montreal Protocol
scientists determined that the loss of stratospheric
ozone was greater than they had originally thought
and that man-made compounds containing bromine
and  chlorine  were   responsible  for  this  loss.
Consequently, in June 1990 the countries that  had
signed the Montreal Protocol met  in London to
develop an accelerated CFC reduction schedule (i.e.,
a decrease in CFC production to 50 percent of 1986
production levels by 1995 and 15 percent of 1986
levels  by  1997).   According  to  this  London
Agreement, production  of  CFCs,  halons, and
carbon tetrachloride will cease by 2000 and methyl
chloroform (MCF) production would end by 2005.2

    In November 1990  President George  Bush
signed the Clean Air Act Amendments  (CAAA),
which include Title VI.  This title consists of six
major sections, of which the most important are
sections 604 and  606.  Section 604 accelerates the
London Agreement's reduction schedules for CFCs,
halons, and carbon tetrachloride and shortens the
time allowed for  methyl  chloroform phaseout by
three years.  Section  606  allows  Congress to
accelerate the reduction and phaseout schedules of
section 604 if necessary  to protect human health
and  the environment. Together, sections 604 and
606 generate nearly all of the costs and benefits of
Title VI.  The  remaining  sections   include  the
following: section 608 (which requires the EPA to
establish standards regarding the use and disposal of
ozone-depleting  substances  during  the  service,
repair, or  disposal of appliances and  industrial
refrigerators); section 609 (which requires  the EPA
to regulate the  servicing of motor vehicle air
conditioners); and section 611 (which stipulates that
the EPA must establish labeling requirements for
containers of ozone-depleting substances and for
products containing these  substances). This analysis
does not examine the costs and benefits of section
605, which institutes the reduction and phaseout
schedules  for hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs),
because the schedules of section 606 supersede
section  605's timetables.  Table G-l provides a
description of the principal sections of the CAAA's
Title VI.
    1 ICF, Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance
with Section 604 of the Ckan Air Act for the Phaseout of O^pne
Depleting Chemicals, Prepared for Global Change Division, Office
of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C.July 1, 1992, page ES-1.
    2Ibid, ES-1 and ES-2.
                                                G-2

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table G-1
 Six Major Sections of Title VI
               Section
                            Description
 Section 604 - Class I Phaseout
Institutes the reduction and phaseout schedules for Class I substances
(methyl chloroform, halons, chlorofluorocarbons,  carbon tetrachloride).
 Section 605 - Class II Phaseout
Institutes the reduction and phaseout schedules for Class II substances
(hydrochlorofluorocarbons).
 Section 606 - Accelerated Schedule   Permits Congress to accelerate the phaseout schedule of Class I and II
                                    substances if necessary for the protection of human health and the
                                    environment.
                                    Also, if countries modify the Montreal Protocol to accelerate phaseout
                                    schedules of Class  I and II chemicals, Congress can amend the Clean Air
                                    Act to reflect these modifications.
 Section 608 - National Recycling and
 Emission Reduction Program
Requires the EPA to establish standards regarding the use and disposal of
Class I and II substances during the service, repair, or disposal of
appliances and industrial refrigeration units.
 Section 609 - Servicing of Motor
 Vehicle Air Conditioners
Requires the EPA to regulate the servicing of motor vehicle air
conditioners.
 Section 611 - Labeling
Stipulates that the EPA establish labeling requirements for containers of
Class I and II substances and for products containing these substances.
    In November 1992 the parties to the Montreal
Protocol  met in  Copenhagen to  establish  an
agreement  that   incorporates  new   scientific
information on stratospheric ozone depletion.3  For
example, data from the National Aeronautics  and
Space Administration (NASA) indicated that ozone
depletion  was  progressing  more   rapidly  than
expected.   In addition, ozone  depletion   was
extending further south in the  United States  than
anticipated and lasting longer (late fall to late May).4
In response to new data, the parties to the Montreal
Protocol agreed to several changes in the reduction
and   phaseout  schedules   of  ozone-depleting
chemicals.   First,  they agreed to a 1999 phaseout
        U.S.    Environmental   Protection    Agency,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t6/fact_sheets/66.txt, March
25, 1998.

    4 Ibid, ES-3 and ES-4.
                    deadline for hydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs),
                    chemicals not regulated under the earlier London
                    Agreement.   Second, they called for a freeze on
                    production of methyl bromide by stipulating that
                    the chemical should not exceed 1991 levels starting
                    in 1995.5   Third,  these  countries  decided  to
                    accelerate the reduction schedule for the production
                    and  consumption  of hydrochlorofluorocarbons
                    (HCFCs). Lastly, they hastened the phaseout  of
                    halons by agreeing to 1994 as the production and
                    consumption phaseout deadline.6
                        5    U.S.    Environmental    Protection    Agency,
                    http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/mbr/harmoniz.html, March 26,
                    1999.

                            U.S.    Environmental    Protection    Agency,
                    http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t6/fact_sheets/66.txt, March
                    25, 1998.
                                                  G-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Under the Clean Air Act Amendments' section
606, the EPA also responded to the new scientific
data by  periodically  accelerating the reduction
schedules  for  MCF,  CFCs,  halons,   carbon
tetrachloride, and HCFs and by establishing earlier
phaseout deadlines.  In addition, the EPA targeted
HBFCs  and  methyl  bromide,  chemicals  not
explicitly  addressed by the 1990 Clean  Air Act
Amendments.

    The  most recent changes established under
section 606 involve methyl bromide. In 1993 the
EPA called for a freeze on production at 1991 levels
starting in 1994 and established a phaseout deadline
of 2001.  In  1995 and 1997 the parties to the
Montreal  Protocol met in Vienna and Montreal,
respectively, to address issues such as the phaseout
of methyl bromide.  In 1998 Congress directed the
EPA to  match the 1997 Montreal Amendment's
reduction and phaseout schedule for this chemical.
In 1998, Congress amended the Clean  Air Act to
establish  a new methyl bromide reduction schedule,
which establishes 2005 as the phaseout deadline,
and helps to address the needs of American farmers
who  are  currently waiting for methyl  bromide
alternatives   that   are  in   the  research   and
development stage.7  Table G-2 presents the most
significant sections of the new and old phaseout schedules.
                                                              U.S.   Environmental    Protection   Agency,
                                                      http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/nibr/harrnoniz.htnil,
                                                      November 9, 1999.
                                                G-4

-------
                                                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table G-2
Phaseout Scenario in Clean Air Act Section 604 and
Phaseout Scenario in Amendments Added under Clean Air Act Section 606
Year   Section 604 (Original Schedule)
Section 606 (Revisions to Original Schedule)
 1991   • Methyl chloroform (MCF) production decreases to 1989 levels

 1993   • MCF production decreases 10% from 1989 levels

 1994   • MCF production decreases 15% from 1989 levels       -»

 1995   • MCF production decreases 30% from 1989 levels       -»

 1996   • MCF production decreases 50% from 1989 levels       -»

 2000   • MCF production decreases 80% from 1989 levels

 2002   • 100% phaseout of MCF
  MCF production decreases from 1989 levels by 50%

  MCF production decreases from 1989 levels by 70%

  100% phaseout of MCF
1989   • Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) production decreases to 1986 levels

1991   • CFC production decreases 15% from 1986 levels

1992   • CFC production decreases 20% from 1986 levels

1993   • CFC production decreases 25% from 1986 levels

1994   • CFC production decreases 35% from 1986 levels       -»

1995   • CFC production decreases 50% from 1986 levels       -»

1996   • CFC production decreases 60% from 1986 levels       -»

1997   • CFC production decreases 85% from 1986 levels

2000   • 100% phaseout of CFC production
  CFC production decreases to 75% from 1986 levels

  CFC production decreases to 75% from 1986 levels

  100% phaseout of CFC production
                                                                G-5

-------
                                                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Year   Section 604 (Original Schedule)
                                                                               Section 606 (Revisions to Original Schedule)
1991   •  Halon production decreases 15% from 1986 levels

1992   •  Halon production decreases 20% from 1986 levels

1993   •  Halon production decreases 25% from 1986 levels

1994   •  Halon production decreases 35% from 1986 levels

1995   •  Halon production decreases 50% from 1986 levels

1996   •  Halon production decreases 60% from 1986 levels

1997   •  Halon production decreases 85% from 1986 levels

2000   •  100% phaseout of halon production
                                                                     100% phaseout of halons
1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

2000
Carbon tetrachloride production decreases to 1989 levels

Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 10% from 1989 levels

Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 20% from 1989 levels

Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 30% from 1989 levels

Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 85% from 1989 levels



100% phaseout of carbon tetrachloride
-»     • Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 50% from 1989 levels

-»     • Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 85% from 1989 levels

-»     • Carbon tetrachloride production decreases 100% phaseout of carbon
        tetrachloride
                                                                   G-6

-------
                                                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Year  Section 604 (Original Schedule)
                                           Section 606 (Revisions to Original Schedule)
1994

1999

2001

2003

2005
                                           • Freeze on production and consumption of methyl bromide at 1991 levels

                                           • 25% phaseout of methyl bromide

                                           • 50% phaseout of methyl bromide

                                           • 75% phaseout of methyl bromide

                                           • 100% phaseout of methyl bromide

                                           (quarantine and preshipment uses exempt; critical agriculture uses allocated after 2005)
1996
                                             100% phaseout of hydrobromofluorocarbons (HBFCs)
2003

2010

(2010-
2020)

2015

2020

2030
Freeze on HCFC production
Prohibition of HCFC production after
January 1, 2030
Production and consumption of HCFC-141b banned

Production and consumption of HCFC-142b and HCFC-22 decreases to 1989 levels

Production and consumption of HCFC-142b and HCFC-22 permissible only for servicing
equipment manufactured prior to 2010

Production and consumption of the remaining HCFCs decreases to 1989 levels

100% phasout of HCFC-142b and HCFC-22

100% phaseout of the final category of HCFCs
                                                                 G-7

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Cost and  Benefit Approaches

    To estimate the costs and benefits of Title VI,
we rely primarily on past EPA regulatory impact
assessments (RIAs), including the following:

    •   Addendum to  the 1992 Phaseout Regulatory
        Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of
        CFCs, Halons,  Methyl Chloroform,  Carbon
        tetrachloride, andHCFCs (1993);

    •   Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance nith
        Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout
        ofO^pne Depleting Chemicals (1992);

    •   Regulatory  Impact Analysis:  The National
        Recycling   and  Emission Reduction Program
        (Section 608 of the Clean Air Amendments of
        1990)  (1993);

    •   Section 609 of the  1990  Clean Air  Act:
        Cost-Benefit Anajysis and Regulatory flexibility
        Analysis (1991);

    •   Draft: Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed
        Rule Requiring Labeling of Products Containing
        or Manufactured with O^pne Depleting Substances
        (1991).

The major difference between this analysis and the
RIA analyses involves the parameters used to value
the costs and benefits. To ensure  consistency with
the  larger  Section  812  analysis, we adjust the
discount rate in the costs calculations, and we adjust
the value of statistical life, GDP per capita growth
rates,  and  the  discount  rate   in  the  benefits
calculations.

Cost Approach in RIAs

    Existing regulatory impact assessments (RIAs)
for individual  provisions of Title VI provide the
basis for  the social costs of phasing out  CFCs,
halons, methyl chloroform, and HCFCs.8  These
social  costs  are  the   additional quantities  of
resources necessary to produce equivalent quantities
of goods and services for consumers. To  generate
social cost estimates, the RIAs calculate the costs of
replacing ozone-depleting chemicals (ODSs) with
alternative technologies and materials, as well as the
costs of recycling and storing unused ODSs. The
estimates also include costs of training, labeling, and
administration. The total cost estimate of Title VI
comprises the costs of sections 604 and 606 and the
incremental costs of the remaining sections (i.e., the
cost estimates for sections 608, 609, and 611 do not
include the costs of actions already required by
sections 604  and 606). Table G-3 indicates the
major costs  associated with  each  section. We
present summaries of the cost methodologies in this
appendix;  for more  details, see the RIAs of the
individual provisions of Title VI.
    8 Only a small percentage of carbon tetrachloride (less than
three percent of the total produced in the U.S.) is subject to the
CAAA, and the costs of phasing out carbon tetrachloride are
likely insignificant compared to the costs of phasing out CFCs,
halons, and MCFs. Consequently, the RIAs do not quantify the
costs of phasing out carbon tetrachloride. In addition, this
analysis does not assess the cost of methyl bromide because Part
2: The Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of the Proposed Phaseout of Methyl
Bromide does not provide the corresponding benefits.
                                                   G-8

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
  Table G-3
  Scope of Title VI Cost Estimates
    Section
  608
                                     Costs
  604 & 606     «    Capital investment and variable costs associated with switching to alternative technologies
                     and non-ozone-depleting substances;
                     Possible elimination of products containing ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) if firms are
                     unable to develop cost-effective manufacturing alternatives;
                •    Costs of recycling ODSs;
                     Additional costs of switching from methyl bromide to other substances (e.g. purchases of
                     more costly substitutes, incremental labor needs, and crop and throughput issues).
Purchase of ODS recovery equipment;
Training and certification of technicians;
Filtration of refrigerants to remove impurities;
Leak repair requirements;
Storage of unused chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs);
Paperwork.
  609           «    Training and certification of mobile air conditioner (MAC) service technicians;
                     Recycling costs, including fees for off-site recycling or labor and capital costs for on-site
                     recycling.
  611           «    Development and application of new labels;
                     Administrative activities associated with compliance;
                     Possible accelerated substitution  of less harmful  substances relative to the mandates of the
                     rule codifying the phaseout of ODSs (thereby resulting in additional costs beyond those
                     resulting from the phaseout rule).
     Costs: Sections 604 and 606

     To generate  the costs of section  604, the
Addendum  to the 1992 Phaseout Regulatory Impact
Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs,  Halons,
Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs
(1993) and the  Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance
with Section 604  of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of
O^pne Depleting  Chemicals (1992) use engineering
analyses that involve several steps.  First, the RIAs
identify potential technical responses to section 604
from 1990 to 2075. For example, they examine data
on the CFG reduction technologies available to each
CFC-using industry (i.e., mobile air conditioners,
household  refrigeration,  foam blowing,  solvent
cleaning, sterilization, rigid  polyurethane  foams,
chillers, and process-12 refineries).9 For halon the
       ICF, Incorporated, Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons,
Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs, Prepared for
the Stratospheric Protection Division,  Office  of Air and
                                     RIAs analyze 74  categories of fire extinguishing
                                     applications, the primary users of the  substance.10
                                     With these data, the RIAs  identify three potential
                                     technical responses: use of chemical substitutes for
                                     CFC and halon use in new and existing equipment,
                                     implementation of engineering controls that reduce
                                     use of ODSs through recycling, and use of product
                                     substitutes for ODS-containing products.

                                          Second,  the  RIAs  assess  the costs of the
                                     responses. For halons and CFCs the RIAs examine
                                     the date at which an action is first available for
                                     adoption, the time necessary for the entire industry
                                     to evaluate  the  action, and the time required for
                                     Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September
                                     10, 1993, page 6.

                                         10ICF, Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance
                                     with Section  604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^pne
                                     Depleting Chemicals, Prepared for Global Change Division, Office
                                     of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
                                     July 1, 1992; page 4-7.
                                                    G-9

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
firms to adopt the action if it is cost-effective. They
also study reduction potential (decrease in ODS use
for all firms that have decided to take the action)
and applicability to new and/or existing equipment.
This CFG and halon cost approach is similar to the
approach   used  in   the  U.S.  Environmental
Protection  Agency's  Regulatory  Impact Analysis:
Protection  of Stratospheric  O^pne  (1988); the main
difference is the expansion of the methods used to
model the lifetimes of equipment using CFC and
halons.11  By contrast, for MCFs the RIAs do not
focus on the lifetime of the equipment  because
firms can retrofit MCF-consuming  end uses with
MCF alternatives.12   Using the relevant data for
MCFs, halons, and CFCs, the RIAs estimate feasible
schedules for implementation of reduction measures
and estimate the following costs:

    •  Variable costs (e.g., materials, energy, labor,
        and operating expenses);
    11 Specifically, the cost model improves upon the 1988
model in the following ways: tracking the size, age, and turnover
of CFC-consuming equipment over time; simulating the
lifecycle of the equipment in terms of manufacturing, operation,
servicing, and disposal; estimating CFC use, CFC emissions,
energy use, and costs for each point in the lifecycle; calculating
CFCs  potentially  available through recycling from older
equipment; and simulating the impact of CFC  reduction
measures by assessing the degree of emissions reductions, total
costs,  and total changes  in  energy  use associated with
implementing groups of controls over time for each end use.
(ICF Incorporated,  Regulatory Impact Analysis:  Compliance with
Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout ofQ^one-Depleting
Chemicals, Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office of
Air and Radiation, U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,
1992, pages 4-2, 4-8, 4-9, and 4-16.)

    12 The EPA's Costs and Benefits of Phasing Out Production of
CFCs and Hahns in the United States (1989) and the  EPA's
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric O^pne (1988)
provide the basis  of  the cost methodology  for the MCF
phaseout. Note that the MCF model calculates energy costs as
a part of operating costs, rather than as a separate component,
because MCF end uses  are not energy  intensive.    (ICF
Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis:  Compliance with Section
604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout ofO^pne-Depleting Chemicals,
Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office of Air and
Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, pages
ES-8, 4-27.)
    •  Capital costs;

    •  One-time  fixed  costs  (e.g., research  and
        development or training); and

    •  Changes in energy efficiency.

     For the last step of the cost analyses, the model
selects technologies that minimize  production cost
increases   and  achieve   the  necessary  ODS
reductions. The final  set  of control plans must
satisfy the  following requirements:  1)  the plans
contain  components  that industry has  already
implemented or intends to implement in the near
future; 2) they jointly  ensure that the amount of
CFC production over time  does not exceed the
maximum stipulated by the phaseout schedule; and
3) they  collectively prevent  CFC  use  after  the
phaseout deadline from exceeding feasible recycling.

     Under section 606  the EPA accelerates the
reduction and phaseout schedules of ODSs; for
these substances the cost methodology is the same
as the section 604 methodology for CFCs, halons,
methyl chloroform, and carbon tetrachloride.  For
HCFCs the EPA calculates  the costs of phaseout by
multiplying the quantity of replaced HCFCs by the
difference in price between the HCFC compound
and  its substitute.  This analysis assumes  that the
replacement compounds will cost between 10 and
50 percent more than the HCFCs. Together, the
costs of sections 604 and 606 are $55.9 billion (1990
dollars) with a two percent discount rate; these costs
comprise nearly all of the costs of Title VI.

     Costs: Sections  608

     For section 608, the Regulatory Impact Analysis:
The National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program
(Section 608 of the  Clean Air Amendments of 1990)
(1993) uses the section 604 cost model to forecast
the timing of emissions controls, resulting prices,
and   recycling levels from  1994 to 2015.    In
particular,  the  model  assumes  that   recovery
efficiency is 95 percent and predicts that all users of
chillers,  industrial  processes, cold  storage, retail
food, and refrigerated transport will either recover
                                                   G-10

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
or recycle CFCs  at service and disposal and that
after the phaseout all household appliance users will
recover CFCs at disposal.13  With a two percent
discount rate the cost estimate is $1.2 billion (1990
dollars).

     Costs: Section 609

     Section 604 prompts service establishments to
recycle CFC-12 in mobile air conditioners (MACs).
Therefore, the section 604 cost estimate  accounts
for most costs associated with the recycling of CFC-
12 from MACs.  The  costs of section 609 that are
not included in the section 604 cost estimate are the
costs  of  training and  certifying  MAC  service
technicians.  The  analysis of the  social  costs  of
Section 609 examines these costs from 1992 to 2008
under two scenarios: a lower  bound scenario in
which small and large shops recover CFC-12 and
pay an off-site recycler to purify and return the used
refrigerant and an upper bound scenario in which all
shops recycle CFC-12 on-site.14  The central cost
estimate for section 609 with a two percent discount
rate is $14.3 million (1990 dollars).

     Costs: Section  611

     For section  611, the Draft: Regulatory Impact
Analysis of the Proposed Rule Requiring  Labeling of
Products Containing or Manufactured with O^pne Depleting
Substances  (1991) evaluates two  response options:
companies   label    all   products   or    they
reformulate/redesign the products to eliminate the
use of Class I  ozone-depleting substances (fully
halogenated CFCs, three halons, methyl chloroform,
and carbon tetrachloride).15 The RIA then assesses
three associated costs: costs  of  implementing
substitutes  (for MCF-containing products)  more
rapidly than predicted under the phaseout schedule,
administrative activity costs, and costs of labeling.16
From 1994 to 2000 the costs  of section 611 are
$252 million with a two percent discount rate.

Benefits  Approach in RIAs

     The RIAs'  Tide  VI    benefits  analyses
necessarily  differ from the benefits  analyses for
other parts  of our CAAA-analysis because, unlike
most of the effects of criteria air pollutants, the
effects of Tide VI are global in scale and occur over
several hundred years.  The delay in effects occurs
for several reasons. First, emissions often emanate
from  products  that   leak the  ozone-depleting
chemicals over a significant period of time. Second,
ozone-depleting chemicals rise into die stratosphere
and  affect the ozone layer at a slow rate. Third,
ozone-depleting  substances  can  persist  in  the
stratosphere  for  many  years.   Fourth,  natural
processes that replace stratospheric ozone are slow.
To  reflect  the long  time period during  which
stratospheric ozone depletion occurs, this analysis
assumes  that the benefits accrue from 1990 to 2165.

     Figure G-l  is a simplified illustration of the
relationships between the sets of data used in the
existing benefits analyses.  First, the EPA estimates
change  in ozone-depleting substance  emissions.
With these  data  the EPA calculates the extent of
stratospheric ozone depletion and global warming.
Then the EPA calculates the effects of stratospheric
ozone on UV-b radiation, which in turn affects
    13ICF, Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: The National
Recycling andEmission Reduction Program (Section 608 of the Clean Air
       nts of 1990)., Prepared for the Stratospheric Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 25,
1993, page 4-2.

    14ICF, Incorporated, Section 609 of the 1990 Chan Air Act:
RefrigerantRecycling for Mobile Air Conditioners: Cost-Benefit Analysis
and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis., Prepared for the Division of
Global Change, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 24,
1991, pages 4 and 8.
    15 The costs analysis does not account for the accelerated
reduction  and phaseout  schedule of section 606.  ICF,
Incorporated, Draft: Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Proposed Ra/e
Requiring Labeling, of Products Containing, or Manufactured with Oyone
  i   &     & j              &      j          ^
Depleting Substances., Prepared for Global Change Division, Office
of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
November 1991, pages 1, 4, and 6.

    16 Ibid, page 37.
                                                  G-11

-------
                                            The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
                                      Fig u re G -1

                           SCHEMATIC OF COST AND
                       BENEFIT  ANALYSES OF TITLE  VI
                               Emissions Estimates
Cost estim ates


   Present
   value
                Stratospheric
                ozone m odeling
Global warming
estimates*
  I
UV-b
radiation
                                                 Tropospheric
                                                 ozone
                            Hum an health
                            effects
                                                  Ecological
                                                  effects
                                                  Som e benefits
                                                  addressed
                                                  qualitatively
                            Monetization of
                            som e benefits
                               Present
                               value
                                                  Monetization of
                                                  som e benefits
                                                                         I
                                                   Present
                                                   value
     Several ozone-depleting substances are also greenhouse gases with high radiative forcing
     potential relative to carbon dioxide.  We do not assess the impact ofglobal warming in this analysis.
                                         G-12

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
estimates of tropospheric ozone.17   Using UV-b
radiation, tropospheric ozone, and global warming
data as inputs, the EPA estimates human health and
environmental effects.18 Lastly, the EPA monetizes
the benefits of improved human and environmental
health  where possible.19   In  this  analysis,  our
assessment of benefits is slightly different from that
of the previous RIAs because we attribute benefits
to effects of reduced stratospheric ozone and not to
global warming.  We present the benefits estimate as
a net present value, rather than an annualized value,
because annualization incorrectly imputes benefits
of later phaseouts to earlier years.  For  example,
annualization of the benefits of phasing out HCFC-
22 by 2020 attributes benefits to years prior to 2030,
when neither the costs nor  the benefits of that
phaseout have  yet  occurred.   Consequently, an
annualized  estimate will  overstate benefits at the
beginning of the time span and understate them
later.

Emissions Modeling

     The methodology for predicting global use of
ozone-depleting  chemicals  and  the  resulting
emissions is  similar  to the methodology used in
Regulatory Impact Analysis:  Compliance with Section 604
    17 The relationships between stratospheric ozone depletion
and global warming and between stratospheric ozone depletion
and tropospheric ozone are incompletely understood at this
time. The Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with Section 604 of
the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout ofO^pne Depleting Chemicals (1992)
and the Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout Regulatory Impact Analysis:
Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon
Tetrachloride, andHCFCs  (1993) base their tropospheric ozone
estimates on the "Effects  of Increased UV Radiation on Urban
Ozone" (Whitten and Gery, 1986).

    18  Note that the Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with
Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^one Depleting
Chemicals (1992) and the Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout Regulatory
Impact Analysis: Accekrating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons, Methyl
Chloroform,  Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs (1993)  do not
provide data on the models used to estimate UV-b radiation.

    19  The benefits estimates used in the RIAs' benefit/cost
comparison sections do not reflect  economic  impacts  (e.g.,
profit increases that occur if alternative technologies are more
efficient than ODS-using technologies).
of the Ck an Air Act for the Phaseout of Q^pne-Depleting
Chemicals (1992). The main difference in the baseline
scenario, which  assumes no Title VI controls,
involves  methyl  bromide.   In  this analysis we
assume  the following  as a baseline:  1)  in  1990
facilities worldwide produce 63 million kilograms of
methyl bromide and facilities  in the U.S. produce
29.1   million   kilograms;   2)   methyl   bromide
production grows at 5.5 percent annually until 2025
and zero percent thereafter; 3) 50 percent of methyl
bromide production generates emissions; 4)  humans
generate about 25 percent of total methyl bromide
emissions20; and 5) bromine is 40 times as effective
as chlorine at destroying ozone.  Also, based on
NASA's new data regarding the extent of ozone
depletion in the Northern Hemisphere, the model
assumes that the weighted average ozone depletion
was 3.38 percent in 1989 relative to 1979 .21

     The control scenario used in this prospective
analysis  is based on the "CAA phaseout scenario"
established in the 1992 RIA and the "President's
schedule" outlined w. Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of
CFCs, Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride,
and HCFCs  (1993).   The  phaseout  schedule,
presented in Table G-2, summarizes the emission
reductions  incorporated in  this  study's  control
scenario. The emissions model forecasts global use
and   emissions    of   CFCs,   MCFs,   carbon
tetrachloride, HCFCs, and halons under the control
scenario  in two  major  steps.22   For   sections
    20 Sources of methyl bromide include anthropogenic and
natural sources. Natural sources include the ocean, plants, and
soil.

    21 Stolarski, Watson, Testimony to the Senate Commerce,
Science,  and  Transportation  Subcommittee  on  Science,
Technology, and Space, April 16, 1991; ICF, Incorporated,
Addendum  to the  1992  Phaseout  Regulatory Impact  Analysis:
Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon
Tetrachloride, and  HCFCs,   Prepared for  the  Stratospheric
Protection  Division,  Office  of  Air  and Radiation,  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, September 10, 1993, page 9.

    22 See ICF, Incorporated, Addendum to the  1992 Phaseout
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons,
Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs, Prepared for
                                                    G-13

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
reflecting the accelerated reduction and phaseout
schedule,  the model  first applies the chemical
demand growth rates developed for the Regulatory
Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric O^pne (1988),
with  the assumption that  all nations will comply
with the Copenhagen Amendments. For the other
sections (i.e.,  section  611, section 609,  and  the
ecological components of sections 604 and 606), the
model  assumes  that all nations comply with  the
Montreal   Protocol   and   the   1990   London
Agreements.23   Second, the  model applies  these
growth rates to the release rates for the chemicals.24
This  calculation generates  the  total  emissions
estimate for each chemical from 1985 to 2165.25

Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
Modeling and Global Warming

     Using the total emissions estimates of ODSs,
the atmospheric lifetimes of the  chemicals, and
conversion factors, the EPA calculates stratospheric
chlorine and bromine  concentrations.  Lifetimes
indicate the length of time that the chlorine and
bromine associated with a specific chemical will
likely remain in the atmosphere. Conversion factors
relate  the  emissions   to  stratospheric   ozone
changes.26   To translate changes in stratospheric
chlorine and bromine concentrations to changes in
the Stratospheric  Protection Division,  Office of Air and
Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September
10, 1993, page 9.

    23 Ibid, ICF (1993a), 9; Ibid IGF (1992), 3-6 and 3-12.

    24 Ibid, ICF (1993a), 1; Ibid ICF (1992), 3-12.

    25  ICF Incorporated's Addendum to  the  1992  Phaseout
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Acceleratingthe Phaseout of CFCs, Halons,
Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, andHCFCs (1993a) does
not present emissions estimates.

    26  The sources of the ozone depleting potential estimates
include  Fisher et al. (1990a) and the 1987 Montreal Protocol.
(ICF Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with
Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout ofO^pne-Depleting
Chemicals, Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office of
Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency,
1992, page 3-16.)
total  column ozone, the  EPA modifies Connell's
parameterized  version   of  a   one-dimensional
atmospheric chemistry model.27 The EPA calibrates
this model to incorporate the effects of atmospheric
processes  (e.g., heterogeneous chemical reactions)
by   applying   an  adjustment   factor  to   the
stratospheric ozone content; this calibration ensures
that the model's global results are consistent with
historical ozone trends for northern hemisphere
middle and high  latitudes.28   The EPA's  model
assumes that increases in stratospheric chlorine are
the primary causes of the observed ozone change
and  that  the  annual  average change  in UV-b
predicted by the  modeling framework  equals  the
annual  average   UV-b  change  inferred  from
observed ozone trends and radiation models.

     In conjunction with  the  calibrated  version of
Connell's parameterized  model,  a second  model
incorporates the  ability of CFCs, halons, MCF,
carbon  tetrachloride,  and   HCFCs  to  act  as
greenhouse gases (substances that  contribute to the
warming of the earth's atmosphere by absorbing
infrared  radiation  emitted   from  the  earth's
surface).29 This second model, adapted from  the
    27 Connell, Peter, "A Parameterized Numerical Fit to Total
Column Ozone Changes Calculated by the LLNL 1-D Model
of the Troposphere and Stratosphere," Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, 1986. (For a description
of the stratospheric  ozone model, see U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Assessing the Risks of Trace Gases that Can
Modify the Stratosphere., 1987; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Future Concentrations of Stratospheric Chlorine andBromine,
EPA 400/1-88-005,  August 1988; and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency,  Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection  of
Stratospheric O^one, August 1, 1988.)

    28 Rodriguez, J.M., M.K.W. Ko, and N.D. Sze, " Antarctic
Chlorine Chemistry: Possible Global Implications," Geophysical
Research letters, 15,  1988, pages 257-260.

    29 CFC substitutes may indirectly influence global warming
by affecting the energy efficiency of  CFC-using capital stock
(e.g., insulating foam and refrigerators). As chemicals that are
more or less energy efficient replace CFCs, total energy demand
could diminish or increase, causing changes in the emissions of
energy-related greenhouse gases. (ICF  Incorporated, Regulatory
Impact Analysis: Compliance with Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for
the Phaseout of O^pne-Depleting Chemicals, Prepared for the Global
                                                   G-14

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Goddard Institute of Space Sciences' climate model,
uses   estimates   for   emissions  of  controlled
chemicals, substitute chemicals, and energy-related
greenhouse  gases to  calculate  changes  in global
temperature over time.30 The model adjusts column
ozone and temperature so that they are consistent
with consensus ozone-depleting potential and global
warming potential estimates.31   The  model also
reflects  1) radiative and chemical feedback from
water vapor, 2) ocean absorption, 3)  atmospheric
circulation  effects,  and 4) chemical  interactions
between substances.32'33

     Estimates from stratospheric ozone modeling
may  be under-  or  overestimates,  depending  on
heterogeneous reactions in the aerosol layer, ozone
depletion  in  the Arctic,  the  linearity  of  the
Change  Division,  Office  of Air  and  Radiation,  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, pages 3-17 and 3-18.)

    30 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Regulatory Impact
Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric O^pne, August 1, 1988; ICF
Incorporated,  Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with Section
604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^pne-Depleting Chemicals,
Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office of Air and
Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, page
3-18.

    31 National Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration
Conference Publication 3023, ^!» Assessment Model for Atmospheric
Composition, 1988; ICF Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis:
The National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program (Section 608
of the  Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990),  Prepared for the
Stratospheric  Protection  Division,   U.S.   Environmental
Protection Agency, 1993, page 5-2.

    32 Radiative forcing constants and lifetimes form the basis
of the global warming potential estimates, calculated with an
infinite time horizon (Lashof and Ahuja, 1990).  Fisher et al.
provide data on direct radiative forcing constants (Fisher et al.,
1990b).

    33 ICF Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: The National
Recycling and Emission Redaction Program (Section 608 of the Clean Air
Act Amendments  of 1990),   Prepared  for the Stratospheric
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1993,  page 5-2;   ICF,  Incorporated,  Addendum to the 1992
Phaseout Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs,
Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride,  and HCFCs,
Prepared for the Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of
Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
September 10, 1993, page 9.
atmospheric  response, and other factors.34  The
EPA estimates that the accelerated reduction and
phaseout  schedules of section 604 and  606 will
result in  7 percent less ozone  depletion from
baseline levels in 2005 and 47.01 percent less ozone
depletion in 2075.35

Physical Effects

     For the physical effects that scientists have
modeled with dose-response functions, we use data
on UV-b  radiation  and tropospheric ozone  to
calculate benefits. We include benefits that scientists
have identified but not yet quantified in a qualitative
discussion.   Below  we  present   the  benefits
methodology for each section.

     Physical  Effects:  Sections 604
     and 606

     Table  G-4  presents   the  quantified  and
unquantified physical effects estimates of sections
604 and 606, which generate about 98 percent of the
benefits.  The   quantified  benefits  include  the
following:  reduced incidences of mortality and
morbidity associated with skin cancer (melanoma
and nonmelanoma); reduced incidences of cataract
morbidity and  the associated  pain and suffering;
reduced  crop   damage   associated  with  UV-b
radiation  and tropospheric  ozone; and  reduced
polymer degradation from UV-b radiation.
    34 ICF Incorporated, Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance
with Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^pne-
Depleting Chemicals, Prepared for the Global Change Division,
Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1992, page 5-8.

    35  ICF,  Incorporated, Addendum  to the  1992 Phaseout
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, Halons,
Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs, Prepared for
the Stratospheric  Protection  Division,  Office of Air and
Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September
10, 1993, page 14.
                                                     G-15

-------
                                                          The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table G-4
Benefits of Section 604, 606, and 609
    Health Effects- Quantified
            Estimate
            Basis for Estimate
   Melanoma and nonmelanoma
   skin cancer
   (fatal)
6.3 million lives saved from skin
cancer in the U.S. between 1990
and 2165
Dose-response function based on UV
exposure and demographics of exposed
populations.1
   Melanoma and nonmelanoma
   skin cancer
   (non-fatal)
299 million avoided cases of non-
fatal skin cancers in the U.S.
between 1990 and 2165
Dose-response function based on UV
exposure and demographics of exposed
populations.1
   Cataracts
27.5 million avoided cases in the
U.S. between 1990 and 2165
Dose-response function uses a multivariate
logistic risk function based on demographic
characteristics and medical history. 1	
Ecological Effects- Quantified
            Estimate
            Basis for Estimate
   American crop harvests
Avoided 7.5 percent decrease from
UV-b radiation by 2075
Dose-response sources: Teramura and Murali
(1986), Rowe and Adams (1987)
   American crops
Avoided decrease from
tropospheric ozone
Estimate of increase in tropospheric ozone:
Whitten and Gery (1986). Dose-response
source: Rowe and Adams (1987)
   Polymers
Avoided damage to materials from
UV-b radiation
Source of UV-b/stabilizer relationship: Horst
(1986)
Health Effects- Unquantified
Skin cancer: reduced pain and suffering
Reduced morbidity effects of increased UV. For example,
•   reduced actinic keratosis (pre-cancerous lesions resulting from excessive sun exposure)
•   reduced immune system suppression.

Ecological Effects- Unquantified

Ecological effects of UV. For example, benefits relating to the following:
•   recreational fishing
•   forests
•   overall marine ecosystem
•   avoided sea level rise, including avoided beach erosion, loss of coastal wetlands, salinity of estuaries and aquifers
•   other crops
•   other plant species
•   fish harvests

Ecological benefits of reduced tropospheric ozone relating to the overall marine ecosystem, forests, man-made materials,
crops, other plant species, and fish harvests

Benefits to people and the environment outside the U.S.	
Effects, both ecological and  human health, associated with global warming.
Notes:
       1) For more detail see EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone (1988).
       2) Note that the ecological effects, unlike the health effects, do not reflect the accelerated reduction and phaseout
        schedule of section 606.
       3) Benefits due to the section 606 methyl bromide phaseout are not included in the benefits total because the EPA
        provides  neither annual  incidence estimates nor a monetary value. The EPA does provide, however, a total
        estimate  of 2,800 avoided skin cancer fatalities in the U.S.
                                                       G-16

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Using the change in UV radiation exposure due to
current and future ozone depletion, we estimate the
number  of  additional  cases  of  skin   cancer
(melanoma and non-melanoma) and cataracts. With
the exception of non-melanoma mortality, which is
estimated as a fixed percentage of non-melanoma
incidence, we  use  dose-response  functions  to
develop future incremental skin cancer estimates.
We   employ  nearly   identical  approaches   in
developing the three  dose-response  functions for
non-fatal  non-melanoma  (i.e.,  basal  cell  and
squamous cell carcinoma), non-fatal melanoma, and
fatal melanoma.

    The  first step  uses results from studies that
have identified key groups of wavelengths  ("action
spectra")  within  the  UV  spectrum  that  are
associated with specific types of health effects (e.g.,
DNA damage).36   Once the appropriate action
spectrum for a health effect is determined, the next
step involves estimating the amount of UV dose
received at various  latitudes across the U.S. in the
years prior to ozone  depletion.   The  third  step
involves obtaining nationwide skin cancer incidence
and mortality data for each health effect.37  These
data are then combined with the estimated variation
in UV doses across latitudes in a cross-sectional
analysis of the relationship between skin  cancer
incidence or  mortality and differences  in  UV
exposure.38 This statistical analysis uses an equation
of the form:  (fractional change in incidence) =
(fractional change in UV dose + l)b -1, where b (the
biological amplification  factor) equals the  percent
change in incidence associated with a one  percent
change in dose.  The dose-response  function for
cataracts  is developed similarly.39

    The  health benefits model uses these dose-
response functions to project incremental cases of
non-fatal   non-melanoma,  fatal   and  non-fatal
melanoma, and cataracts  that will occur  due  to
future  increases  in   UV  exposure  caused   by
stratospheric ozone depletion.  In essence, future
incremental  health   effects  are  estimated   by
multiplying the baseline level of each  health effect
by the percentage change  in UV exposure  for
different latitudes in the  U.S. times the appropriate
dose-response factor.  Because the baseline levels of
all  of these UV-related  health effects tend to  be
higher for older people  and for those with lighter
skins, our method for projecting future incremental
skin  cancers  and  cataracts incorporates this and
other relevant factors  in its  benefits  estimates.
Estimates  of  non-melanoma fatalities  are  not
calculated from a dose-response function. Instead,
the  model  assumes  that  the number of non-
melanoma deaths will be a fixed percentage of the
    36 Sedow, R.B., "The Wavelengths of Sunlight Effective in
Producing Skin Cancer: A Theoretical Analysis," Proceedings of
die National Academy of Sciences, 71(9):3363-3366, 1974.

       Non-fatal basal and squamous cell non-melanoma
incidence rates were obtained from Scotto, J., T.  Fears, and
Fraumeni, "Incidence of Nonmelanoma Skin cancer in  the
United  States," U.S.  Department  of Health  and  Human
Services, (NIH) 82-2433, Befhesda, MD,  1981.  Non-fatal
melanoma incidence rates were obtained from National Cancer
Institute SEER Report, 1984. Fatal melanoma incidence rates
were obtained from  Pitcher, H.M.,  "Examination of  the
Empirical Relationship Between Melanoma Death Rates in the
United  States  1950-1979 and Satellite-Based Estimates of
Exposure to Ultraviolet Radiation," U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
March 17, 1987, draft.
       Non-fatal Non-Melanoma: Scotto, J,  and T. Fears,
"Estimating Increases  in  Skin Cancer Morbidity  Due to
Increases   in  Ultraviolet   Radiation  Exposure,"  Cancer
Investigation, 1(2), 119-126,1983. Non-fatal Melanoma: Scotto,
J, and T. Fears, "The Association of Solar Ultraviolet and Skin
Melanoma Incidence Among Caucasians in the United States,"
Cancer Investigation, 5(4), 275-283,1987. Melanoma mortality:
Pitcher, H.M., and J.D. Longstreth, "Melanoma Mortality and
Exposure to Ultraviolet Radiation: An Empirical Relationship,
Environment International, vol. 17, 7-21, 1991.

      Cataract prevalence data were obtained from Leske and
Sperduto, "The Epidemiology of Senile Cataracts: A Review,"
American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 118, No.2, 152-165,
1983. For information on the dose-response relationship, see
Hiller, R.,  R.  Sperduto,  and F.  Ederer, "Epidemiological
Associations with Cataract  in the 1971-1972 National Health
and Nutrition Survey," American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol.
18, No. 2, 239-249,1983.
                                                   G-17

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
total non-melanoma cases.40 We estimate that from
1990 to 2165 sections 604 and 606 will result in 6.3
million avoided  deaths  from  skin  cancer, 27.5
million avoided cataract cases, and 299.0 million
cases of non-fatal skin cancers (melanoma and non-
melanoma) .

    Although  the evidence linking UV-b and
melanoma is  controversial, studies  suggest that
exposure to sunlight is a major environmental risk
factor  for melanoma. However, uncertainty exists
about   three  aspects of this   relationship:  the
appropriate  action spectrum  (i.e.,  the relative
contribution of different wavelengths  of light to
overall risk), the appropriate dose metric (acute,
intermittent, or chronic), and the importance of age
at exposure.  Although UV-b was initially thought
to be solely responsible for melanoma, studies  by
Setlow et al. (1993) and Ley (1997) have shown that
UV-a as well as UV-b is a significant factor  in the
induction  of  melanoma.     The  uncertainty
surrounding the dose-metric stems from the fact
that chronic,  cumulative,  low-level exposures  to
sunlight are not  associated with development of
melanoma. Instead, melanoma risk is higher among
those  intermittently exposed to  sunlight and that
melanoma occurs most frequently on body parts
that are intermittently exposed. Therefore, current
thinking suggests that intermittent, intense bursts of
UV exposure (i.e., sunburns) are an important factor
in the development of melanoma. Epidemiological
studies exploring this hypothesis have confirmed
such an association, though the strength of these
findings may be weakened by recall bias  (Berwick
1998).   Finally, melanoma may exhibit a significant
latency period;  studies  such  as  Holman and
Armstrong (1984) have found that severe early life
exposures to UV are an important risk factor for
melanoma in  adults.  However, the most recent
study of this effect (Autier and Dore, 1998) found
that childhood exposures are important only in
addition to severe adult exposures.
    The effect of the uncertainties in the first two
aspects of the  UV/melanoma relationship (action
spectrum  and dose metric)  on  the  melanoma
mortality estimates is difficult to determine based on
current information. If melanoma mortality exhibits
a latency period, our results may be overestimated,
because  the  analysis  did not specifically model a
latency period.

    To  estimate crop  damage, we  apply earlier
studies on the relationship between crops, UV-b
radiation, and tropospheric ozone to the changes in
UV-b radiation and tropospheric ozone predicted
by the emissions models.41  We estimate that the
avoided  increase  in  damage  to American  crop
harvests from  UV-b radiation by  2075 will equal
about  7.5  percent.   To calculate  the benefits of
avoided  photodegradation of all  UV-b sensitive
polymers, we use the Horst et al. study (1986) on the
relationship  between  UV-b  radiation  and  the
increase in polymer stabilizers needed  to mitigate
rigid PVC pipe damage.42

    The unquantified effects of sections 604 and
606  include  the  following:  avoided  pain and
suffering from skin cancer, ecological effects of UV-
b radiation and tropospheric ozone, human health
and  environmental benefits outside the  United
States, and changes in  pulmonary  and respiratory
          Non-melanoma mortality estimates are based on
the assumption that one percent of non-melanoma incidence
results in mortality.
    41 Sources of dose-response relationship for crops and UV-
b: Teramura and Murali (1986) and Rowe and Adams (1987).
Source of dose-response relationship for crops and tropospheric
ozone:  Rowe  and Adams  (1987).  Source  of  increased
tropospheric ozone estimates: Whitten and Gery (1986).  Our
benefits analysis does  not include assessing the effects of
tropospheric ozone on forests.   Although there are  C-R
functions available that would allow an assessment, we could
not use them because of we do not have the necessary measure
of tropospheric ozone changes.

    42 Although the Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with
Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^one-Depleting
Chemicals provides monetized benefits estimates of reduced
crop damage from  tropospheric ozone and reduced polymer
damage from UV-b, it does not provide a quantified estimate in
non-monetary terms.
                                                  G-18

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
functions from increased tropospheric ozone.43 The
EPA  also  lists  avoided  actinic  keratosis  (pre-
cancerous lesions from excessive sun exposure) as
another unquantifred benefit.   Using the  first
National  Health  and   Nutrition  Examination
(NHANES I), Engles et d. linked increased UV
exposure  to   increased   incidence  of  actinic
keratosis.44 This study, however, did not provide
sufficient  quantitative  information  relating  the
incidence  of  actinic keratosis  to  levels  of UV
radiation. In addition, several  researchers provide
data suggesting that avoided increases in infection
intensity may constitute an unquantified benefit. For
example, Perna et al. associated  UV-b exposure with
the reactivation of Herpes virus infections.45 Other
studies have linked UV exposures to reductions in
the ability of animals to  control  infections  with
Leishmania  sp.  (Giannini  and DeFabqj;  malaria
(Taylor and Eagles).  The yeast Candida (Denkins et
al. and Chung et a/);, the bacterium staphylococcus aureus
(Chung et al).46 Valerie et al. also showed that UV
    43ICF Incorporated's Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance
with Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of O^pne-
Depleting Chemicals (1992) does not present the information on
the studies linking tropospheric  ozone with pulmonary and
respiratory effects.

    44 Engles, A., M.L. Johnson, and S. Haynes,"Health Effects
of Sunlight Exposure in the United States: Results from the
First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1971-
1974," Archives of Dermatology, Vol. 4, January 1988, pages 72-79.

    45 Perm, J.J., M.L. Mannix, J.E. Rooney, A.L. Notkins, and
S.E. Straus, "Reactivation of Latent  Herpes  Simplex Virus
Infections by Ultraviolet Light: A Human Model," Journal of the
American Academy of Dermatology, 17, 1987, pages 473-478.

    46  Chung, H.T.,  D.C. Lee,  S.Y.  Im, and R.A  Daynes,
"UVR-Exposed Animals Exhibit  and Enhanced Susceptibility
to Bacterial  and Fungal  Infections," Journal of Investigative
Dermatology, Vol. 90, No. 4, April 1988, page 52; Denkins, Y.,
I.J., Fidler, and Kripke, M.L, "Exposure of Mice to UV-B
Radiation Suppresses Delayed Hypersensitivity to  Candida
albicans" fhotobiology and Photochemistry, 1989; Giannini, S.H., and
E.G. DeFabo, "Abrogation of Skin  Lesions in  Cutaneous
Leishmaniasis by Ultraviolet B Irradiation," Leishmaniasis: The
First Centenary (1885-1985) Neiv Strategies for Control, Heart, D.T.
(ed.), NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences , London, Plenum
Pub., Cos.;  Taylor, D.W. and D.A  Eagles, "Assessing the
Effects  of Ultraviolet  Radiation  on Malarial Immunity,"
Prepared for Sabotka and Company under  EPA  contract
number 68-01-7288, subcontract number 132.914.
irradiation of cells  grown in  vitro and exposed to
sunlight for as little as 10 to 30 minutes can activate
the human immunodeficiency virus type 1  (HIV-
l).47  Scientists, however, have not yet provided a
quantitative relationship between the impact of UV-
b-induced   immunosuppression   and   human
disease.48

    Physical Effects: Sections 608. 609.
    and 611

    For sections 608, 609, and 611  we  base the
quantified benefits  estimates  on the methodology
used  for sections 604 and 606, but do not provide
the quantified estimates  cited in the  RIAs.  For
section   608  we   use  the  same   emissions,
stratospheric   ozone,    and  UV-b    radiation
methodologies used for sections 604 and 606; the
quantified  benefits  of  section   608,  however,
comprise only benefits from reduced incidences of
skin cancer morbidity and mortality. For section 609
the benefits estimate is simply a percentage of the
benefits of section 604; in fact, we avoid double
counting  by  omitting  609  benefits  from  the
calculation of the total Title VI benefits  estimate.
For section 611  we calculate  the benefits estimate
with a benefit per kilogram ratio obtained from data
in the Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with Section
604 of the Clean Air Act for  the Phaseout of O^pne
Depleting Chemicals (1992). We apply this ratio to the
emissions reduction caused by firms that accelerate
the use of MCF substitutes to avoid labeling.

    The unquantified benefits estimates of sections
608, 609, and 611 are the same as the unquantified
benefits  of  sections   604  and  606, with  one
exception. The analysis of section  611 includes two
additional  benefits:   an  increase   in   available
information regarding ozone-depleting substances
and enhanced implementation and enforcement of
EPA's  refrigerant recycling program.   Quantified
    47Valerie,  K.,  A.  Delers,  C. Bruck,  C.  Thiriart,  H.
Rosenberg, C. Debouck, and M. Rosenberg, "Activation of
Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 by DNA Damage in
Human Cells," Nature, Vol. 333, May 5, 1988, pages 78-81.

    48 Ibid, ICF (1992), 6-26.
                                                    G-19

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
and  unquantified benefits of 608  and  611 are
summarized in Table G-5 and G-6 respectively.
 Table G-5
 Benefits of Section 608
 Quantified Health Effects
 Skin cancer: fatal and nonfatal
 Health Effects-Unquantified
 Skin cancer: reduced pain and suffering
 Cataracts: reduced morbidity, pain and suffering
 Reduced morbidity effects of increased UV. For example,
 •   reduced actinic keratosis  (pre-cancerous lesions resulting from excessive sun exposure)
 •   reduced immune system suppression.

 Ecological Effects- Unquantified

 Ecological effects of UV. For example, benefits relating to the following:
 •    recreational fishing
      forests
      overall marine ecosystem
 •   avoided sea level rise - which, in turn, leads to:
          decreased beach erosion
          decreased loss of coastal wetlands
          decreases in the salinity of estuaries and aquifers
 •   other crops
 •   other plant species

 Other ecological benefits of reduced tropospheric ozone relating to
 •   the overall marine ecosystem
     forests
     man-made materials (e.g., degradation of elastomers, textile fibers and dyes, certain paints)
 •   other crops
 •   other plant species

 Benefits to people and the environment outside the U.S.


 Effects, both ecological and human health, associated with global warming.
                                                  G-20

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
Table G-6
Benefits of Section 611
Health Effects- Quantified
Skin cancer: fatal and nonfatal
Cataracts: reduced morbidity, pain and suffering
Ecological Effects- Quantified
Crops: reduced damage associated with increased UV radiation
Crops: reduced damage associated with increased tropospheric ozone

Polymers: reduced degradation from UV-b radiation

Health Effects- Unquantified

Skin cancer: reduced pain and suffering

Reduced morbidity effects of increased UV.  For example,
    reduced actinic keratosis (pre-cancerous lesions resulting from excessive sun exposure)
•    reduced immune system suppression

Ecological Effects- Unquantified

Ecological effects of UV. For example, benefits relating to the following:
•    recreational fishing
•    forests
    overall marine ecosystem
    avoided  sea level rise - which, in turn, leads to:
         decreased beach erosion
         decreased loss of coastal wetlands
         decreases in the salinity of estuaries and aquifers
    crops in  general
•    other plant species
•    fish harvests

Ecological benefits of reduced tropospheric ozone relating to
•   the overall marine ecosystem
•   forests
•   man-made materials (e.g., degradation of elastomers, textile fibers and dyes, certain paints)
•   crops in general
•   other plant species
•   fish harvests

Benefits to people and the environment outside the U.S.

Enhanced implementation and enforcement of EPA's refrigerant recycling program

Increase in available information regarding ozone-depleting substances (ODSs); consumers who wish to
buy products that do not contain ODSs will be better able to express their preferences through their
purchasing power.

Effects, both ecological and human health, associated with global warming.
                                                G-21

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Valuation

   To  calculate monetary values of the quantified
benefits, we multiply the physical effects estimates
by the appropriate physical effects value. For the
health benefits, we use $15,000 for the avoided cost
of cataracts,  $15,000  for  the avoided  cost  of
melanoma skin cancer, and $5,000 for the avoided
cost of nonmelanoma skin cancer.49 This analysis
employs a value of statistical life of $4.8 million
(1990 dollars), which is the value used to calculate
the criteria pollutant mortality benefits  estimate
presented in Chapter 6, Table 6-3. To calculate the
monetary benefits of increased  crop  yields,  the
model multiplies the change in crop yields by crop
values  from  the  Department of Agriculture.50 To
calculate the monetary benefits related to fish, we
apply $739 per ton (1990 dollars) to the increase in
fish harvests.51 We define the polymer benefits as
the avoided  loss in consumer surplus associated
with increased polymer prices.  We assume that the
cost is  proportional  to the  increase in  price
following the addition of stabilizers and that the
price of polymer stabilizers will increase by 1.86
percent for each 25 percent increase in stabilizer.52

   With a two percent discount rate, the benefits of
sections  608, 609, and 611 are  $671 million, $296
million,   and   $831  million   (1990   dollars),
respectively. We do not separate these values into
their components.   The total  monetized  health
benefits for section 604 and 606 with a two percent
discount  rate  are  $4.2  trillion and   the  total
monetized ecological benefits are $92.5 billion; thus,
the total benefits of sections 604 and 606 are about
$4.3 trillion. Table G-7 is a tabular summary of the
monetary values of the benefits  from sections 604
and 606, which generate about  98  percent of the
monetized benefits.53
    49  Wasson, John and Steve Abseck, "Memorandum:
Further Detail on the Costs and Benefits of Phasing Out Ozone
Depleting Substances, EPA Contract No. 68-D4-0103, WA-
205,"  Prepared for Jim DeMocker, U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency, October 9, 1995.

    50 The RIAs do not provide the specific crop values used.

    51 The U.S. Department of Commerce provides the fish
values. (Ibid, ICF (1992),  6-29.)
    52 Ibid, ICF (1992), 6-41.

    53 The dollar year was not available for some cost of illness
estimates in Table G-7.  Because these estimates come from a
1988 RIA, we are thus underestimating the monetized benefits
of the health effects associated with these unadjusted values.
                                                  G-22

-------
Table G-7
Sections 604 and 606: Valuation of Total Benefits from 1990 to 2165, With a Two Percent Discount Rate
Quantified Effects
  Valuation
(1990 dollars)
                                  Source Data
Health Effects
Mortalities from skin cancer (melanoma and
nonmelanoma) in the U.S. (1990-2165)
$3,900 billion    Value of statistical life: $4.8 million (1990 dollars). (See Appendix H fora description of
                source data.)
Cataract cases in the U.S. (1990-2165)
  $72 billion     Avoided cost of cataracts: $15,000 (dollar year not provided) Costs include increased
                medical costs, increased work loss, increased costs for chores, other indirect social and
                economic costs, and willingness to pay to avoid cataracts. Data from literature review,
                contacts with health providers, and cataract patient survey. (Source: Rowe etal. 1987)
Nonfatal skin cancer cases (melanoma and
nonmelanoma) in the U.S. (1990-2165)
 $220 billion     Cost of melanoma skin cancer: $15,000 per case (dollar year not provided); costs of
                nonmelanoma skin cancer: $5,000 per case (dollar year not provided). Estimates include
                increased medical costs and decreased productivity but do not include costs of caregiving
                and chores performed by others. Data from Skin Cancer Focus Group. (See ICF's August
                1988 RIA for details.)
Total Health Benefits
$4,200 billion
Ecological Effects
   Decrease in American crop harvests from UV-b
   radiation by 2075
  $49 billion
Crop values from Department of Agriculture.
•  Decrease in American crops from tropospheric
   ozone by 2075
  $28 billion
Crop values from Department of Agriculture.
   Damage to polymers from UV-b radiation by 2075
  $6 billion      Costs are proportional to the increase in polymer prices following the addition of
                stabilizers. Price increase of 1.86% expected for a 25% increase in stabilizer.
Total Environmental Benefits
 $84 billion
Total Benefits
$4,300 billion
Note :  1) The RIAs do not provide specific crop values
                                                                        G-23

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Adjustments to Estimates  From
Existing Analyses

    To  ensure consistency  with assumptions in
other portions of the  current  study, we  adjust
certain parameters used in existing regulatory impact
assessments of Title VI provisions. We vary several
parameters and compare the resulting net present
values of Title VTs costs  and benefits. The Title VI
analysis generates net present values, rather than
annualized values, because annualization incorrectly
imputes benefits of later phaseouts to earlier years.
For  example, annualization of the  benefits of
phasing out HCFC-22 by 2020 attributes benefits to
years prior  to 2030, when neither the costs nor the
benefits  of that  phaseout have  yet occurred.
Consequently, the annualized  estimate overstates
benefits at the beginning of  the time span and
understates them later.
Discount Rate

    Because the benefits occur over several hundred
years,  the chosen  discount  rate  can have  an
especially large effect on the benefits estimate.  In
this analysis we use a five percent discount rate for
our primary estimate.  This  is consistent with the
retrospective analysis of the  Clean Air Act and the
other analyses conducted  for the present study.55
We also preform sensitivity tests using discount
rates of three percent and seven percent. Finally,
for consistency with cost and benefit estimates that
we cannot adjust, we calculate aggregate benefits
and costs using a discount rate of two percent.
    Table G-8 describes the values we use for the
following parameters:  discount rate and value of
statistical life. We are able to adjust key parameters
in the benefits  analyses of sections 604, 606, and
609 and the cost analyses of sections 604 and 606.
We cannot  adjust parameters for other sections,
however, because we lack annual  cost and benefit
data from these sections.54 Moreover, for section
604  and the  accelerated phaseout schedule of
section 606, we are unable to modify the parameters
for the analysis of ecological benefits. Nevertheless,
the benefits from sections 604 and 606  constitute
the majority of Title VI benefits  (approximately 98
percent at a two  percent discount rate) and  only
about one percent of the benefits of these sections
result from ecological benefits. In addition, sections
604 and  606 account for about 97 percent of the
costs (at a two percent discount rate).
    54 We calculate the benefits of section 609 as a percentage
of the benefits of section 604, so we do not need annual data for
section 609.
    55 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Benefits and
Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990, October 1997.
                                                G-24

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
 Table G-8
 Adjustments to Key Parameters of Existing Analyses That Support the 812 Title VI Estimates
Parameter
Discount Rate
(Used for
Costs and
Benefits)
Value of
Statistical Life
(Benefits
Only)
Assumption for
Section 812
Prospective
Central Case: 5%
Sensitivity tests:
3% and 7%
Distribution of
values from $0.6
million to $13.5
million with
expected value of
$4.8 million
Adjustments to Title VI Analyses
Sections 604 and
606
Used Section 812
parameters, plus
2%.
Used Section 812
parameters.
Section 608
2% (No
adjustment
possible.)
$3 to $12 million
Section 609
2% (No
adjustment
possible for
costs.)
Used Section
812
parameters.
Section 611
2% (No
adjustment
possible.)
$3 to $12 million
Value of Statistical Life

    The value of statistical life (VSL) is essential for
measuring the monetized benefits associated with a
reduced number of skin cancer mortality cases. We
use a $4.8 million central estimate of VSL, based on
analysis described in Appendix H.  To reflect the
uncertainty of the VSL estimates, we  employ a
Monte Carlo approach using a Weibull distribution
of VSL estimates  as an input. This distribution is
the same  as that  used in  the analysis of criteria
pollutants.56
    56 The Weibull distribution has the following parameters:
a location of $0.0, a scale of $5.32 million  and a shape of
1.509588.
Cost and  Benefit Results
With  Adjusted Parameters

    Both cost and benefit estimates are sensitive to
the discount  rate.   As mentioned earlier,  the
discount rate has a particularly significant effect on
the benefits estimate because the benefits occur
over several hundred years (1990 to 2165). These
benefits result from actions taken to reduce ozone-
depleting chemical emissions from 1990 to 2075,
the time period over which costa are incurred. In
this section we first present the net present value of
the costs and benefits using the central discount rate
of five percent. We then discuss the results of the
sensitivity tests using discount rates of three and
seven percent. Lastly, we show the results using a
two percent discount rate, which is consistent with
the discount rates used in existing RIAs and which
allows us to compare the costs and benefits of all
the major sections of Title VI, including provisions
where discount rate adjustments are not possible.

    The adjusted primary benefit estimate (using a
five percent discount rate) for Title VI is $530
billion and the cost estimate is  $30 billion.  The
benefits range  from $240  billion with  a seven
percent discount rate and $1,900 billion with a three
percent discount rate. The costs range from  $20
                                               G-25

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
billion to  $40 billion,  with the same respective
discount rates. The benefits of Title  VI greatly
exceed the costs for all  discount rate assumptions;
in fact, the benefits are about 20 times greater than
the costs at a five percent discount rate.57 (See Table
G-9)    Even the  seven  percent  discount rate
sensitivity test yields total benefits that are 12 times
greater than the costs.

Five Percent Discount Rate

    With a five percent  discount rate, the expected
human health benefits from sections 604 and 606
are approximately $400 billion. Table G-10 shows
the results of the  statistical simulation modeling
analysis; the 5th and 95th percentile values are $100
billion to $900 billion, respectively. The annual
human health benefits from sections 604 and 606,
calculated with a five percent discount rate, steadily
increase until about 2045; they then decrease until
2165, the last year in the analysis.  (See Figure G-2.)
About 93 percent of the benefits occur from 2015
to 2165.

    The  costs of sections 604 and 606  of Title VI
are  approximately  $26  billion; these  sections
generate approximately 97 percent of the costs. The
human health benefits for sections 604 and 606 are
almost 17 times  greater than  the costs  of these
sections.
    57 Note that we do not include the costs of the methyl
bromide phaseout of section 606 because existing RIAs do not
provide benefits  estimates  for this phaseout.  The costs,
calculated with a three percent discount rate, are about $1.7
billion.
                                                 G-26

-------
                                                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table G-9
Costs and Benefits of Sections 604 and 6061
Discount
Rate
2%
3%
5%
7%
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
Benefits (Trillions) Costs (Trillions) Benefits/Cost Ratio
1990 Dollars 1990 Dollars
$4.24 $0.06 76
$1.81 $0.04 44
$0.44 $0.03 17
$0.14 $0.02 8
The cost and benefits estimates associated with a two percent discount rate are the estimates for sections 604,
606, 608, 609, and 61 1 . For the other discount rates the estimates represent the costs and the human health
benefits for sections 604 and 606. These two sections generate the majority of the Title VI costs and benefits
(approximately 98 percent of the benefits and 97 percent of the costs in the two percent discount rate
calculations).
We do not include the costs of the methyl bromide phaseout of section 606 because existing RIAs do not
provide benefit estimates for this phaseout.
In general, the costs occur from 1990 to 2075, while the benefits occur from 1990 to 21 65. (Tables G-11 and G-
12 provide the specific time frame for each section of Title VI.)
Three Percent and Seven Percent
Sensitivity Tests

    The  expected human  health benefits  from
sections  604 and  606  are  approximately $1,800
billion at a three  percent discount rate and $100
billion at a seven percent discount rate. With a three
percent discount rate, the range of expected human
health benefits is $100 billion to $7,800 billion, with
90 percent of these expected benefits between $400
billion and $4,000 billion.  By contrast, at a seven
percent discount rate the range of expected human
health benefits is $14 billion to $700 billion, with 90
percent of the expected human  health benefits
between $33 billion and $300 billion.

    The annual benefits from sections 604 and 606,
calculated with a three percent discount rate, steadily
increase until about  2062; they  then decrease till
2165, the last year in the analysis. About 99 percent
of the benefits occur from 2015 to 2165. At a seven
percent discount  rate the  annual benefits  from
sections 604 and  606 steadily increase until about
2038 and then decrease till 2165. About 92 percent
of the benefits calculated with a seven  percent
discount rate occur from 2015 to 2165.
                                                       The costs of sections 604 and 606 of Title VI
                                                    are approximately $41 billion at a  three percent
                                                    discount rate and approximately $18 billion  at a
                                                    seven percent discount rate; these sections account
                                                    for approximately 97 percent of the total costs. The
                                                    costs for sections 604 and 606 are about 44 times
                                                    smaller than the human  health benefits for these
                                                    sections at a three percent discount rate and about
                                                    8 times smaller at a seven percent discount rate.
                                              G-27

-------
                                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table G-10
Human Health Benefits for Sections 604 and 606
                                                  Billions of 1990 dollars
                Range:
                        $40 to $2,600
                Mean:
                            $400
               Median:
                            $400
          Standard Deviation:
                            $300
              Percentiles:
                 5%
                            $100
                 50%
                            $400
                 95%
                            $900
   10,000 Trials
        .0381
  Forecast: G4
Frequency Chart
                                     $1.0
                                    trillions
1 Outlier
 - 375
Percent of Benefits from 1990 to 2014
                           3.64%
Percent of Benefits from 2015 to 2165
                           93.36%
Note: Estimates calculated with a five percent discount rate.
                                       G-28

-------
$9,000
                                           Figure G-2
             Annual Human Health Benefits From Sections 604 and 606 (Discounted at 5%)
                                                  Year
                                             G-29

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Two Percent Discount Rate

    Using benefits estimates from RIAs for sections
608  and  611 and re-calculating the benefits of
sections 604, 606, and 609 with a two percent
discount rate and a VSL of $4.8 million yields a total
benefits estimate of $4.3 trillion (1990 dollars) for
Title VI.58  (See Table G-ll). Of this estimate, $4.2
trillion  (98 percent) results from the human health
benefits of sections 604 and 606.  The range of
expected benefits from human health improvements
is $0.3 trillion to $20.8 trillion, with 90 percent of
the expected benefits between $0.9 trillion and $9.4
trillion. The annual human health  benefits  from
sections 604 and 606, calculated with a two percent
discount  rate,  steadily increase from 1990  until
about 2077; they then  decrease till 2165. About 99
percent of the benefits occur from 2015 to 2165.

    To estimate  the costs of Title VI with a two
percent discount rate, we use the estimates from the
RIAs that analyze sections 608, 609, and 611 and
we re-calculate the costs of sections 604 and 606
using the two percent discount rate.59 Total present
value Title VI costs with a two percent discount rate
are approximately $57 billion. The cost estimate is
about 76 times smaller  than the comparable benefits
estimate.  Table G-12 lists the cost components.
Undiscounted Benefits

    The annual undiscounted benefits from sections
604 and 606 steadily increase until about 2110; they
then decrease in steps until 2165. The steps appear
to be related to the application of 10-year cohort
survival rates for persons  born after  2075.  See
Figure G-3 for a graphical depiction of the annual
benefits.
    58 The RIAs for sections 608 and 611 present a lower
bound benefits estimate that incorporates a $3 million VSL and
an upper bound benefits estimate that incorporates  a $12
million VSL. To obtain a point estimate, we weight the lower
bound by 80 percent and the upper bound by 20 percent. (The
benefits of section 608  do not include the HCFC phaseout
benefits because the phaseout is too complex to model.) In
addition, note that the benefits of section 609 are a subset of the
benefits  of sections 604 and 606, so we do not  add them
separately to the benefits of the other sections to obtain the
total benefits.

    59 The estimate for section 611 is an average of the lower
bound, which assumes that only companies using ODSs as
solvents  will label products, and  an upper bound, which
assumes that 10 times as many companies use solvent-cleaned
products and will need to label their products. Also, the costs
for section 608 do not include the costs of the HCFC phaseout.
                                                  G-30

-------
Table G-11
Summary of Benefits of Title VI with a Two Percent Discount Rate and $4.8 Million VSL
                   Section
                                      Benefits
                                     (Millions)
                                    1990 Dollars
                              Notes
 Years During
Which Benefits
    Accrue
 604 & 606  Class I Phaseout
            - Reduced Mortality, Cataracts, and
             Non-Fatal Cancers
            - Methyl Bromide Reductions
            - Ecological Benefits	
                                        $4,338,000
                                        $4,243,000
                                          $84,000
                                                     No information currently available.
                                                                    1990 to 2165

                                                                    1994 to 2160
                                                                    1989 to 2075
    605
Class II Phaseout
No information currently available.
    608     National Recycling and
            Emission Reduction Program
                                             $670   1) Only health effects are monetized.
                                                     2) The RIA for section 608 does not include benefits of HCFC phaseout
                                                        because this phaseout is too complex and predicting baseline innovation
                                                        is too difficult.
                                                     3) The benefits estimate listed is the weighted average of the benefits
                                                        calculated with $3 million and $12 million for the VSL. (The $3
                                                        million estimate has a weight of 0.8 and the $12 million estimate has a
                                                        weight of 0.2)
                                            	4) Benefits reflect the accelerated phaseout schedule.	
                                                                    1994 to 2165
    609     Servicing  of Motor Vehicle  Air
            Conditioners
                                             $300   The benefits of section 609 are a subset of the benefits of sections 604 and   1991 to 2075
                                                     606; we calculate section 609 benefits as 0.00682% of the benefits of 604
                                                     and 606 combined. (This percentage is the total benefits of 609 in 1989
                                            	dollars divided by the total 604 benefits in 1989 dollars.)	
    611     Labeling
                                             $830   1) The benefits do not reflect the accelerated phase-out schedule.
                                                     2) The benefits estimate listed is the weighted average of the benefits
                                                        calculated with $3 million and $12 million for the value of a statistical
                                                        life. (The $3 million estimate has a weight of 0.8 and the $12 estimate
                                            	has a weight of 0.2)	
                                                                    1989 to 2075
                   TOTAL
                                        $4,339,000
 Notes:  1)  All benefits expressed in 1990 dollars using the implicit GDP deflator from the 1998 Economic Report of the President.
        2)  The benefits of section 611 and the ecological benefits of section 604 do not reflect the accelerated reduction and phaseout schedule of section 606.
                                                                     G-31

-------
TableG-12
Summary of Costs for Title VI by Section with a Two Percent Discount Rate

604 &
606
605
608
609
611
Section
Class I Phaseout
Class II Phaseout
National Recycling and
Emission Reduction
Program
Servicing of Motor
Vehicle Air
Conditioners
Labeling
Cost
Estimate
(Millions,
1990 Dollars)
$56,000

$1,200
$14
$250
Notes
Does not include cost of methyl bromide reductions.
No information currently available.



1 ) We convert costs from 1 991 to 1 990 dollars using the GDP deflator from the 1998 Economic
Report of the President.
2) The RIA for Sect. 608 does not include costs of HCFC phaseout.
3) At a 4% discount rate the costs are $1,074.38 million, and at a 7% discount rate the costs are
$853.91.
1 ) We convert from 1 991 to 1 990 dollars using the GDP deflator from the 1998 Economic Report of
the President.
2) To avoid counting the same costs for both section 604 and 609, we include only the operator
training and equipment certification costs of section 609 here.
1) The costs are probably in 1990 dollars, but this is unclear.
2) Most costs are one-time costs.
3) The cost estimate is an average of the lower bound, which assumes that only firms using ODSs
as solvents will label products, and an upper bound, which assumes that 10 times as many firms
will need to label their products because they incorporate solvent-cleaned products.
Years
During
Which
Costs
Accrue
1990 to
2075

1994 to
2015
1992 to
2008
1994 to
2000
             TOTAL
$57,000
Notes:   1) The costs listed above for sections 604 & 606 do not include methyl bromide costs, which equal $1.7 billion with a 3% discount rate, because the RIA did not present the
           corresponding benefits.
        2) The costs of sections 609 and 611 do not reflect the accelerated reduction and phaseout schedules of section 606.
                                                                      G-32

-------
                                                       Figure G-3
                        ANNUAL UNDISCOUNTED HUMAN HEALTH BENEFITS OF SECTIONS 604 AND 606
   $600,000
   $500,000 -
   $400,000 -
   $300,000 --
i)
m
   $200,000 - -
   $100,000 --
                                                              Year
                                                       G-33

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Limitations And  Uncertainties

    An   analysis  of  programs  that   protect
stratospheric ozone necessarily considers impacts
over hundreds of years, introducing a wide range of
uncertainty in the estimates of costs and benefits.
There are clearly limitations and uncertainties in
predicting the   advancement  of  both  medical
treatment and ODS substitution technologies over
time, modeling averting behavior of individuals in
response  to changes  in  UV-b  radiation  levels,
anticipating the  results of new information  that
might alter the modeling of stratospheric ozone
depletion  and formation, and forecasting economic
parameters such as the growth in  GDP and  the
valuation  of health risk reduction.

    We have not attempted to  characterize  the
impact of all  the  uncertainties  and  limitations
inherent in this type of analysis. For more detail, we
refer the  reader  to the source  material in EPA's
RIAs for Title VI provisions and the descriptions of
the cost and benefit modeling approaches found
there.  As part of this analysis, however, we conduct
selected quantitative sensitivity  tests and literature
reviews to characterize several major uncertainties in
the cost and benefits analyses presented here.  The
discussion that follows includes  characterization of
the  following: issues  in  long-term  discounting;
limitations in the cost modeling; and limitations in
the benefits modeling, including  the  modeling of
averting behavior.

Long-term Discounting

    As demonstrated above, the discount rate can
have an important effect on the estimation of costs
and benefits that accrue over a long period of time.
Long-term   discounting   may   present  special
problems that are worth  exploring in some detail
through sensitivity tests of alternative discount rate
assumptions.     For example,  some  economic
literature    suggests   that   accounting    for
intergenerational transfers  in a manner different
from   intragenerational    transfers    may   be
appropriate.60  One possible rationale for treating
long-term, intergenerational transfers differently is
that an individual's rate of time preference (which
presumably applies only for his or her lifetime, or
intragenerationally)  may  differ  from his  or her
bequest motive for future generations. At least one
empirical  study  suggests  that  individuals  may
implicitly apply lower discount rates for programs
where the benefits accrue later in time.61 In addition,
people may attribute the same level of importance
to all events that occur in the far-distant future,
regardless of the relative position of these events in
time. According to Weitzman, analysts should apply
the lowest possible nonnegative rate to events in the
far-distant future.62

    Although some of the arguments for using an
alternative discounting procedure  for long-term
benefits and costs are persuasive, implementation of
an  alternative  procedure  is not straightforward.
There appears  to  be little guidance in the existing
economic  literature  on the  key issues of  what
discount rate to use for long-term versus short-term
discounting as well  as when to alter the discount
rate.   Recently drafted   EPA guidance  on the
conduct of economic analyses, however, suggests
that  longer-term   discount   rates  might   be
    60 Arrow, K.J., W.R. Cline, KG. Maler, M. Munasinghe, R.
Squitieri, and J.E. Stiglitz, "Intertemporal Equity, Discounting,
and Economic Efficiency," Climate Change 1995: Economic and
Social Dimensions of Climate Change. Edited by J.P. Bruce, H. Lee,
and E.F. Haites, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996;
Lind, Robert C., "Intergenerational Equity, Discounting, and the
Role of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Evaluating Global Climate
Policy," Integrative Assessment oj"Mitigation, Impacts, and Adaptation
to Climate, Edited by N. Nakicenovic, et aL, Laxenburg, Austria:
International  Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, 1994;
Schelling, Thomas C., "Intergenerational Discounting," Energy
Policy. 23(4/5), 1995, pages 395-401; Solow, Robert, "An Almost
Practical Step Toward Sustainability," Paper presented at the
Fortieth Anniversary of Resources for the Future, October 8,
1992, in Washington, D.C.

    61 Cropper, Maureen L., Sema K. Aydede, and Paul R.
Portney,  "Discounting Human Lives."  American Journal of
              lies, December 1991: 1410-1414.
                                                            62 Weitzman, Martin L., "Why the Far-Distant Future
                                                        Should Be Discounted at its Lowest Possible Rate," Journal of
                                                        Environmental Economics and Management, Volume 36, 201-208
                                                        (1998).
                                                  G-34

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
approximated  through Ramsey Rule discounting,
using effective  annual discount rates of from 0.5 to
3.0 percent.63 Throughout our presentation of Title
VI cost and benefit results, we use a five percent
discount rate for our primary estimate.  We also
calculate alternative estimates using three and seven
percent  discount  rates.   These  discount  rates
maintain  consistency with other analyses  of the
prospective.

Costs

    Major uncertainties in the cost estimates result
where it is  difficult to predict the pace  and nature of
innovation in  key industries.  To  the extent the
models used do not quantify transition costs in the
long  term, the uncertainty in the cost  estimates
increases.  In addition, predicting the responses of
manufacturers to the different sections of Title VI
is  difficult. Table G-13 lists the primary causes of
uncertainty in the cost estimates.
    63 We use the discount rate of 0.5 percent as  a low
nonnegative discount rate for events in the far-distant future.
(Frank  Arnold et  a/.'s  Draft Final Report: Discounting  in
Environmental Policy Evaluation supports long-term discount rates
from 0.5 percent to 3.0 percent.)
                                                   G-35

-------
                                                        The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
TableG-13
Major Limitations of Existing Cost Analyses for Title VI
                                          Sections 604*, 606, and 609
                       Limitations
              Effects on Cost Estimates
The assumption of little or no technical innovation in ODS-
related industries over the time span of the analysis may be
inaccurate.
Inclusion of innovation may decrease the cost estimate.
The model does not quantify transition costs, such as
temporary layoffs, administrative costs, and the costs of
unknown environmental hazards created by the use of
alternatives to CFCs.
Inclusion of transition costs may increase the cost
estimate.
Section 608
The assumptions of the capital and operating costs of
recovery devices and the time necessary to perform
recycling operations are largely hypothetical.
A better understanding of the capital and operating costs,
as well as the time necessary for recycling, may either
increase or decrease cost estimates.
The extent of compliance with recycling rates mandated by
the Venting Prohibition is very uncertain.1 Therefore, the
baseline assumptions regarding the percentages of CFCs
that are actually recycled are also very uncertain.
A better ability to forecast recycling rates  may either
decrease or increase cost estimates.
The baseline recycling value assumes no innovation in
recycling technologies through 2017, which may be
inaccurate.
Including innovation in recycling technologies may
decrease the cost estimates.
Section 611
Manufacturers' responses to the labeling requirement may
include labeling,  reformulating products, ceasing production,
or petitioning for an exemption to the labeling requirement.
Predicting the frequency of these responses is difficult.
A better ability to forecast manufacturers' responses may
either decrease or increase cost estimates.
Note:             *We do not include the costs of the methyl bromide phaseout in the total cost estimate because the RIAs do not provide
                 the benefits of this phaseout. The cost estimates for the methyl bromide phaseout are uncertain, because the model
                 assumes that the demand for output manufactured with methyl bromide is perfectly inelastic and that the methyl bromide
                 production industry is perfectly competitive. While these assumptions may be unrealistic, they allowed the analysis to
                 focus on consumer impacts and ignore effects on output markets.

    1 The Venting Prohibition is essentially a recovery and recycling requirement. For more detail see ICF (1993).
                                                     G-36

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Benefits

    Several factors contribute to uncertainty in the
benefit estimates.   (See Table  G-14 for a list of
major limitations.)  For example, scientists have an
incomplete understanding of the  processes  that
govern ozone depletion and affect exposure to  UV-
b  radiation.    In  addition,  the  dose-response
coefficients relating UV-b exposure to melanoma
skin cancer and cataracts are difficult to  estimate.
Scientists have not yet developed quantified dose-
response relationships for some benefits, such as
reduced damage to the immune system from UV-b
radiation.  As a result, the benefit estimates  may
either overestimate   or  underestimate  the  true
benefits of Title VI provisions.

    Data  limitations  also  impede  attempts  to
monetize certain benefits.  For example,  there are
well established concentration-response functions
that would allow  us  to measure  the effects  of
tropospheric  ozone on forests.  We are, however,
unable to use the CR  functions because we do not
have the necessary measured changes in ozone. As
a result,  we  are  also unable to  monetize these
benefits.
2050 may be almost  twice  the  estimated cost of
averting behavior (application of sunscreen).65  To
estimate benefits, the Title VI  analysis relies on
epidemiological studies, which incorporate averting
behavior as currently practiced.  Omission of future
increases in averting behavior may nonetheless
overstate the benefits  of reduced  emissions  of
ozone-depleting  chemicals.66   The  analysis  may
understate the benefits, however, if individuals alter
their behaviors in ways that could increase exposure
or risk (e.g., sunbathing more frequently and/or for
longer periods) ,67
    Another difficulty involves the long term nature
of the study.  Predicting invention, research and
development, producer and consumer responses to
price changes, and technological change for the next
century and a half is highly speculative. Predicting
major natural events that influence the effects  of
stratospheric ozone depletion is also difficult.64 Our
inability to forecast with accuracy may cause the
benefit estimate to be too high or too low.

    Lastly, the quantitative analysis of Title VI does
not  account for potential increases  in  averting
behavior (e.g., people's efforts to protect themselves
from UV-b radiation). Murdoch and Thayer (1990)
estimate  that  the  cost-of-illness  estimates  for
nonmelanoma skin cancer cases between 2000 and
    64 For example, volcanic eruptions increase dust levels,
which may affect risks from stratospheric ozone depletion.
    65 Murdoch, James C. and Mark A. Thayer, "The Benefits
of Reducing the Incidence of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancers: A
Defensive Expenditures Approach," Journal of Environmental
Economics and Management, 1990, pages 107-119.

      Although Dr. Marianne Berwick, an epidemiologist at
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, issued
a study indicating that sunscreens are ineffective in preventing
melanoma, many dermatologists contest this assertion ("Studies
Doubt  Sunscreens Stop a Cancer," The New York Times,
February 2, 1998, page 19; Berwick , Marianne, Sunscreens and
Skin Cancer: The Epidemiologcal Evidence, February 17, 1998; Boyd,
Christopher, "Sunscreen Research Bums Up Skin Specialists:
Doctors  Fear Controversial Report Will Confuse Public,"
Orlando Sentinel, March 1, 1998, page A4).

             /., 1999.
                                                  G-37

-------
                                                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table G-14
Major Limitations of Existing Benefits Analyses for Title VI
                       Limitations
Effects on Benefits Estimates
Scientists have an incomplete understanding of
     the chemical and physical processes that cause ozone
     depletion,
•    the relationship between ozone depletion and exposure to
     ultraviolet radiation (UV-b), and
     the dose-response coefficients relating UV-b exposure to
     melanoma skin cancer and cataracts.
A better understanding may either increase or decrease
the benefits estimate.
Scientists have not yet developed quantified dose-response
relationships for some benefits, such as reduced damage to
the immune system from UV-b radiation.
Additional dose-response relationships will increase the
benefits estimate.
The long term nature of the studies introduces a significant
degree of uncertainty. For example, predicting innovation,
research and development, producer and consumer responses
to price changes, technological change, and major natural
events for the next 100 to 150 years is difficult.
A better ability to forecast future events may either
decrease or increase benefits estimates.
Although truncation of benefits and cost streams is necessary
for the analysis, it does influence the size of the benefit and
cost estimates.
The current method of truncating benefit and costs
streams results in a greater underestimation of benefits
than costs.
The RIAs do not account for averting behavior (i.e., people's
efforts to protect themselves from UV-b radiation) or behavior
increasing exposure or risk (e.g., increased sunbathing).
Inclusion of averting behavior may decrease the benefits
estimate, while inclusion of enhancing behavior may
increase the benefits estimate.
Not all RIAs for Title VI include comprehensively monetized
benefits, due, in part, to key data gaps (e.g., accepted
concentration response functions for ozone effects on forests).
More comprehensive monetization will increase the
benefits estimate.
Section 608
The extent of compliance with recycling rates mandated by the
Venting Prohibition is very uncertain. Therefore, the baseline
assumptions regarding the percentages of CFCs that are
actually recycled are also very uncertain.
A better ability to forecast recycling rates may either
decrease or increase benefits estimates.
The baseline recycling value assumes no innovation in
recycling technologies through 2017, which may be inaccurate.
Including innovation in recycling technologies may
increase the benefits estimate.
Section 611
Manufacturers' and consumers' responses to labeling rules are
difficult to predict.
An enhanced ability to forecast their responses may either
increase or decrease the benefits estimate.
Benefits attributed to labeling regulations may actually result
from other circumstances as well.
Consequently, the benefits resulting from this rule may be
less than the estimate included in the RIA.
Although some sectors may reduce the use of MCF as a result
of the labeling rule, other sectors may increase their use of this
substance.
A better ability to predict people's actions may decrease
the benefits estimate.
                                                      G-38

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Alberini, A., M. Cropper, T. Fu, A. Krupnick,J. Liu, D. Shaw, and W. Harrington. 1997. "Valuing Health
        Effects of Air Pollution in Developing Countries: The Case of Taiwan."
        Economics and Management. Vol. 34. No. 2. October, pages 107-126.

Arnold, Frank, Frances G. Sussman, and Leland B. Deck. 1997. Draft Final Report: Disci
        Policy Evaluation.

Arrow, K.J., W.R. Cline, K.G. Maler, M. Munasinghe, R. Squitieri, and J.E. Stiglitz. 1996. "Intertemporal
        Equity, Discounting, and Economic Efficiency."  Climate Change 1995: Economic and Social Dimensions of
        Climate Change. Edited by J.P. Bruce, H. Lee, and E.F. Haites. Cambridge: Cambridge University
        Press.

Autier, Philippe, Jean-Francois Dore, Sylvie Negrier, Daniele Lienard, Renato Panizzon, Ferdy J. Lejeune,
        David Guggisberg, and Alexander M. M. Eggermont. 1999. "Sunscreen Use and Duration of Sun
        Exposure: a Double-Blind, Randomized Trial." Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Vol. 91. No. 15.
        August 4. pages 1304-1309.

Autier, P., and J.F. Dore. 1998. "Influence of Sun Exposures During Childhood and During Adulthood on
        Melanoma Risk."  Int] Cancer. Vol. 77. pages 533-537.

Berwick, Marianne. 1998.  Sunscreens and Skin Cancer: The Epidemiological Evidence.

Berwick, M. 1998. "Epidemiology: Current Trends, Risk Factors, and Environmental Concerns." In Cutaneous
        Melanoma (eds) Batch, CM, Houghton, AN, Sober, AJ and Soong, S-J, St. Louis: Quality Medical
        Publishing, Inc.

Boyd, Christopher. 1998. "Sunscreen Research Burns  Up Skin Specialists: Doctors Fear Controversial Report
        Will Confuse Public." Orlando Sentinel. March  1. page A4.

Bureau of Economic Analysis. 1998. http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/0898nip3/tab2a.htm..

Census Bureau. 1998. http://www.census.gov/population/projections/nation/npaltsrs.txt.

Chung, H.T.,  D.C. Lee, S.Y. Im, and R.A. Daynes. 1988.  "UVR-Exposed Animals Exhibit and Enhanced
        Susceptibility to Bacterial and Fungal Infections." Journal of Investigative Dermatology. Vol. 90. No. 4.
        April, page 52.

Congressional Budget Office, Congress of the United States. 1998. The Economic and Budget Outlook: Fiscal
        Years 1999 to 2008. January.

Connell, Peter. 1986. "A Parameterized Numerical Fit to Total Column Ozone Changes Calculated by the
        LLNL 1-D Model of the Troposphere and Stratosphere." Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
        Livermore, CA.
                                               G-39

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Council of Economic Advisers. 1998. Table B-3, "Quantity and Price Indexes for Gross Domestic Product,
        and Percent Changes, 1959-97." Economic Report of the President.

Council of Economic Advisers. 1997. Table B-32, "Population by Age Group, 1929-96." Economic Report of the
Cropper, Maureen L., Sema K. Aydede, and Paul R. Portney. 1991.  "Discounting Human Lives." American
        Journal of Agricultural Economics.

Denkins, Y., I.J., Fidler, and Kripke, M.L. 1989. "Exposure of Mice to UV-B Radiation Suppresses Delayed
        Hypersensitivity to Candida albicans" Photobiology and Photochemistry.

Engles, A., M.L.Johnson, and S. Haynes. 1988. "Health Effects of Sunlight Exposure in the United States:
        Results from the First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1971-1974." Archives of
        Dermatology. Vol. 4. January, pages 72-79.

Fisher, D. A., C. H. Hales, D. L. Filkin, M. K.W. Ko, N. D.  Sze, P. S. Connell, D. J. Wuebbles, I. S. A.
        Isaksen, and F. Stordal. 1990a. "Model Calculations of the Relative Effects of CFCs and their
        Replacements on Stratospheric Ozone," Nature, 344, pages 508-512.

Fisher, D. A., C. H. Hales, W. C. Wang, K. W.  Ko, and N. D. Sze. 1990b. "Model Calculations of the Relative
        Effects of CFCs and their Replacements on Global Warming." Nature, 344. pages 513-516.

Giannini, S.H., and E.G. DeFabo. 1987. "Abrogation of Skin Lesions in Cutaneous Leishmaniasis by
        Ultraviolet B Irradiation." Eeishmaniasis: The First Centenary (1885-1985) New Strategies for Control,
        Heart, D.T. (ed.). NATO ASI Series A: Life Sciences, London, Plenum Pub., Cos.

Horst, R., K. Brown, R. Black, and M. Kianka, Mathtech, Incorporated. 1986.  The Economic Impact of Increased
        UV-B Radiation on Polymer Materials: A Case Study of Rigid PVC. June.

Hunter, J.R., S.E. Kaupp, and J.H. Taylor. 1982. "Assessment of effects of radiation on marine fish larvae."
        The Role of Solar Ultraviolet Radiation in Marine Ecosystems. Edited by J. Calkins.

ICF Incorporated. 1993a. Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of
        CFCs, Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride,  andHCFCs. Prepared for the Stratospheric
        Protection Division, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ICF Incorporated. 1993. Regulatory Impact Analysis: The National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program (Section
        608 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990). Prepared for the Stratospheric Protection Division, U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency.

ICF Incorporated. 1992. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance mth Section 604 of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout
        of 0 ^one-Depleting Chemicals. Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office  of Air and Radiation,
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                G-40

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
ICF Incorporated. 1991. Draft: Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Rule Requiring Labeling of Products Containing or
        Manufactured with O^pne Depleting Substances. Prepared for the Global Change Division, Office of Air
        and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ICF Incorporated. 1991. Section 609 of the 1990 Clean Air Act: Refrigerant Recycling for Mobile Air Conditioners:
        Cost Benefit Analysis and Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Prepared for the Division of Global Change, U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency.

Johannesson, M. and P. Johansson. 1997. "Quality of Life and the WTP for an Increased Life Expectancy at
        an Advanced Age." Journal of Public Economics. Vol. 65. pages 219-228.

Jones-Lee, M.W., M. Hammerton, and P.R. Philips. 1985. "The Value of Safety: Results of a National Sample
        Survey." The Economic Journal. Vol. 95. March, pages 49-72.

Lashof, D. A. and D.R. Ahuja. 1990. "Relative Global Warming Potentials of Greenhouse Gas Emissions."
        Nature, 344. pages 529-531.

Ley, R.D. 1997. "Ultraviolet Radiation A-induced Precursors of Cutaneous Melanoma in Mondelphis
        Domestica." Cancer Research. Vol. 57. pages 3682-3684.

Lind, Robert C. 1994. "Intergenerational Equity, Discounting, and the Role of Cost-Benefit Analysis in
        Evaluating Global Climate Policy." Integrative Assessment of Mitigation, Impacts, and Adaptation to Climate.
        Edited by N. Nakicenovic, W.D. Nordhaus, R. Richels, and F.L. Toth. Laxenburg, Austria:
        International Institute  of Applied Systems Analysis.

Loehman, E. and V De. 1982. "Application of Stochastic Choice Modeling to Policy Analysis of Public
        Goods: A Case Study of Air Quality Improvements." The Review a/Economics and Statistics. Vol. 64.
        pages 474-480.

"Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer." 1987. 26 ILM 1550. September 16.

Murdoch, James C. and Mark A. Thayer. 1990. "The Benefits of Reducing the Incidence of Nonmelanoma
        Skin Cancers: A Defensive Expenditures Approach." Journalof'EnvironmentalEconomics and
        Management, pages 107-119.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Conference Publication 3023. 1988. An Assessment Modelfor
        Atmospheric Composition.

Perna, J.J.,  M.L. Mannix, J.E. Rooney, A.L. Notkins, and S.E. Straus. 1987. "Reactivation of Latent Herpes
        Simplex Virus  Infections by Ultraviolet Light: A Human Model." Journal of the American Academy of
                 y. 17. pages 473-478.
Rodriguez, J.M., M.K.W. Ko, and N.D. Sze. 1988. " Antarctic Chlorine Chemistry: Possible Global
        Implications." Geophysical Research Letters,  15. pages 257-260.

Rowe, R.D.  and R. M. Adams. 1987. Analysis of Economic Impacts of Lower Crop Yields Due to Stratospheric O^pne
        Depletion, Draft Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

                                                G-41

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Rowe, R.D., T.N. Neithercut, and W.D. Schulze. 1987. Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Cataracts, Draft
        Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Schelling, Thomas C. 1995. "Intergenerational Discounting." Energy Policy. 23(4/5).

Scotto, Fears, and Fraumeni, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, NIH. 1981. "Incidence of
        Nonmelanoma Skin  Cancer in the United States." pages 2, 7, and 13.

Setlow, R.B., Grist, E., Thompson, K., and Woodhead, A.D. 1993. "Wavelengths Effective in the Induction
        of Malignant Melanoma." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. Vol. 71. pages 3363-3366.

Solow, Robert. 1992. "An Almost Practical Step Toward Sustainability." Paper presented at the Fortieth
        Anniversary of Resources for the Future. October 8. Washington, D.C.

Stolarski, Watson. 1991. Testimony to the  Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on
        Science, Technology, and Space. April 16.

"Studies Doubt Sunscreens Stop a Cancer." 1998. The New York Times, February 2. page 19.

Taylor, D.W. and D.A. Eagles.  (No date.) "Assessing the Effects of Ultraviolet Radiation on Malarial
        Immunity." Prepared for Sabotka  and Company under EPA contract  number 68-01-7288,
        subcontract number 132.914.

Teramura, A.H. and N.S. Murali. 1986.  "Intraspecific Differences in Growth and Yield of Soybean Exposed
        to Ultraviolet-B Radiation Under Greenhouse and Field Conditions."  Environmental and Experimental
        botany.

Unsworth, Robert, Jim Neumann, and W.  Eric Browne,  Industrial Economics, Inc. 1990. "Review of
        Existing Value of Life Estimates: Valuation Document." Prepared for Jim DeMocker, Office of
        Policy Analysis and Review, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1999. http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/mbr/harmoniz.html. March
        26.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1998. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t6/fact_sheets/66.txt. March
        25.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1997. Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990. October.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1993. Part 2: The Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of the Proposed Phaseout of
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1989. Costs and Benefits of Phasing Out Production ofCFCs andHalons in
        the United States. November 3.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Protection of Stratospheric O^pne. August
        1.

                                               G-42

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. Future Concentrations of Stratospheric Chlorine and Bromine, EPA
       400/1-88-005. August.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987. Assessing the Risks of Trace Gases that Can Modify the Stratosphere.

Valerie, K., A.Delers, C. Bruck, C. Thinart, H. Rosenberg, C. Debouck, and M. Rosenberg. 1988. "Activation
       of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 by DNA Damage in Human Cells." Nature. Vol. 333.
       May 5. pages 78-81.

Viscusi, W.K. and W. Evans. 1990. "Utility Functions that Depend on Health Status: Estimates and
       Economic Implications." American Economic Review. Vol. 80. No. 2. pages 353-374.

Wasson, John and Steve Abseck. 1995. "Memorandum: Further Detail on the Costs and Benefits of Phasing
       Out Ozone Depleting Substances, EPA Contract No. 68-D4-0103, WA-205." Prepared  for Jim
       DeMocker, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October 9

Weitzman, Martin L. 1998. "Why the Far-Distant Future Should Be Discounted at its Lowest Possible Rate."
       Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. Vol. 36. pages 201-208.

Whitten, G.Z. and M. Gery. 1986. "Effects of Increased UV Radiation on Urban Ozone," EPA Report
       600/9-8 6016. Presented at EPA workshop on global atmospheric change and EPA planning. Edited
       by H.Jeffries.
                                              G-43

-------
                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
[This page left blank intentionally.]
               G-44

-------
 Valuation  of Human  Health
and  Welfare  Effects  of
Criteria  Pollutants
    This appendix describes the derivations of the
economic valuations for health and welfare endpoints
considered in the benefits analysis.  It includes three
primary sections. First, we introduce the method for
monetizing improvements in health and  welfare.
Second, we summarize dollar estimates used to value
benefits and outline the derivation of each estimate.
Valuation estimates were obtained from the literature
and reported in dollars per case avoided for health
effects, and dollars per unit of avoided  damage for
welfare effects. Economic valuations are characterized
in terms of a central  (point) estimate as well as a
probability distribution which reflects the uncertainty
around the central estimate.  Third, we  present the
results of the economic benefits analysis. All dollar
values are in  1990  dollars.    This third section
concludes with an exploration of the uncertainties in
valuing the benefits attributable to the CAAA.
Methods Used to Value Health
And Welfare Effects

    The general approach to benefits analysis involves
a three-step process— (i) identification of potential
physical effects  (i.e., individual health and welfare
endpoints); (ii) quantification of significant  endpoints;
and (iii) monetization of benefits. The first two steps,
identification and quantification of physical effects, are
described in Appendix D, Human Health and Welfare
Effects of  Criteria Pollutants.  The third step is
detailed in this  appendix. Monetization of benefits
attributed  to the CAAA involves applying dollar
estimates obtained   from  economic  literature  to
individual health and welfare endpoints relevant for
the  812  prospective analysis.    As context  to
understanding  the  methodology  for transferring
estimated values  of physical  effects, this section
provides a brief discussion of the theoretical economic
foundation of, and general approach to, valuing the
benefits of improved air quality.

    Economists equate the dollar value of a benefit to
the level of well-being an individual enjoys from the
provision or consumption of a particular good or
composite good (i.e., bundle or mix of goods). A
fundamental assumption in economic theory is that
individuals can trade between different consumption
levels of these  goods,  services, or money, and
maintain the same level of welfare.  Typically, this
willingness to trade-off between goods is measured as
willingness to pay (WTP) or willingness to accept
compensation (WTA).  These measures are essentially
dollar  equivalents  to  changes  in  the  level of
consumption  of a good or  service  so  that the
individual maintains the same level of well-being. In
other words, the individual is indifferent between his
or her current bundle of goods and the alternative
bundle of goods.

    While WTP and WTA represent an individual's
own assessment of the dollar value of better health,
they are not necessarily equivalent measures.1 WTP,
in the case of health, is the largest amount of money
a person would pay to obtain an improvement (or
avoid a decline) in health.  When faced with two
    1 The measures differ for several reasons. For example the
measures have different points of reference from which to
evaluate changes in welfare. WTP's reference point is the level of
utility without the improvement.  WTA's reference point is the
level of utility with the improvement. Moreover, the measures have
different upper bound constraints.  WTP measures what a person
would pay to obtain better health and is bound by the person's
wealth and income.  WTA, on the other hand, measures what a
person must be paid to forego better health.  WTA does not have
an upper bound, but it must be at least as large as WTP.
Economists, however, do not expect  significant  differences
between WTP and WTA when the dollar amounts are small
relative to the individual's wealth and income.
                                            H-1

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
options, to either (1) pay a certain dollar amount to
enjoy the  health improvement or (2)  abstain from
paying  the dollar amount and not  experience the
health improvement, the individual feels either choice
provides the same degree of well-being.  Alternatively,
willingness to  accept compensation (WTA) is the
smallest amount of money a person would voluntarily
accept as compensation to forego an improvement, or
endure a decline, in health.  The individual feels that to
accept  the payment  and not experience the health
improvement  or  refuse  the  compensation   and
experience improved health will provide the same
degree  of well-being.  In practice, WTP is generally
used  to value  benefits because it  is  often easier to
measure and quantify.2 In this report, we refer to all
valuation estimates as WTP values, even though the
underlying economic valuation literature is based on
studies  which  elicited expressions of WTP and/or
WTA.3

    In  the context of cost-benefit analysis, WTP  is
useful  for estimating the monetary value of non-
market, public goods. A major characteristic of public
goods is that  they  are nonrival  (i.e.,  one person's
consumption of the good does not reduce the amount
available to others).   In the case of health-related
improvements due   to  environmental  quality,  the
benefits are also nonexclusive.  Benefits are not (and
to some extent, cannot be) regulated.  As a result, the
benefits are actually reductions in the probabilities or
risk of enduring certain health
    2It is worth noting that the appropriateness of either WTP or
WTA also depends on property rights. In the case of a policy
aimed  at reducing existing pollution levels, a  WTP measure
implicitly assumes that the property rights rest with the polluting
firm. Alternatively, WTA measures implicitly assume that the
property rights rest with the public. (Carson and Mitchell, 1993.)

    In some cases (e.g., hospital admissions), neither WTA nor
WTP estimates are available. In those cases, cost of illness (COI)
estimates are applied in lieu of  WTP values.   COI estimates
understate  the true  welfare  change  since important value
components (e.g., pain and suffering associated with the health
effect) are not reflected in the out-of-pocket costs for the hospital
stay.
problems.  In theory, the total social value associated
with the decrease in risk is
N
2_i (number of units of risk reduction \ * (WTP per unit risk reduction ) (1)

where (number of units of risk reduction^ is the
number of units of risk reduction conferred on the ith
exposed individual  as  a result  of  the pollution
reduction,  (WTP per unit risk reduction^ is the ith
individual's willingness to pay for a unit risk reduction,
and N is the number of exposed individuals.  The
units are in terms of cases reduced per unit of time
(usually one year).

    Using mortality risk as an example, suppose that
a given reduction  in  PM concentrations results in
lowering the risk of death by 1/10,000 per year. Then
for every 10,000 individuals, one less death would be
expected if ambient PM concentrations are reduced.
If an individual's WTP for this 1/10,000  decrease in
mortality risk is  $500  (assuming,  for now, that all
individuals' WTPs are the same), then the value of a
statistical life is 10,000 x $500, or $5 million.

    While the estimation of WTP for a market good
(i.e., the estimation of a demand schedule)  is not a
simple  matter,  the  estimation   of  WTP  for  a
nonmarket good, such as a decrease  in  the risk of
having a particular  health problem, is substantially
more difficult.  Estimation of WTP for decreases in
very specific health  risks  (e.g.,  WTP to decrease the
risk of a day of coughing or WTP to decrease the risk
of admission to the  hospital  for a respiratory illness)
is  further  complicated by several  factors,  such as
wealth, income, age, pre-existing health impairments,
or  other personal characteristics.  There are many
policy contexts where distinguishing among WTP
estimates   based on  categorical   differences  (e.g.,
distinguishing between WTP of a low-income group
and a high-income group)  is controversial.  Given the
consideration of these influencing factors  and the
limitations on information available for  developing
WTP estimates,  EPA  sought  to  develop the most
appropriate  and   accurate  estimates   possible.
Derivations of the dollar value estimates for this study
are discussed below.
                                                  H-2

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Valuation of Specific Health
Endpoints

    Since the Section 812 CAA retrospective analysis
(U.S.  EPA   1997),  there  have  been  significant
advances made in economic valuation methodologies
for both mortality and morbidity effects. Much of the
literature  presents emerging new  approaches for
characterizing the  effects  of potentially important
determinants  of WTP, such as age, income, risk
perception, and current health status.  Despite this
progress, many  of the more  recent studies test
techniques that are in the development stage and use
data from work reviewed and incorporated in the
Section  812  retrospective  analysis.   This  section
reviews the sources and methodology used to derive
WTP estimates for premature mortality and a variety
of morbidity effects valued in the present study. In
addition, there are brief discussions of more recent
advances relevant to particular endpoints.

Valuation of Premature Mortality
Avoided

    The economic benefits associated with premature
mortality were  the largest category of monetized
benefits in the Section 812 CAA retrospective analysis
(U.S. EPA 1997).4  In  addition,  EPA  identified
valuation  of  mortality  benefits   as  the  largest
contributor to the range of uncertainty in monetized
benefits.  Because of the uncertainty in estimates of
the value  of premature mortality  avoidance, it  is
important to adequately characterize and understand
the various types of economic approaches  available
for mortality valuation.   Such an assessment also
requires an understanding of how alternative valuation
    4As noted in the methods section, it is actually reductions in
mortality risk that are valued in a monetized benefit analysis.
Individual WTPs for small reductions in mortality risk are summed
over enough individuals to infer the value of a statisticalV£e saved.
This is different from the value of a particular, identified life saved.
The "value of  a premature death avoided,"  then, should be
understood as shorthand for "the value of a statistical premature
death avoided."
approaches reflect that some individuals may be more
susceptible to air pollution-induced mortality.

    The health science literature  on air  pollution
indicates that several human characteristics  affect the
degree to which mortality risk affects an individual.
For example, some age groups are more susceptible to
air  pollution than  others  (e.g.,  the  elderly  and
children). Health status prior to exposure also affects
susceptibility — at risk individuals include those who
have   suffered   strokes  or  are  suffering  from
cardiovascular  disease  and angina (Rowlatt, et al.
1998).

    To reflect  the full range  of knowledge  of air
pollution-induced mortality,  an ideal  estimate of
mortality risk reduction benefits would be  an  ex ante
willingness  to  pay (WTP)  to improve  one's own
chances of  survival  plus  WTP to improve other
individuals' survival rates.5 The measure would take
into account the specific nature of the risk  reduction
commodity that is provided to individuals,  as well as
the context in which risk is reduced. To measure this
value, it is important to assess how reductions in air
pollution reduce the risk of dying from the time  that
reductions take effect onward, and how individuals
value  these changes.  Each individual's survival curve,
or the probability of surviving beyond a given  age,
should  shift as a result of an environmental quality
improvement.    That  is,   changing the current
probability  of survival  for an  individual also shifts
future probabilities of that individual's survival. This
probability shift will differ across individuals because
survival curves are dependent on such characteristics
as age, health state, and the current age to which the
individual is likely to survive.  For example, Figure H-
1 illustrates how a  risk  reduction may  change a
survival curve for a given  population. In this  figure,
the solid line shows a survival curve for white  males,
from  California 1980 life tables  (adapted from Selvin,
1996), up to age 80.  The dashed line  shows that the
probability of survival beyond a given age increases
with a reduction in mortality risk.
    5 For a more detailed discussion of altruistic values related to
the value of life, see Jones-Lee (1992).
                                                  H-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    While the change in a survival curve represents a
cumulative effect of a  change in risk over time, the
annual change in risk of death represents a static effect
of a risk reduction. As discussed in Appendix D in
greater detail, the instantaneous risk of death at a
specific age is often used to illustrate the effects of
changes in risk.  The annual risk of death is related to
the probability of survival in that it represents the rate
at which the survival probability changes at any given
age, divided by the probability of surviving beyond
that age.   Figure  H-2  shows how  a constant risk
reduction reduces annual risk of death across various
age cohorts. The baseline risk of death increases with
each cohort (solid line). As a result, the reduction in
risk (in  this hypothetical  example  a  constant  25
percent reduction) lowers each cohorts' risk level at a
different rate.   The  elderly  experience  a greater
reduction in risk than younger cohorts as can be seen
by  the increasing difference between the solid and
dashed line. It is important to note that this example
shows the effect of a uniform risk reduction, and air
pollution controls may have risk reduction effects that
vary across age cohorts.

    An alternative way to view the age-dependent
effect of risk reduction is to consider changes in the
cumulative effect of risk as measured by changes  in
remaining life expectancy.  Remaining life expectancy
is measured as the average number of additional years
expected to be lived by those individuals alive at a
given age, and derives from the area under the survival
curve at any given age.  The age-dependent effects  of
a hypothetical change in risk are portrayed in Figure
H-3.  Consider the effect of risk reduction on two
cohorts, aged 10 years apart. When each cohort was
at age 40 both had the same life expectancy shown in
Figure H-3 as point A'. Given a risk reduction in the
future that occurs when one cohort is at age 60 and
the other at age 70, the life expectancy of the 60 year
old increases  by  the  amount A'B',  and the life
            Figure H-1
            Hypothetical Survival Curve Shift
                                                 H-4

-------
                                         The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Figure H-2
Change in 1990 Annual Risk of Death by 25 Percent
Figure H-3
Increase in 1990 Remaining Life Expectancy
                                       60
                                       Age
                                       H-5

-------
                                                     The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
expectancy of the 70 year old increases by the amount
A"B".  The change in life expectancy is greater for
the younger cohort than the older  cohort because
these measures represent  a cumulative accrual  of
increased life expectancy (i.e., the younger cohort will
benefit  from the lower risk environment for more
years).

    Because the risk reduction  results in various
changes in risk levels, individual values  for risk
reduction are likely to vary as well. Some individuals
having  a greater change  in risk, and hence  life
expectancy, may have different values for the change
than those individuals experiencing a smaller change
in risk. Note that future generations may hold values
for health as well.   Cropper and Sussman (1990)
develop theoretical models formalizing these concepts
when investigating  how  an individual's values  for
reduction of a  future risk  to oneself and to future
generations should be discounted to the present.

    While these theoretical models reflect the types of
values necessary to estimate  the impact of the CAAA,
they are difficult to implement.  First, they require an
estimate of individuals' survival curves. In  order to
develop these survival probabilities, it is necessary to
characterize the dose/response relationship for the
regulated pollutants  and know how this information
varies with age and health states over time.  Second, it
is  necessary to  estimate values for risk reductions,
considering the key dimensions  in which  risk and
valuation of risk reduction may vary (e.g., with age and
health state).

Mortality Valuation Methodologies

    This section summarizes alternative approaches to
mortality risk valuation, and outlines the approach
used to  measure the economic value of these types of
benefits for air  pollution  reductions associated with
the CAAA. The first part provides background on the
methods that individuals have developed to  estimate
the  value  of  risk  reduction   benefits,  including
commonly-applied approaches to valuation as well as
approaches that are beginning to be established in the
risk valuation literature.  The second part discusses the
appropriateness of  using these methodologies  for
assessing the  economic value of mortality benefits
associated with air pollution reduction. The Agency
has concluded that recent advances in the literature
show promise in incorporating several of the factors
that are likely to  influence value, but problems with
the methodological  approaches  and  lack  of data
needed to reliably to appropriately estimate values
with the newer models leads us to adopt  a value of
statistical life approach for the primary estimate of air
pollution-related mortality benefits.

    Commonly Applied Approaches

    The preferred approach researchers have taken to
estimate values  for avoiding premature mortality is
based  on  individual  WTP  for  risk   reduction.
Although some  cost-benefit analyses have based
values on avoided lost earnings (i.e., the human capital
approach), the WTP approach is preferred because it
more closely  conforms  to economic theory.6  The
common WTP measures of the value  of  life-saving
programs include the value of statistical life  (VSL) and
the value of  a statistical life year (VSLY).  Newer
approaches to estimate values incorporate changes in
life expectancy, risk of dying, life-days per person, and
age-specific preferences.  This section describes these
approaches  and  discusses issues  that  arise  in  their
application  to estimate  the value of mortality risk
reduction benefits.

    The most commonly applied  approaches for
mortality valuation are the value of statistical life and
value  of statistical life  year.  Both of these approaches
     In a recent article by Ireland and Gilbert (1998), the authors
evaluate value of life estimates used in tort recovery cases.  The
article discusses the concept that for an individual there can be
finite utility (or determined value) to life and at the same time no
monetary equivalent.  The authors do, however, build on this
argument to demonstrate that existing value of life estimates are in
fact lower bounds to the true value. By "lower bound," the
authors refer to a value representative of a specific individual, not
of a statistical life. In citing a reasonable value of life range, they
use  a range similar to that of the 812 retrospective analysis,
although the authors do not cite the source of this range. Ireland
and Gilbert write, "A decedent has lost something of immense
value, for which estimates in the $4-$6 million range is clearly a
low market value estimate".
                                                  H-6

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
directly address the value of premature death  and
health impairment.  The VSL method measures the
value of a given reduction in risk and an individual's
WTP  to reduce  that  risk,  relying  on  wage  and
occupational risk tradeoff data or  the results of
contingent   valuation   surveys.    Individual  WTP
amounts  for small reductions in mortality  risk are
"standardized" to reflect reduction of population risk
of one statistical life saved.  The result of applying this
method is not the value of an identifiable life, but
instead the value of reducing fatal risks in a population
(Viscusi 1992).

    Viscusi  (1992)  summarizes  the  value  of life
literature, including almost forty studies providing
VSL estimates relevant for policy application.  For the
section 812 retrospective analysis, EPA identified 26
studies from that review that reflect the application of
the  most  sound  and defensible  methodological
elements (see Table H-l).  Five of the 26 studies are
contingent  valuation (CV)  studies,  which  directly
solicit WTP information from subjects; the  rest are
wage-risk studies, which base  WTP on estimates of
the additional compensation demanded in the labor
market for riskier jobs.  Using a Weibull distribution
to describe the distribution of the mean mortality risk
valuation estimates from these  studies, the  mean
estimate of the distribution  is $4.8  million with a
standard deviation of $3.2 million (1990$).

    Since EPA's retrospective analysis, Desvousges et
al. (1998) has  conducted a meta-analysis of twenty-
nine mortality studies presented in Viscusi (1993) and
Fisher, Chestnut, and Violette  (1989).7 Desvousges et
al.'s meta-analysis yields  $3.3. million (1990 dollars) as
a value of statistical life, with a 90 percent confidence
interval  between  $0.4 and  $6.3  million.8   Their
estimate, $3.3 million, falls well within the range
generated  by  EPA's  uncertainty  analysis  of VSL
estimates. The selection of studies accounts for much
of the difference between their  analysis and EPA's.
The Desvousges et al. analysis includes thirteen studies
that EPA did  not use  and EPA  includes ten studies
omitted by Desvousges et al.
    1 In addition to the Viscusi (1993) study, the 812 retrospective
examined two other studies, Miller et al. (1990) and the Fisher,
Chestnut, and Violette (1989). We opted to not use the Miller et
al. study given our concerns regarding the appropriateness of the
selection of studies for valuing reductions in environment-related
mortality risk and concerns about the adjustments made to the
underlying data.  The Fisher, Chestnut, and Violette (1989) study
was  not  used  because the data  was not  as  current or
comprehensive as the data in the Viscusi study.
    8 Desvousges et al. do not adjust the value of statistical life to
account for age differences.  They do note that a single estimate
for the value of statistical life may not be a good representation of
the  differences between willingness-to-pay  of the elderly and
young, healthy workers. They state that Moore and Viscusi (1988)
demonstrate that willingness-to-pay is higher for people with more
life years to lose while Desvousges et al. (1996) and Johnson et al.
(1998) indicate that willingness-to-pay is lower for people with
limited abilities to engage in activities and care for themselves.
                                                    H-7

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table H-1
Summary of Mortality Valuation Estimates
_ . . Type of
Study Estimate
Kneisner and Leeth (1991) (US)
Smith and Gilbert (1984)
Dillingham (1985)
Butler (1983)
Miller and Guria (1991)
Moore and Viscusi (1988a)
Viscusi, Magat, and Huber(1991b)
Gegaxet al. (1985)
Marin and Psacharopoulos (1982)
Kneisner and Leeth (1991) (Australia)
Gerking, de Haan, and Schulze (1988)
Cousineau, Lacroix, and Girard (1988)
Jones-Lee (1989)
Dillingham (1985)
Viscusi (1978, 1979)
R.S. Smith (1976)
V.K. Smith (1976)
Olson (1981)
Viscusi (1981)
R.S. Smith (1974)
Moore and Viscusi (1988a)
Kneisner and Leeth (1991) (Japan)
Herzog and Schlottman (1987)
Leigh and Folson (1984)
Leigh (1987)
Garen (1988)
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Cont. Value
Labor Market
Cont. Value
Cont. Value
Labor Market
Labor Market
Cont. Value
Labor Market
Cont. Value
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Labor Market
Valuation (millions 1990$)
0.6
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.2
2.5
2.7
3.3
2.8
3.3
3.4
3.6
3.8
3.9
4.1
4.6
4.7
5.2
6.5
7.2
7.3
7.6
9.1
9.7
10.4
13.5
SOURCE: Viscusi, 1992 and EPA analysis.
    When  applying  VSL estimates  to  estimate
mortality benefits, it is important to determine the
differences between the nature of air pollution risk
and risks faced by persons whose risk-dollar tradeoff
decisions have been addressed in the literature. First,
several studies indicate that the value people place on
mortality risk reduction may depend on the nature of
the risk (e.g., Fisher et al. 1989; Beggs 1984). Current
VSL estimates do not account for a number of the
important factors that affect risk perception.  For
example, premature mortality risks from air pollution
are experienced on  an involuntary  basis and are
generally uncompensated, while job-related risks are
assumed by individuals who presumably have some
choice as  to occupation and are compensated for
taking a riskier job.  Second, the demographics of the
population at risk from air pollution, particularly in
                                                H-8

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
terms of age, income, and health state, may differ
from the demographics of individuals surveyed in the
literature.  For a more detailed discussion of how
these factors can affect the economic valuation of
premature mortality, and specifically estimates derived
from the VSL approach, see the discussion, "Benefits
Transfer and VSL,"  presented in the section titled,
"Uncertainties in the Valuation Estimates."

    The VSLY method values life-years that would be
lost if an individual were to die  prematurely.  Most
commonly,  VSLY  estimates  are  an  annualized
equivalent of VSL estimates (Moore and Viscusi 1988,
French and Mauskopf 1992). A VSLY  estimate  may
imply a  stream of constant  values per  year.   The
annualized VSLY estimate depends on  three factors:
the underlying VSL estimate; a discount rate; and the
number  of remaining life years implied by  the
underlying VSL estimate.

    We develop an estimate of the value  of a statistical
life-year lost (VSLY) based on an  approach suggested
by Moore and Viscusi (1988).  They assume that the
willingness to pay to save a statistical life is the value
of a single year of life times the expected number of
years of life remaining for an  individual. They also
suggest that the typical respondent in a mortality risk
study may have a life expectancy of an  additional 35
years.  Using the  35-year life expectancy and VSL
estimate  of $4.8  million, their  approach yields an
estimate of $137,000 per life-year lost or  saved.  In the
prospective analysis, we also assume that an individual
discounts future additional years. This implies that the
value of each life-year lost must be greater than the
non-discounted  value.   Assuming a  five percent
discount rate and  adopting the  above  outlined
approach, the implied value of each life year lost used
in the prospective  analysis  is  $293,000 (in  1990
dollars).

    Critics  note  several disadvantages  to using this
type of VSLY method, most notably that the value of
avoiding premature death depends on more than just
lifespan.   With  the VSLY approach, the  benefit
attributed to avoiding a premature  death  depends
directly on how premature it is — resulting in smaller
values for  older  people,  who have shorter life
expectancies, and larger values for younger people.

    While  this approach attempts to derive  age-
adjusted values of expected life remaining using VSL
estimates, it does not address potential differences in
the value of a statistical life due to differences in the
average age of the affected population or the average
age at which an effect is experienced.  Studies have
shown that simple progressive declines in value as
estimated with  the  VSLY  method  may be  an
oversimplification; in many cases, values for  health
peak  several times throughout a lifetime (e.g., after
having children, after retirement).  In addition, in
many cases, data restrictions limit researchers' ability
to estimate VSLY because it is difficult  to  obtain
estimates of age-specific risks and the number of life-
years  lost.

    Life Quality Adjustments

    Another way to make adjustments to account for
heterogeneity in value of life estimates is an approach
that incorporates health status by applying a  VSLY
estimate  (generated from the  VSL  literature) to an
estimate of quality-adjusted life years (QALY).  The
resulting value estimates measure improvements in
health based  on  individuals'  attitudes toward
symptoms  or different levels  of pain or physical
impairment (Tolley et al. 1994).  This  approach utilizes
survey techniques to rate different health  conditions
and adjust the number of life years lost to represent
lost quality-adjusted  life years.  As  a result, this
approach aims to develop a value for a single QALY
that is the same regardless of individual characteristics.
In other words, the approach tries to standardize the
measure of mortality risk reduction that emerges from
a  health effects  analysis, making  valuation more
straightforward.

    The  Life Quality Adjustment approach  may
implicitly incorporate  morbidity impacts  to  assess
values for various causes of death, and is often used in
health economics to  assess the cost effectiveness of
medical  spending programs,  to  value  morbidity
avoidance, and to value mortality avoidance. Using a
QALY rating system, health quality ranges from 0 to
                                                 H-9

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
1, where 1 may represent full health, 0 death,  and
some number  in  between  (e.g., 0.8) an  impaired
condition.  If an individual lives with a health quality
index of 0.8, then the implied value of avoiding a year
with this condition and having full health in its place
would be 0.2 x  VSLY.  By the same token, the value
of gaining an additional life year in this condition is 80
percent of the value of gaining a year in full health
(i.e., 0.8 x VSLY) and represents  an annual value for
mortality  risk  avoidance for a  person with  the
condition.

    Tolley, et al. (1994) estimate values for a variety of
health   conditions  using   numerous  techniques,
including, in some cases, valuation of quality-adjusted
life years.  For example, when estimating values for
acute and  chronic symptoms using  QALYs,  the
authors  calculate  low,  medium  and high  value
estimates  based  on a  range of VSL  estimates.
Specifically, the authors use the following three VSLY
estimates (1991$) for QALY valuation:
        Low Estimate —
.000 VSLY:   Derived
        from Miller, Calhoun and Arthur (1990)  -
        VSL of $1.95 million, two percent discount
        rate.

    •   Medium   Estimate   =   $120.000   VSLY:
        Derived from Miller, Calhoun and  Arthur
        (1990)  - VSL of $1.95 million, six percent
        discount rate.

    •   High Estimate = $175.000 VSLY: Derived
        from Moore  and Viscusi (1988) - VSL of
        $6.0 million, 0 percent discount rate.

    The authors multiply the VSLY estimate by the
estimate of QALYs to calculate a value for each
symptom. It is not clear from the analysis discussion
which symptom values represent  the application of
this approach.

    Cutler  and Richardson   (1998)  apply  a VSL
estimate to  an  estimate of QALYs to  measure the
value of health improvements between 1970 and 1990
for ten health conditions.  To do this, the authors use
an  VSLY  estimate  of  $100,000, derived  as  the
intermediate value of results reported in studies by
Viscusi (1993) and Tolley et al. (1994).  In addition,
the authors estimate QALYs using information on
disease prevalence in the US from  1970 to 1990,
weighted by a factor that represents how quality of life
for a given condition has changed over time (e.g.,
more  buildings  have  ramps  and  elevators  for
individuals who have mobility problems, thus raising
quality of life over time).

    Murray  and  Lopez  (1996) modify the  above
theoretical approach by deriving an  estimate  of
disability-adjusted life  years  (DALYs).    DALY
estimates consider the years of life lost and years lived
with  disability,  adjusted for  the  severity  of the
disability. The approach to estimate DALYs is similar
to  that used to  estimate QALYs in  that  both
incorporate judgments about the value of time spent
in different health states.   However, DALY  and
QALY estimation methods differ in that the methods
to estimate DALYs are elicited from preferences for
particular value choices using a specific standardized
set of value choices.

    The Life Quality Adjustment approach scales
WTP values (VSL estimates) using a measure of life
years that reflect heterogeneity in  quality of health
(QALYs).  In many cases, the applied VSLY estimates
do not reflect consistent use of VSL estimates or
discount rates. In addition, in each of these valuation
analyses health economists have constructed a scale or
index that ranks  health outcomes  in terms of how
adverse individuals believe them to be. Often, the
extreme points on the scale are "perfect health" and
"immediate death," but some applications allow for
health outcomes that might be viewed as worse than
death. These ranking methods do not yield estimates
of WTP, and therefore are not linked to utility theory.
It is not clear that the ranking of health outcomes
obtained by these indices would match the ranking
obtained by knowing individuals' WTP  for various
health effects.  As discussed by Johansson  (1995),
these scales or indices rely on much more restrictive
assumptions   about  the  nature   of  individual
preferences than are normally made in WTP studies.
                                                H-10

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Longevity

    Several recent efforts estimate values for an
identifiable life by estimating the WTP for own life
extension.  Johannesson and Johansson (1996,1997)
estimate the "WTP to increase one's life expectancy by
one   additional  year  (i.e., extending  men's  life
expectancy from age 75 to 76, and women's from age
80 to 81,  conditional on  reaching age 75 or 80).
Johannesson, Johansson, and Lofgren (1997) estimate
the value of an immediate small reduction in mortality
risk (a "blip" or one year of fatal risk prevention).

    While this methodology represents a utility-theory
based value, the value estimate  for a single year of
longevity does not exactly correspond to what is
needed for an assessment  of air pollution benefits.
Johannesson and Johansson (1996, 1997)  estimate  a
value for a single year of life extension near  the end of
one's lifetime - values at this age are likely to be low
because of a low expectation of quality of life at this
advanced age. It is likely that mortality values will vary
within an individual's lifetime and with probability of
survival.   In addition,  mortality  associated  with
pollutant exposure will likely yield a longevity loss
greater than one year (e.g., mortality associated with
particulate  matter yields an average longevity loss of
approximately 14  life years among those who are
afflicted).  Moreover, because  of the hypothetical
nature of  the  contingent  valuation  method,  it is
unclear whether respondents  accept the  scenarios
presented and whether enough context was provided
to understand the risk and the budget implications of
the scenario and the response.

    Cost  Effectiveness

    Garber and Phelps (1997) present a methodology
for valuing a discounted life year that is  determined
by income  and risk aversion in a life-cycle model. To
calculate the  optimal cost  effectiveness cut-off for
medical intervention,  the authors assume values of a
utility function, health production function, income,
discount rate, and baseline mortality to derive a value
equivalent to W^TP for a discounted life year.  In this
model, utility is a  function of income (less medical
expenditures), and future  income is  a  function of
survival and medical expenditures.  As a result, the
authors use  mortality rates  to calculate expected
income.  Changes in these mortality rates result in
changes in survival probabilities, and hence income.
The model estimates an individual's willingness to
trade income  from  one period  to another; the
discounted change in income is equivalent to W/TP for
a change in risk.

    Although this methodology is based on a life-
cycle model using survival probabilities, it is simplistic
in  its  assumptions  and  is  based  on  assumed
preferences, rather than on revealed preferences or
those stated by an individual. In effect, the model
estimates values based largely on one empirical input:
individual income.  For example, the VSL for a 40
year-old cannot exceed $250,000 because that amount
exceeds the discounted expected income.  The largest
value of discounted life-year obtained by the authors
is approximately $37,000.

Valuation  Strategy Chosen for this
Analysis

    To  estimate  the  economic value of mortality
benefits associated with  air pollution  reductions,
economic theorists prefer estimates that reflect ex ante
values of  reducing  the risk of mortality across the
population (i.e., for individuals having different health
states and other characteristics such as income level
and risk perception). This requires an estimate of an
individual WTP for a reduction in an involuntary risk
that will change individuals' survival probabilities for
a lifetime.   Developing a valuation estimate based on
this theoretically ideal approach, however, is currently
subject  to significant  data  and  methodological
problems.  Moreover, many of the valuation methods
that are frequently presented  as an alternative to the
VSL approach rely on VSL estimates and calculate
values that depend on lifespan data, which may be
difficult to measure given the current  health data
limitations. Consequently, EPA's current interpreta-
tion of the state-of-the-art in  premature mortality
valuation leads to adoption of the VSL approach for
development of the primary benefit estimate.
                                                H-11

-------
   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
    As discussed above, several different approaches
for estimating a mortality-related value  have been
developed.  Each, however, has either methodological
inconsistencies   with  the  preferred  utility-based
approach, or does not provide a value estimate for a
commodity comparable to that provided by reduced
air pollution. We summarize the potential problems
of these alternatives below and in Table H-2:

    •   Life Quality Adjustment:  This approach
        relies on VSL estimates  applied  to  survey
        estimates  of  life-years   (i.e.,  QALYs   or
        DALYs)   for  the  economic   valuation.
        Currently, no generally accepted estimate or
        range  of estimates  of  VSLY have been
        established, instead these values derive from
        various VSL studies and  reflect numerous
        discount rates.   In addition, the life years
        estimates require  data sets that can account
        for the health states or utilities specific to a
        wide variety of health effects associated with
        air pollution.  In many cases, these estimates
        are not available or  are  based  on  health
        professionals' perceptions of various health
        outcomes,  and  not  necessarily  based  in
        economic utility theory.

    •   Longevity:     The  longevity   valuation
        approach of Johannesson and  Johansson
        (1996 and 1997) provides an estimate of the
        value  for  an  identifiable  one-year   life
        extension.  While the contingent valuation
        approach used may be consistent with utility
        theory,  the  commodity  valued  does  not
        represent the  commodity gained through
        improvement of ambient air quality.

    •   Cost Effectiveness:  While  the approach
        taken by Garber and Phelps relies on survival
        probabilities  throughout  an  individual's
        lifetime, the methodology is based on a utility
        function  that  makes  specific  assumptions
        about individual preferences to measure WTP
        rather than  eliciting  value  from  either a
        revealed  or  stated  preference  approach.
        Moreover, this  approach measures a WTP
        that  is  constrained by  income.    Where
            individual risks are small (perhaps one in ten
            thousand)  relative to  certain loss  of life,
            individual WTP may also be small relative to
            income.
H-12

-------
Exhibit H-2
Summary of Alternative Methods for Assessing the Value of Reduced Mortality Risk
      Method
         Description
           Strengths
            Weaknesses
     References
Value of Statistical
Life (VSL) - hedonic
wage studies
Uses wage and risk data to
estimate WTP to avoid risk in the
workplace
- Revealed preference
-Well-established approach: more
than 60 primary studies
-Workplace risk context; working-age
subjects and voluntary risk
- VSL may imply ex post risk
Summaries by Viscusi
(1992) and others;
many primary studies
VSL - contingent
valuation studies
Uses survey responses to
estimate WTP to avoid risks
- Flexible approach; some studies
use environmental risk context
- Good data on WTP by
respondent
- Risk information not well-understood
by subjects; questions may be unfamiliar
- VSL may imply ex post risk
Summaries by Viscusi
(1992) and others
VSL - consumer
market studies
Value of Statistical
Life Year (VSLY)
Quality Adjusted Life
Year (QALY)
WTP for change in
survival curve
WTP for change in
longevity
Cost-Effectiveness
Note: WTP = willinaness to
Uses consumer expense and risk
data (e.g., smoke detectors) to
estimate WTP to avoid risks
Annual equivalent of VSL
estimates
Applies quality adjustment to life-
extension data, uses cost-
effectiveness data to value
Reflects WTP for change in risk,
potentially incorporates age-
specific nature of risk reduction
Uses stated preference approach
to generate WTP for longevity or
longer life expectancy
Develops a standard of
comparison to measure the
efficiency of various treatments in
achieving a given health outcome
oav
- Revealed preference
- Flexible approach
- Provides financially accurate
adjustment for age at death
-Widely used in public health
literature that assess different
private medical interventions
- Theoretically preferred approach
that most accurately reflects
nature of risk reductions from air
pollution control
- Life expectancy is familiar term to
most individuals
-Widely used in public health
contexts

- Major difficulties estimating both risk
and expense variables
- VSL may imply ex post risk
- Adjustment may not reflect how
individuals consider life-years; assumes
they have equal value for all remaining
life-years
- Lack of data on health state indices
and life quality adjustments that are
applicable to an air pollution context
- Almost no current literature
- Lack of available data due to the
severe methodological difficulties in
presenting complex risk data to subjects
and eliciting reliable values
- Life expectancy is a simplifed term that
does not incorporate age-specific risk
information
-Methodological and data problems in
attempting to adapt to air pollution
context
- Public health context may be for
private goods (i.e., treatment)
- Dollar values do not necessarily reflect
patient preferences

Summaries by Viscusi
(1992) and others
Viscusi and Moore
(1988); French and
Mauskopf(1992)
Tolley(1994); Cutler
and Richardson
(1998)
Cropper and Sussman
(1990)
Johannesson and
Johansson (1997);
Health Canada (1998)
Garber and Phelps
(1997)

                                                                  H-13

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Valuation of Hospital Admissions
Avoided

    The valuation of this benefits category reflects the
value of reduced incidences  of hospital admissions
due to respiratory or cardiovascular conditions.  We
measure  avoided hospital admissions as opposed to
the  number of  avoided  cases  of  respiratory or
cardiovascular conditions, because of the availability
of C-R  relationships  for  the hospital admissions
endpoint. Hospital admissions reflect a class of health
effects linked to air pollution which are acute in nature
but more  severe than  the  symptom-day measures
discussed below.

    As described  in  Chapter 5,  our  approach to
estimating the number of incidences for this category
involves  reliance on several concentration-response
(C-R)  functions.    Each  concentration-response
function provides  an alternative definition of either
respiratory  effects or  cardiovascular  effects,  and
defines alternative relationships between a single
health affect and  different  pollutants.   For  the
valuation of these incidences, the current literature
provides well-developed and detailed cost estimates of
hospitalization  by health effect  or illness.   Using
illness-specific estimates of avoided medical costs and
avoided  costs  of lost work-time,  developed  by
Elixhauser (1993), we construct cost of illness (COT)
estimates that are specific to the suite of health effects
defined by each C-R function. For example, we use
twelve distinct C-R functions to quantify the expected
change in respiratory admissions.9  Consequently in
this  analysis, we  develop  twelve  separate  COI
estimates, each reflecting the unique composition of
health effects considered in the individual studies.

    Because each epidemiology study defines a health
effect  by a group of ICD codes, we construct COI
estimates for each study by aggregating estimates  that
are specific to an ICD code. These estimates use the
following information reported by Elixhauser (1993):
average hospital costs, average  length  of stay, and
baseline  incidences.10   We  use  this  ICD  code
information to develop valuation estimates that have
two components, hospital charges and lost earnings
due to the hospital stay. Our estimate of lost earnings
due to time spent in the hospital is based on valuing
the average length of hospital stay  at a daily rate of
$83.  This daily rate is the median weekly wage divided
by five work days and is based on U.S. Department of
Commerce figures (1992). After developing values for
each relevant ICD code (i.e., hospital costs plus lost
earnings), we weight these values based on  their
prevalence in  the baseline. The final COI estimate,
specific to each study, is the  sum  of the weighted
value of ICD code-specific estimates.

    We use a Monte Carlo approach to combines the
valuation and physical effects modeling to generate a
benefits  estimate  for hospital  admissions.    This
approach also allows us to account for the variability
in costs due to alternative definitions of respiratory
and cardiovascular conditions that result in a hospital
admission. The Monte Carlo process for integrating
the C-R function and its COI  value involves  first
randomly selecting an estimated change in incidences
from the  suite of  applicable  C-R  functions.   For
example, we use five epidemiology studies for the
endpoint hospital admissions  due to  cardiovascular
effects, and develop COI estimates specific to each
study. The Monte Carlo modeling then selects the
COI  estimate specifically developed for  that  C-R
function.  These values are multiplied to generate a
single benefits  estimate   for  reduced  hospital
admissions.  This process is repeated so that the value
from  each iteration  is  collected  to  generate  a
distribution  that  characterizes  the   range   and
probability  of possible benefits  estimates.    The
primary benefit estimates of avoided cardiovascular-
related hospital admissions reflect the central value of
this distribution.

    The use of COI estimates suggests we are likely to
significantly underestimate the WTP  to avoid hospital
     For more detailed discussion of the various health effects
considered by each C-R function and methodology for estimating
the number of avoided hospital admissions, see Appendix D.
    '"Potential  illnesses  associated  with  respiratory
cardiovascular admissions were identified by ICD-9 code.
and
                                                 H-14

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
admission.  The valuation of any given health effect,
such  as  hospitalization,  should reflect the value  of
avoiding associated pain and suffering and lost leisure
time,  in addition to medical costs and lost work time.
While the probability distributions in this analysis
characterize a range of potential costs associated with
hospitalization, they do not account for the omission
of factors from the COI estimates, such as pain and
suffering.   Consequently,  the valuations for these
endpoints most likely understate the true social values
for avoiding hospital admissions due to respiratory or
cardiovascular conditions.

Valuation  of Chronic Bronchitis
Avoided

    In this  analysis, chronic bronchitis is one of the
two monetized morbidity endpoints  whose  effects
may be expected to last from the initial onset of the
illness throughout the rest of the individual's life.
WTP   to  avoid  chronic   bronchitis   therefore
incorporates  the  present  discounted  value  of  a
potentially  long  stream  of  costs  (e.g.,  medical
expenditures  and lost earnings) and reduced health-
state utility.11

    Two studies, Viscusi et al. (1991) and Krupnick
and Cropper (1992)  provide estimates of WTP  to
avoid a case of chronic bronchitis. While alternative
estimates exist, many are  derived from these two
primary studies.12  The study by Viscusi et al. uses a
sample that is larger and more representative of the
general population, while the Krupnick and Cropper
study solicits values only from individuals who have a
relative with the disease.  As a result, the valuation of
    "The severity of cases of chronic bronchitis valued in some
studies approaches that of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
To maintain consistency with the existing literature, we do not
treat those cases separately in this analysis.

    12For examples of alternative estimates see Desvousges et al.
(1998) and Tolley et al. (1994). Both studies present estimates of
avoiding one year of chronic bronchitis that are based on adjusting
values from either Viscusi et al. (1991) or Krupnick and Cropper
(1992).
chronic  bronchitis  is based on  the distribution of
WTP responses from Viscusi et al. (1991).

    Both the Viscusi et al.  and the  Krupnick and
Cropper studies estimate the WTP to avoid a severe
case of  chronic bronchitis  (CB). The incidence of
pollution-related chronic bronchitis, however, is based
on three studies which consider only new incidences
of the illness and the resulting severity is unknown.13
In response to the uncertainty  regarding how the
severity  of a new case may progress, the prospective
analysis  adjusts  Viscusi  et a/.'s   WTP   estimates
downward. This adjustment reflects the decrease in
severity  of a case of pollution-related CB relative to
the case  in the Viscusi study and the elasticity of WTP
with respect to severity.  The elasticity of WTP to
avoid CB is a marginal value and not unit elastic (i.e.,
not equal to one).   Consequently, WTP adjustments
are made in one percent increments.  At each step, the
WTP  specific  to  a given  CB  severity level (sev), is
adjusted to derive the WTP to avoid  a case with a one
percent  lower  level  of  severity  by calculating  (
0.99*jw).14  In this analysis, we derive an estimate of
WTP for a case of chronic bronchitis that represents
a 50 percent reduction in the severity described in the
Viscusi study. The iterative procedure continues until
the severity is half of the of the Viscusi value.

    With the downward adjustment to Viscusi et a/.'s
WTP estimate, calculating the WTP to avoid a case of
    13 The three studies are Abbey etal (1993), Abbey etal (1995)
and Schwartz (1993).  For more discussion of estimating the
number of avoided cases of chronic bronchitis see Appendix D,
Human Health  Effect of Criteria Pollutants.   Incidences are
predicted separately for each year during the period 1990-2010.
It is important that only new cases  of chronic bronchitis are
considered in this analysis because WTP estimates reflect lifetime
expenditures and lower utility associated with the illness. If the
total prevalence of chronic bronchitis, rather than the incidence of
only new chronic bronchitis were predicted each year, valuation
estimates reflecting lifetime losses could be repeatedly applied to
the  same individual  for many  years, resulting  in a  severe
overestimation of the value of avoiding pollution-related chronic
bronchitis.

    14 Note that the elasticity changes at each iteration because
the elasticity of WTP  with respect to severity is a function of
severity.
                                                   H-15

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
pollution-related  chronic   bronchitis  has   three
components, each introducing some uncertainty. The
components are (1) WTP to avoid a case of severe
CB, (2) the  severity level of an average pollution-
related case of CB relative to that of the severe case,
and (3) the elasticity of WTP with respect to severity.
Based on assumptions about the distributions of each
component's value, a distribution of WTP to avoid a
pollution-related case of CB is derived by Monte Carlo
methods.  Each of the three underlying distributions
is described briefly below.

    The distribution of WTP to avoid a severe case of
CB is based on the distribution of WTP responses in
the Viscusi study.  Viscusi ef al. derived an implicit
WTP to avoid a statistical case of chronic bronchitis
from respondents' WTP for a specified reduction in
risk. The mean response implied a WTP of about $1
million (1990 dollars); the median response implied a
WTP of about $530,000 (1990 dollars).15 Viscusi et al.
report the  mean and median of their distribution of
WTP  responses  and the  decile  points.    The
distribution  of  reliable WTP responses  from  the
Viscusi study can therefore be approximated by a
discrete distribution, assigning  equal probability to
each of the first nine decile points (or one-ninth
probability to each decile).  This method omits five
percent of the   responses from  each  end of  the
distribution   (i.e.,  the  extreme  tails  which  are
considered unreliable).  Our present study uses this
trimmed  distribution  of  Viscusi  et  a/.'s    WTP
responses, for which the mean is  $720,000  (1990
dollars), as the distribution of WTPs to avoid a severe
case of CB.

    The distribution of the severity level of an average
case of pollution-related CB is based on the severity
levels used in Krupnick and Cropper's  study, which
estimates the relationship between severity level and
the natural log of WTP. The distribution is triangular
with a  mean of 6.5 and endpoints at  1.0 and 12,
although the most severe case of CB in that study is
assigned a severity level of 13.16

    The elasticity of WTP to avoid a case of CB with
respect to the severity of the case equals a constant
times the severity level.  This constant, estimated in
Krupnick and  Cropper's study of  the relationship
between severity and the natural  log of  WTP, is
normally distributed with mean of 0.18 and standard
deviation of 0.0669.

    Using   distributions   of  the  three   WTP
components described  above,  the  Monte   Carlo
analysis generates  a distribution with  a mean of
$260,000 for WTP to avoid a pollution-related case of
CB.   Consistent with  economic theory, the COI
estimates generated by Cropper and Krupnick (1990)
are lower than the mean WTP estimate (i.e., COI does
not reflects  the desire to avoid pain  and suffering).17
These COI estimates are approximately $86,000 for a
30 year old, $84,000 for a 40 year old, $76,000 for a 50
year old, and $43,000  for a  60 year old  (in 1990
dollars). The prospective's WTP estimate is  3 to  6
times greater than the full COI  estimate for 30 year
olds and 60 year olds, respectively.

Valuation of Chronic Asthma Avoided

    Chronic asthma is the other morbidity endpoint
that is valued as a health condition lasting throughout
an individual's lifetime.  The number of new cases of
chronic asthma is based on a study by McDonnell et
al. (1999),  and specifically  examines the effects of
ozone as a potential cause of the illness among adult
males (i.e., ages  27 and older). Similar to the valuation
of chronic bronchitis, WTP to avoid chronic asthma
    15There is an indication in the Viscusi paper that the dollar
values in the paper are in 1987 dollars. Under this assumption, the
dollar values were converted to 1990 dollars.
    16The Krupnick and Cropper study bases its most severe case
of CB (i.e., severity level equal to 13) on that used in the Viscusi
study.

    17 Using a 5 percent discount rate and assuming that 1) lost
earnings  continue  until age 65,  2)  medical expenditures are
incurred  until death,  and 3) life expectancy is  unchanged by
chronic bronchitis, Cropper and Desvousges calculate several
estimates  of  the present value of the stream  of medical
expenditures and lost earnings associated with an average case of
chronic bronchitis.
                                                 H-16

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
is presented as the net present value of what would
potentially be a stream of costs and lower well-being
incurred over a lifetime.

    Estimates of WTP to avoid asthma are provided
in two studies, one by Blumenschein and Johannes son
(1998)  and one by O'Conor and Blomquist (1997).
Both studies use the contingent valuation method to
solicit annual WTP estimates from  individuals who
have been diagnosed as asthmatics.   Each study,
however,  applies  a  different valuation approach.
Blumenschein and Johannesson solicit WTP values by
asking dichotomous choice and open-ended bidding
game questions.  They report an average monthly
WTP of $162 which amounts to an annual value of
approximately $1,900 (1990 dollars).  Alternatively,
O'Conor  and Blomquist apply a risk-risk tradeoff
approach similar to that used in the chronic bronchitis
studies. They calculate $1,200 (1990 dollars) as the
average annual WTP to avoid asthma.

    To  maintain consistency between the health
effects modeling and the valuation, the WTP estimates
were  adjusted to  account  for  two  factors.   As
mentioned earlier, valuation  of chronic morbidity
endpoints should approximate the costs and lowered
health-state   utility  that  are  incurred  over  an
individual's lifetime.  We  assume  that  the health
condition does not affect the average life expectancy
of  an  individual (i.e.,  does  not cause  premature
mortality).    Recognizing  that   the  average  life
expectancy will vary with different age groups and that
each age group does not represent an equal portion of
the population, the present discounted stream of WTP
is calculated for seven different age cohorts (between
the ages 27 and 85).  In turn, the net present value for
each age  group  is weighted by that age category's
representative share of the total population.  This
calculation was  performed  for  the  mean WTP
estimates  presented in the two studies.  The central
estimate of WTP to avoid a case of chronic asthma
among  adult males, approximately  $25,000, is the
average  of the present discounted value from the two
studies.  The  analysis characterizes the uncertainty
around  this  estimate  by applying upper and lower
values based on the present discounted value derived
from each study, $19,000 derived from O'Conor and
Blomquist study and $29,000 from the Blumenschein
and Johannesson study.

Valuation of Other Morbidity Endpoints
Avoided

    The valuation of a specific short-term morbidity
endpoint is  generally solicited by  representing the
illness  as a  cluster of acute symptoms.  For each
symptom, the  WTP  is calculated.  These values, in
turn, are aggregated to arrive at the WTP to avoid a
specific short term  condition.  For  example, the
endpoint  lower  respiratory  symptoms (LRS)  is
represented  by  two or  more  of  the following
symptoms: runny or stuffy nose; coughing; and eye
irritation.  The WTP to avoid one day of LRS is the
sum of values  associated with these symptoms. The
primary advantage of this approach is that is provides
some flexibility in constructing estimates to represent
a variety of health effects.

    At the  time  of the  Section  812 retrospective
analysis there were only a small number of available
studies on which to base  estimates (two or three
studies, for some endpoints; only one study for
others). Since the  retrospective analysis, much of the
literature suggests there are developing approaches
that may eventually lead to the refinement of estimates
and the overcoming of some limitations to the current
approach to constructing values.  For example there
is  extensive  progress   in developing valuation
techniques that reflect an individual's current health
state and more accurately account for a symptoms's
attributes (i.e.,  duration and severity).

    There are several aspects of the  short-term
morbidity valuation estimates worth noting.  First,
estimates of WTP  may be  understated for at least two
reasons. If exposure to pollution has any cumulative
or lagged effects, then a given reduction  in pollution
concentrations in one year may confer benefits not
only in that year but in future years as well. Benefits
achieved in later years are not included.  In addition,
the possible  effects of altruism are not considered in
any of the economic value  derivations.   Individuals'
WTP  for reductions in  health risks for others are
implicitly assumed to be zero.  The  second point
                                                H-17

-------
                                                      The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
worth noting is that the total benefit attributed to the
reduction  of particular pollutant's  concentration is
determined largely by the benefit associated with its
corresponding reduction in mortality risk.  This is
largely due to the dollar value associated with mortality
which is significantly greater than any other valuation
estimate. More detailed explanations for valuation of
specific morbidity endpoints are given in Table H-3.
The table  summarizes the sources and derivation of
the economic values used in the analysis.
Valuation  of Welfare Effects

    Economic valuations for welfare effects quantified
in the analysis (i.e., visibility and worker productivity)
are documented in Table H-3.18  Worker productivity,
unlike the avoidance of work loss days or restricted
activity days, reflects  productivity benefits  due  to
improvements  in work conditions   (i.e.,  reduced
ambient ozone)  rather than health improvements (i.e.,
reduced risk of hospitalization).   It is measured in
terms of the reduction in daily income of the average
worker engaged  in  strenuous outdoor  labor and
estimated at $1 per ten percent increase in  ozone
concentration. (Crocker and Horst, 1981). We discuss
the derivation of the visibility valuation further below.
    18  In  valuing  welfare  effects,  the retrospective analysis
included the benefits of reduced household soiling. This valuation
was based on 1972 data that projected expenditure patterns from
1972 to 1985 (Manuel  et al.,  1982).   While this  study was
appropriate for the twenty year time  period of the retrospective
(1970 to 1990), it is of questionable applicability for the current
study.   Since the original study, there have been  alternative
estimates of benefits due to reduced soiling. These estimates,
however, continue to be based on  the original study and its
underlying data (e.g., Desvousges et al., 1998).  Consequently, these
valuation coefficients do not reflect more recent information on air
pollution composition  and  potentially significant changes in
patterns of  household expenditure and allocation.  Progress in the
valuation of this category's  benefits is further limited by the
challenges of developing dose-response functions that accurately
assess the level and rate of materials damage and soiling. Recent
literature does suggest there is progress in refining approaches,
although it has  not  quite advanced  to the  level necessary for
credible quantification or monetization of benefits associated with
reduced materials damage and soiling.
Visibility Valuation

    Since  the late  1970s, a number of contingent
valuation (CV) studies of visibility changes have been
published in the economics literature. These studies
often classify visibility benefits as either residential or
recreational.   CV  studies of residential  visibility
generally survey individuals in urban and  suburban
settings.    The  valuation  is  also  applicable  to
households in rural areas.  Residential values relate to
the impact of visibility changes on an individual's  daily
life (e.g., at home, at work,  and while  engaged in
routine recreational activities).  Benefits of recreational
visibility relate to the  impact of visibility changes
manifested at parks  and wilderness areas that are
expected  to   be  experienced  by  its   visitors.
Recreational visibility benefits may, however, reflect
the   value  an   individual   places  on   visibility
improvements  regardless of  whether  or not  the
person plans to visit the park.19

    The reported estimates, expressed as household
willingness  to  pay  (WTP)   for   a hypothesized
improvement in visibility, have a wide range of values.
For examples, studies of visibility values from western
cities  have reported somewhat lower values than those
from eastern cities. This difference raises the question
of how visibility benefits should be evaluated  with
respect to  location (e.g., eastern U.S. versus western
U.S.),  commodity  definition  (e.g.,   changes  in
recreational areas versus residential areas), and units of
measurement (e.g., visual range, light extinction,  and
deciview).  While the differing values reported in the
literature may appear to imply that visibility is valued
differently  in  the eastern and western  U.S., other
evidence suggests that  eastern and western visibility
are not fundamentally  different commodities.  For
example, NAPAP  data  indicates  that  California's
South  Coast  Air Basin, which encompasses  Los
Angeles and extends northward to the vicinity of San
Francisco,  has   median   baseline   visibility  more
characteristic of the eastern U.S. than of other areas of
the west (NAPAP  1991; lEc  1992, 1993a).  These
    19This type of valuation is typically labeled "existence value."
For more discussion see Chestnut and Rowe, 1990.
                                                   H-18

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
results suggest that the valuation of marginal visibility
changes  is  dependent  on baseline conditions and
proximity  to the  commodity being  valued  (e.g.,
improved visibility in a region with an abundance of
National  Parks  such  as  the  Pacific Northwest).
Returning to the NAPAP example, the similarity in
values may reflect the  similarities between baseline
visibility in eastern  and western coastal  zones (i.e.,
coastal areas typically have  higher  humidity, while
areas of the west tend to have lower humidity and
hence a greater baseline visibility).

    For  the purposes  of this  report, we  interpret
recreational settings applicable for  this category of
effects  to include  National Parks  throughout the
nation.   Other  recreational  settings may also  be
applicable, for example National Forests,  state parks,
or even  hiking  trails or roadside areas with scenic
vistas.  In those cases, a lack of suitable economic
valuation literature to identify these other areas  and/or
a lack of visitation data prevents us  from generating
estimates for those recreational vista areas.  Moreover,
we develop  estimates of recreational  visibility changes
that account for the tendency of individuals to value
visibility changes based on proximity to the National
Park.

    We estimate visibility benefits based on a derived
visibility valuation function. In both  cases, residential
and recreational  visibility, the valuation function takes
the following form:

           HHWTP = B* ln(VR1/VR2)

    where:
        HHWTP = annual WTP per household for
        visibility changes
        VR1 =  the  starting annual average visual
        range
        VR2 =  the annual average visual  range after
        the change in air quality
        B = the estimated visibility coefficient.

The form of this valuation function is designed to
reflect the way individuals perceive and express value
for changes in visibility.  In other words, the expressed
WTP for visibility changes varies with the percentage
change in visual range, a measure that is closely related
to, though not exactly analogous  to, the Deci View
index used in Chapter 4.

    We develop estimates of the visibility coefficients
for residential  and recreational visibility from two
studies.20 We use figures reported in Chestnut and
Dennis  (1997) for the valuation of residential visibility.
This study  publishes estimates of visibility benefits
for the Eastern U.S that are based on original research
conducted in two Eastern cities (Atlanta and Chicago)
by McClelland  et al. (1990).  We use  a central B
coefficient for residential visibility of $141, as reported
in Chestnut and Dennis  (1997).  For the valuation of
recreational visibility benefits,  we use  a study  by
Chestnut and Rowe (1990).  This study reports WTP
estimates of  recreational visibility  in  three park
regions, the Western, Southwestern, and Eastern U.S.
For recreational visibility, the coefficients vary based
on the  study region  and whether the household is
within  or  outside of the National Park region  of
concern.   "In-region"  coefficients are higher than
those  for  "out-of-region"  households.   The "in-
region" estimates for California, the Southwest, and
Southeast are $105,  $137, and $65, respectively; the
corresponding   "out-of-region" estimates  are  $73,
$110, and $40, respectively.

    Our valuation of visibility changes is largely based
on unpublished,  but  peer-reviewed work.   For
example, we use the secondary analysis of Chestnut
and  Dennis (1997)  to  value  residential  visibility
benefits. This article is published in the Journal of Air
and Waste Management Association, but relies on  the
unpublished results reported by McClelland et  al.
(1990).   The source of our  recreational visibility
estimates,  Chestnut and  Rowe  (1990),  is  also
unpublished. Both studies were originally developed
as part of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program (NAPAP) and, therefore, have been subject
to peer-review as part of that program.  Moreover,
these   two  studies  are   frequently   cited  and
    20The unit of measure for the visibility coefficients is dollars.
However, these coefficients are scaled by the small incremental
changes in visibility to generate our WTP estimates.
                                                  H-19

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
recommended  for use  in  published  analyses of
visibility valuation.21

    Concerns  about  the  method  used  in   the
McClelland et al. study, however, suggest their results
may  not incorporate  two  potentially important
adjustments.  First, their study does not account for
the "warm glow" effect, in which respondents  may
provide higher willingness to pay estimates  simply
because   they   favor  "good   causes"  such  as
environmental improvement.  Second, while the study
accounts for non-response bias, it may not employ the
best available methods.   The effect of both these
factors is to suggest an overestimate of WTP. As a
result, we exclude residential visibility estimates from
the overall primary benefits estimate.
    !1For example see Desvousges et al. (1998).

                                                H-20

-------
Table H-3
Unit Values Used for Economic Valuation of Health and Welfare Endpoints
      Health or Welfare
          Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate     Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                                     Derivation of Estimates
Mortality
$4.8 million per
statistical life
Weibull distribution,
mean = $4.8 million
std. dev. = 3,240,000
Central Estimate: Value is the mean of value-of-statistical-life estimates
from 26 studies (5 contingent valuation and 21 labor market studies).
                               $293,000 per
                               statistical life-year
                   Weibull distribution,
                   mean = $293,000
                   std. dev. = 198,000
Uncertainty: Best-fit distribution to the 26 sample means.  The Weibull
distribution prevents selection of negative WTP values.

Central Estimate: Value is the mean of the distribution of the value of a
statistical life-year, derived from the distribution of the value of a
statistical life (see below).

Uncertainty: Assuming the discount rate is five percent, and assuming
an expected 35 years remaining to the average worker in the wage-risk
studies (see above), the value of a statistical life-year is just a constant,
0.061, multiplied by the value of a statistical life. The distribution of the
value of a life-year is derived from the distribution of the value of a
statistical life.  Because the VSL is expressed as a Weibull distribution,
as indicated above, the value of a statistical life-year is also expressed
as a Weibull distribution, with mean equal to 0.061 multiplied by the
mean of the original Weibull distribution (0.061 x $4.8 million =
$293,000) and standard deviation equal to 0.061 multiplied by the
standard deviation of the original distribution (0.061 x $3.24 =
$198,000).
                                                                      H-21

-------
      Health or Welfare
          Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate     Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                                    Derivation of Estimates
Chronic Bronchitis (CB)
$260,000
A Monte Carlo-generated
distribution, based on three
underlying distributions, as
described more fully under
"Derivation of Estimates"
and in the text.
Central Estimate: Value is the mean of a Monte Carlo distribution of
WTP to avoid a case of pollution-related CB.  WTP to avoid a case of
pollution-related CB is derived by adjusting WTP (as described in
Viscusi et al., 1991) to avoid a severe case of CB for the difference in
severity and taking into account the elasticity  of WTP with respect to
severity of CB.  The mean of the resulting distribution is $260,000.

Uncertainty: The distribution of WTP to avoid a case of pollution-related
CB was generated by Monte Carlo methods, drawing from each of three
distributions: (1) WTP to avoid a severe case of CB is assigned a 1/9
probability of being each of the first nine deciles of the distribution of
WTP responses in Viscusi et al., 1991; (2) the severity of a pollution-
related case of CB (relative to the case described in the Viscusi study)
is assumed to  have a triangular distribution, centered at severity level
6.5 with endpoints at 1.0 and 12.0 (see text for further explanation); and
(3) the constant in the elasticity of WTP with respect to severity is
normally  distributed with mean = 0.18 and standard deviation = 0.0669
(from Krupnick and Cropper, 1992). See text for further explanation.
Chronic Asthma
     $25,000       Triangular distribution,
                   centered at $25,000 on the
                   interval [$19,000, $30,000]
                             Central Estimate:  Based on results reported in two studies
                             (Blumenschein and Johannesson, 1998 and O'Conor and Blumquist,
                             1997).  Assumes a 5% discount rate and reflects adjustments for age
                             distribution among adults (ages 27 and older) and  projected life years
                             remaining.

                             Uncertainty:  Reflects the range in central estimate values reported in
                             the two studies.
                                                                      H-22

-------
      Health or Welfare
         Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate    Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                                    Derivation of Estimates
Hospital Admissions
  1. All Respiratory

    -ICD codes: 460-519
   variable—
  function of the
    analysis
See Derivation of Estimates
Central Estimate:  Central estimate is the result of the analysis. The
analysis uses 12 distinct C-R functions.  A COI estimate is constructed
for each. The COI estimates are based  on ICD-9 code  level information
(e.g., average hospital care costs,  average length of hospital stay, and
weighted share of total respiratory illnesses) reported in Elixhauser
(1993).

Uncertainty: Probability distribution is a  result of the analysis and
reflects: (1) uncertainty range of C-R function outcome;  and (2) variation
in study-specific COI estimates.
  2. All Cardiovascular
    - ICD codes: 390-429
   variable—
  function of the
    analysis
See Derivation of Estimates
Central Estimate:  Central estimate is the result of the analysis. The
analysis uses five distinct C-R functions.  A COI estimate is constructed
for each. The COI estimates are based on ICD-9 code level information
(e.g., average hospital care costs,  average length of hospital stay, and
weighted share of total respiratory illnesses) reported in Elixhauser
(1993).

Uncertainty: Probability distribution is a result of the analysis and
reflects: (1) uncertainty range of C-R function outcome; and (2) variation
in study-specific COI estimates.
  3. Emergency room visits for         $194
    asthma
                   Triangular distribution,
                   centered at $194 on the
                   interval [$144, $269]
                             Central Estimate: COI estimate based on data reported by Smith et al.
                             (1997).

                             Uncertainty:  Based on reported 95% confidence intervals for annual
                             estimates of  the number and costs of ER visits.
                                                                     H-23

-------
     Health or Welfare
         Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate    Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                                 Derivation of Estimates
Respiratory Ailments Not Requiring Hospitalization
  1. Upper Resp. Symptoms
    (URS)

     (defined as one or more
     of the
     following:
     runny or
     stuffy nose,
     wet cough,
     burning,
     aching, or
     red eyes)
      $19          Continuous uniform
                   distribution over the interval
                   [$7, $33]
Central Estimate:  Combinations of the 3 symptoms for which WTP
estimates are available that closely match those listed by Pope et al.
result in 7 different "symptom clusters," each describing a "type" of
URS. A dollar value was derived for each type of URS,  using lEc mid-
range estimates of WTP to avoid each symptom in the cluster and
assuming additivity of WTPs. The dollar value for URS  is the average
of the dollar values for the 7  different types of URS.

Uncertainty:  Assumed to be a continuous uniform distribution across
the range of values described by the 7 URS types.
  2. Lower Resp. Symptoms
    (LRS)

     (defined in the study as
     two or more of the
     following:  cough, chest
     pain, phlegm, and
     wheeze.)
      $12          Continuous uniform
                   distribution over the interval
                   [$5, $19]
Central Estimate:  Combinations of the 4 symptoms for which WTP
estimates are available that closely match those listed by Schwartz et
al. result in 11 different "symptom clusters," each describing a "type" of
LRS.  A $ value was derived for each type of LRS, using lEc mid-range
estimates of WTP to avoid each symptom in the cluster and assuming
additivity of WTPs. The $ value for LRS is the average of the $ values
for the 11 different types of LRS.

Uncertainty:  Taken to be a continuous uniform distribution  across the
range of values described by the 11  LRS types.
  3. Acute Bronchitis
      $45          Continuous uniform
                   distribution over the interval
                   [$13, $77]
Central Estimate: Average of low and high values recommended by
IEC for use in section 812 analysis (Neumann et al., 1994).

Uncertainty: Continuous distribution between low and high values
(Neumann et al., 1994) assigns equal likelihood of occurrence of any
value within the range.
                                                                    H-24

-------
    Health or Welfare
        Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate     Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                               Derivation of Estimates
4.  Acute Respiratory
   Symptoms and Illnesses

   - Presence of any of 19
   acute respiratory
   symptoms

   -Any Resp. Symptom

   - Respiratory Illness
      $18          1. URS, probability = 40%
                     LRS, probability = 40%
                     URS+LRS, prob. = 20%

                   2. If URS, use URS $ dist.
                     If LRS, use LRS $ dist.
                     If URS+LRS, randomly
                   select one value each from
                   URS and LRS $
                   distributions; sum the two
Central Estimate: Assuming that respiratory illness and symptoms can
be characterized as some combination of URS and LRS, namely: URS
with 40% probability, LRS with 40% probability, and both URS and LRS
with 20% probability. The $ value for these endpoints is the weighted
average (using the weights 0.40,  0.40, and 0.20) of the $ values derived
for URS, LRS, and URS + LRS.

Uncertainty:  Based on variability assumed for central estimate, and
URS and LRS uncertainty distributions presented previously.
5. Asthma Attack
      $32         Continuous uniform
                  distribution over the interval
                  [$12, $54]
Central Estimate: Mean of average WTP estimates for the four severity
definitions of a "bad asthma day." Source: Rowe and Chestnut (1986), a
study which surveyed asthmatics to estimate WTP for avoidance of a
"bad asthma day," as defined by the subjects.

Uncertainty:  Based on the range of values estimated for each of the
four severity definitions.
6.  Moderate or worse
   asthma
      $32         Continuous uniform
                  distribution over the interval
                  [12, 54]
Central Estimate: Reflects the mean WTP to avoid a "bad asthma day"
as reported by Rowe and Chestnut (1986).

Uncertainty:  Taken to be a continuous uniform distribution across the
range of values obtained from the study.
7.  Shortness of breath,
   chest tightness or
   wheeze
     $5.30        Continuous uniform
                  distribution over the interval
                  [$0, $10.60]
Central Estimate: From Ostro et al., 1995.  This is the mean of the
median estimates from two studies of WTP to avoid a day of shortness
of breath: Dickie et al., 1991 ($0.00), and Loehman et al., 1979
($10.60).

Uncertainty:  Taken to be a continuous uniform distribution across the
range of values obtained from the two studies.
                                                                 H-25

-------
      Health or Welfare
          Endpoint
    Estimated Value Per Incidence (1990$)

Central Estimate     Uncertainty Distribution
                                                                                                    Derivation of Estimates
Restricted Activity and Work Loss Days
  1.  WLDs
       $83
none available
Central Estimate:  Median weekly wage for 1990 divided by 5 (U.S.
Department of Commerce, 1992)

Uncertainty: Insufficient information to derive an uncertainty estimate.
  2.  MRADs
       $38         Triangular distribution
                   centered at $38 on the
                   interval [$16, $61]
                            Central Estimate: Median WTP estimate to avoid 1 MRRAD — minor
                            respiratory restricted activity day - from Tolley et al. (1986)
                            (recommended by lEc as the mid-range estimate).

                            Uncertainty:  Range is based on assumption that value should exceed
                            WTP for a single mild symptom (the highest estimate for a single
                            symptom—for eye irritation—is $16.00) and  be less than that for a WLD.
                            The triangular distribution acknowledges that the actual value is likely to
                            be closer to the point estimate than either extreme.
Welfare Effects
  1.  Visibility

     Residential Visibility
        "in-region"
        "out-of-region"
Valuation function:

HHWTP= B * ln(VR1/VR2)

where:
HHWTP = annual WTP per household
B = estimated visibility coefficient
VR1 = starting annual average visual range
VR2 = the annual average visual range after the
    change in air quality
                             Central Estimate: Estimated WTP for valuation of visibility changes
                             depend upon two factors:  (i) visibility coefficient, B, and (ii) incremental
                             change in visual range.  Visibility coefficients applied in the primary
                             analysis vary by category of visibility change and region.
                             Recreational visibility valuation is based on Chestnut and Rowe (1990).
                             For "in region" recreational visibility, the coefficients are $105, $137,
                             $65, for California, the Southwest, and the Southeast, respectively. For
                             "out-of-region" recreational visibility, the coefficients are $73, $110, $40,
                             for California, the Southwest, and the Southeast, respectively.
2. Worker Productivity Change in daily none available
wages: $1 per
worker per 10%
change in O3
Central Estimate: Based on elasticity of income with respect to O3
concentration derived from study of California citrus workers (Crocker
and Horst, 1981 and U.S. EPA, 1994). Elasticity applied to the average
daily income for workers engaged in strenuous outdoor labor, $73 (U.S.
1990 Census).
Note: All WTP estimates converted to 1990 dollars using the Consumer Price Index (CPI); COI estimates converted using the CPI-Medical.
                                                                      H-26

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Results of Valuation of Health
and Welfare Effects

    We  estimate  total human health and  welfare
benefits  by  combining  the  economic  valuations
described in this Appendix with the health and welfare
effects results presented in Appendix D for projection
years 2000 and 2010. The valuation results reflect the
annual estimates of benefits  for the 48 contiguous
States, or "all U.S. population," which provides a more
accurate  depiction of the trend of economic benefits
over the 20-year study period 22  For our Primary
Central estimate we attribute to Titles I through V of
the CAAA total annual human health benefits of $68
billion in 2000 and $118 billion in 2010.

    As   noted  in  Appendix  D,  we also  include
alternative  estimates for some health and  welfare
impacts,  which form the basis of several alternative
benefit  estimates.   For each  of the health effects
estimates, we quantify statistical uncertainty.   The
range of estimated health and welfare effects, along
with the uncertain economic unit  valuations,  are
combined to estimate a range of possible results. We
use the Monte Carlo method presented in Chapter 8
to combine the health and economic information.
Both tables show the mean estimate results, as well as
the measured credible range (upper and lower five
percentiles of the  results distribution), of economic
benefits for each of the quantified health and welfare
categories.  We summarize our primary estimates of
2000 and 2010 monetized benefits  in Table H-3 and
    22In Appendix D, we present physical effect estimates for
affected population in the contiguous 48 States and for affected
populations within 50 kilometers of a monitor.  We present those
results as a sensitivity test that characterizes the possible magnitude
of human health effects. For the purpose of assessing the total
benefit of the CAAA, the results affecting populations in 48 states
provide a better characterization of the total direct benefits than do
the "monitored area only" results.  The results of only monitored
areas does not account for the benefits of air quality improvements
affecting approximately 25 percent of the population. The "all
U.S. population" results, however, rely on uncertain extrapolations
of pollution concentrations, and subsequent exposures, from
distant monitoring sites to provide coverage for the 25 percent or
so of the population living far from air quality monitors.
Table  H-5, respectively.   The tables  provide our
Primary Central estimate, in addition to our Primary
Low estimate, 5th percentile values, and our Primary
High estimate,  95th  percentile estimates, for each
benefit category.

    We also apply the Monte Carlo method when
generating aggregate monetized benefit results.  The
Monte Carlo method used in the analysis assumes that
each health and welfare endpoint is independent of
the others. We adopt this approach in response to the
very low probability that  the aggregate benefits will
equal the sum of the  fifth percentile benefits  from
each of the ten endpoints. Consequently, the upper
and lower fifth percentiles of the  estimated benefits
from the individual endpoints does not equal the
estimated totals for the Primary High  and Primary
Low estimates.

    There are two  additional aspects of  our results
that warrant discussion. The first is the valuation of
premature mortality due to PM exposure. The second
is  our strategy to  avoid  double-counting when
aggregating health benefits.  As discussed  in Chapter
5,  premature  mortality is estimated based on PM
exposure. Our primary estimates reflect a lag between
PM exposure and the timing of premature mortality.
While this lag does not alter the number of estimated
incidences, it does alter the monetization of benefits.
Because we value the  "event" rather than the present
change in risk, the value of avoided future premature
mortality should be discounted. Therefore, the type
of lag structure  employed plays a direct  role in the
valuation of this endpoint.

    The primary analysis reflects  a five-year lag
structure.   Under this scenario, 50  percent of the
estimated cases of avoided mortality occur within the
first two years.  The  remaining 50 percent are then
distributed across the next three years. Our valuation
of avoided premature mortality applies a five percent
discount rate to the lagged estimates over the periods
2000 to 2005 and 2010 to 2015. We discount over the
period between the initial PM exposure change (either
2000 or 2010) and timing of the projected  incidences.
                                                 H-27

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    Many of the monetized health benefit categories
include overlapping health endpoints, creating the
potential for double-counting.  In an effort to avoid
overstating the benefits, we do not aggregate all of the
quantified health effects.   For example,  "asthma
attacks" and  "moderate  to worse asthma", are all
considered components of the endpoint, "Any of 19
Respiratory Symptoms".  Consequently, we present
the results but do not include  them in our reported
total benefits  figures.    In  other  cases,  there are
endpoints included in our aggregation of benefits that
appear to have overlapping health effects. For those
benefit categories that describe similar health effects,
it  is important  to  keep in mind  that  estimated
incidences are based  on unique  portions of the
population.
                                                H-28

-------
                                                          The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table H-4
Primary Estimates of Health and Welfare Benefits Due to Criteria Pollutants in 2000
                                                               Monetary Benefits (in millions 1990$)
 Benefits Category
5th %ile
Mean
95th %ile
Mortality
Ages 30+
Chronic Illness
Chronic Bronchitis
Chronic Asthma
Hospitalization
All Respiratory
Total Cardiovascular
Asthma-Related ER Visits
Minor Illness
Acute Bronchitis
URS
LRS
Respiratory Illness
Mod/Worse Asthma1
Asthma Attacks1
Chest tightness, Shortness of
Breath, or Wheeze
Shortness of Breath
Work Loss Days
MRAD/Any-of-19

$ 8,600

$220
29

$46
53
0.1

$0
2.8
1.4
0.4
1.2
13
0
0
180
420

$63,000

$3,600
140

$78
200
0.6

$ 1.3
12
3.9
2.5
8.5
35
0.5
0.3
210
760

$150,000

$11,000
240

$ 120
430
1.8

$3.3
26
7.2
6.1
19
66
2.4
0.7
240
1,100
Welfare

       Decreased Worker Productivity                         $ 460                  $ 460                $ 460

       Visibility
           Recreational                                       1,700                  2,000                2,300

	Agriculture	46	450	860

Total Benefits2                                                                  $71,000

Note:
1  Moderate to worse asthma and asthma attacks are endpoints included in the definition of MRAD/Any of 19 respiratory effects.
   Although valuation estimates are presented for these categories, the values are not included in total benefits to avoid the potential
   for double-counting.
2 Summing 5th and 95th percentile values would yield a misleading estimate of the 5th and 95th percentile estimate of total health
   benefits. For example, the likelihood that the 5th percentile estimates for each endpoint would simultaneously be drawn from a
   Monte Carlo procedure is much less than 5 percent. As a result, we present only the total mean.
                                                       H-29

-------
                                                       The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Table H-5
Primary Estimates of Health and Welfare Benefits Due  to Criteria Pollutants in 2010
                                                           Monetary Benefits (in millions  1990$)
Benefits Category                                      5th %ile                Mean              95th %ile
Mortality
Ages 30+
Chronic Illness
Chronic Bronchitis
Chronic Asthma
Hospitalization
All Respiratory
Total Cardiovascular
Asthma-Related ER Visits
Minor Illness
Acute Bronchitis
URS
LRS
Respiratory Illness
Mod/Worse Asthma1
Asthma Attacks1
Chest tightness, Shortness of
Breath, or Wheeze
Shortness of Breath
Work Loss Days
MRAD/Any-of-19

$ 14,000

$360
40

$76
93
0.1

$0
4.2
2.2
0.9
1.9
20
0
0
300
680

$ 100,000

$5,600
180

$ 130
390
1

$2.1
19
6.2
6.3
13
55
0.6
0.5
340
1,200

$250,000

$18,000
300

$200
960
2.8

$5.2
39
12
15
29
100
3.1
1.2
380
1,800
Welfare

    Decreased Worker Productivity                         $710                 $710                 $710

    Visibility
        Recreational                                       2,500                 2,900                 3,300

    Agriculture	7_1	550	1,100

Total Benefits2                                                              $110,000

Note:
1 Moderate to worse asthma, asthma attacks, and shortness of breath are endpoints included in the definition of MRAD/Any of 19
   respiratory effects. Although valuation estimates are presented for these categories, the values are not included in total
   benefits to avoid the potential for double-counting.
2  Summing 5th and 95th percentile values would yield a misleading estimate of the 5th and 95th percentile estimate of total health
   benefits. For example, the likelihood that the 5th percentile estimates for each endpoint would simultaneously be drawn from a
   Monte Carlo procedure is much less than 5 percent. As a result, we present only the total mean.
                                                    H-30

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Uncertainties in the Valuation
Estimates

    The uncertainly ranges for the  results  on the
present value of the aggregate measured monetary
benefits reported in Table H-4 and Table H-5 reflect
two important sources of measured uncertainty:

    •      Uncertainty about the avoided incidence of
          health and welfare effects deriving from
          the  concentration-response  functions,
          including both  selection  of  scientific
          studies and statistical uncertainty from the
          original studies;
    •      Uncertainty about the economic value of
          each quantified health and welfare effect.

These aggregate uncertainty results incorporate many
decisions about analytical  procedures  and specific
assumptions  discussed  in  the Appendices  to this
report.
    In  order  to  provide  a  more  complete
understanding of the economic benefit results, we
conduct sensitivity analyses which examine several
additional important aspects of the main analysis. We
begin with an analysis of the sources of the measured
aggregate  uncertainty,  identifying  which  of the
measured uncertainty components of incidence and
valuation for individual health effects categories drive
the overall uncertainty results. We then follow with
an  examination  of  several issues  involving the
estimated economic benefits of mortality. In the third
section, we provide some insight into the potential
effects of income growth on the valuation of health
effects.

Relative Importance of Different
Components of Uncertainty

    The estimated uncertainty ranges in our primary
results tables, Table H-4 and Table  H-5, reflect the
measured uncertainty associated with both avoided
incidence  and  economic   valuation.    A  better
understanding of the relative influence of individual
                                              Figure H-4
                            Analysis of Contribution of Key Parameters to
                                        Quantified Uncertainty
0\ 3>JUU
| $250-
a $200-
G«
i $150-
a
M $100-
o
o $50-
| $oJ
H
i



(
i
• 95th %ile
i


Mean
) (
5th %ile
i i
•


>  33 a e e e
i
i
i
+2 -&•§ ^o o-S^o-S^fe1 -^o fe1
rt 1 | 1 || 'o -o '^ 'o -o | ^ os -S 2 | ^ 2 H
-30 s.3 53 ^c_3bc3^^=g '« ^ Q.^
A
Comp
                               Contribution to Variance from the Mean
                                              H-31

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
variables on the overall uncertainty in the analysis can
be  gained by  isolating the  individual  effects  of
important variables on the range of estimated total
benefits. This can be accomplished by holding all the
inputs  to  the  Monte  Carlo  uncertainty  analysis
constant (at their mean values), and  allowing only one
variable — for example, the economic valuation  of
mortality — to vary across the range of that variable's
quantified uncertainty. The sensitivity analysis then
isolates  how  this   single   source of variability
contributes to the variation in the primary estimates of
total benefits. The results are summarized in Figure
H-4.   The nine individual uncertainty factors that
contribute the  most  to the overall uncertainty are
shown  in Figure  H-4,  ordered   by  the  relative
significance  of  their  contribution   to   overall
uncertainty.  Each  of the  additional sources  of
quantified  uncertainty in the  overall  analysis not
shown contribute a smaller amount of uncertainty to
the estimates of monetized benefits than the sources
that are shown.

Economic Benefits Associated with
Reducing Premature Mortality

    Because  the economic benefits associated with
premature  mortality are  the  largest  source  of
monetized benefits in the analysis, and because the
uncertainties  in both the  incidence  and  value  of
premature mortality are the most important sources of
uncertainty in the  overall analysis, it is  useful  to
examine the mortality benefits estimation in greater
detail.  We begin with a discussion of the uncertainties
and possible  biases related to the "benefits  transfer"
approach employed to develop our VSL estimate. We
then discuss an alternative method for the valuation of
reduced premature mortality, value of statistical life
year (VSLY).  We  conclude  this section  with  a
sensitivity test  that compare  the  benefit estimates
using a VSL approach and a VSLY approach. Given
the lag structure employed  in estimating  reduced
premature  mortality, we also provide  alternative
calculations for the valuation of this benefits category
using two additional discount rates, three and seven
percent.
    Benefits Tranfer and VSL

    The analytical procedure used in the main analysis
to  estimate  the  monetary  benefits  of avoided
premature mortality assumes that the appropriate
economic value for each incidence is a value from the
currently accepted range of the value of a statistical
life.   As discussed above, the estimated  value  per
predicted incidence of excess premature mortality is
modeled as a Weibull distribution, with a mean value
of $4.8 million and a standard  deviation of $3.2
million.  This estimate is based on 26 studies of the
value of mortal risks.

    There is considerable uncertainty as to whether
the 26 studies on the value of a statistical life provide
adequate estimates of the value of  a statistical life
saved by air pollution  reduction.  Although there is
considerable variation  in  the analytical designs and
data used in the 26 underlying studies, the majority of
the studies involve the value of risks to a middle-aged
working population.  Most of the studies examine
differences in wages of risky occupations, using  a
wage-hedonic  approach.  Certain  characteristics of
both the population affected and  the mortality risk
facing that population are believed to affect  the
average willingness to pay (WTP) to  reduce the risk.
The  appropriateness  of a  distribution  of  WTP
estimates from  the  26  studies  for  valuing  the
mortality-related benefits of reductions in air pollution
concentrations therefore  depends not  only on the
quality of the studies (i.e., how well they measure what
they are trying to measure), but also on (1)  the extent
to which the risks being valued are similar, and (2) the
extent to which the subjects in the studies are  similar
to the population affected by changes in pollution
concentrations.   As  discussed  below,  there  are
possible sources of both upward and downward bias
in the estimates  provided by the 26 studies  when
applied to the population and risk being considered in
this analysis.

    Although there may be several ways in which job-
related mortality risks differ from air pollution-related
mortality risks, the most important difference may be
that job-related risks are incurred voluntarily whereas
air pollution-related risks  are incurred involuntarily.
                                                H-32

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
There is some evidence (see, for example, Violette and
Chestnut, 1983) that people will pay more to reduce
involuntarily incurred  risks   than  risks incurred
voluntarily.  If this is the case, WTP estimates based
on  wage-risk  studies  may  be  downward  biased
estimates of WTP to reduce involuntarily incurred air
pollution-related mortality risks.

    Another possible difference related to the nature
of the risk may be that some workplace  mortality risks
tend to  involve sudden, catastrophic events  (e.g.,
workplace  accidents), whereas air pollution-related
risks tend to involve longer periods of disease and
suffering prior to death.  Several studies indicate that
the  value people place on mortality risk reduction may
depend on the nature of the risk (e.g., Fisher  et al.
1989; Beggs 1984). Some evidence suggests that WTP
to  avoid  a risk of a  protracted death involving
prolonged suffering and loss of dignity and personal
control is greater than the WTP to  avoid a risk (of
identical magnitude)  of  sudden  death.    Some
workplace risks, such as risks from exposure to toxic
chemicals, may be more similar to pollution-related
risks.  It is not clear, however, what proportion of the
workplace risks  in the wage-risk  studies were related to
workplace accidents and what proportion were risks
from exposure to toxic chemicals.  To the  extent that
the mortality risks addressed in this assessment are
associated with  longer periods of illness  or  greater
pain and suffering than are the  risks addressed in the
valuation literature, the WTP measurements employed
in the present analysis would reflect a downward bias.

    If the individuals who die  prematurely from air
pollution are consistently older than the population in
the  valuation studies, the mortality valuations based on
middle-aged people may provide a biased estimate of
the willingness  to pay of older individuals to reduce
mortal risk. There is some evidence to suggest that
the people who die prematurely from exposure to
ambient particulate matter  tend to be older than the
populations in the valuation studies.  In the general
U.S. population far  more older people die  than
younger people; 88 percent of the deaths  are among
people over 64 years old. It is difficult to establish the
proportion  of the pollution-related deaths that are
among the older population because it is impossible to
isolate individual cases where one can say with even
reasonable certainty that a specific individual died
because of air pollution.

    There is considerable uncertainty whether older
people will have a greater willingness to pay to avoid
risks than younger people. There is reason to believe
that those over 65 are, in general, more risk averse
than  the general  population, while  workers  in
wage-risk studies are likely to be less risk averse than
the general  population.   More risk averse  people
would have  a greater willingness to pay to avoid risk
than less risk averse people.   Although the list of
recommended studies excludes studies that consider
only much-higher-than-average occupational risks,
there is nevertheless likely to be  some selection bias in
the remaining studies — that is, these studies are likely
to be  based on samples of workers who are,  on
average, more risk-loving than the general population.
In contrast, older people as a group exhibit more risk
averse behavior.

    The  direction  of bias  resulting  from  the age
difference  is unclear,  particularly because  age is
confounded by  risk aversion (relative to the  general
population).  It could be argued  that, because an older
person has fewer expected years left to lose, his WTP
to reduce mortality risk would  be less than that of a
younger person.  This hypothesis is supported by one
empirical study, Jones-Lee et al.  (1985), that found the
value of a statistical life at age 65 to  be about 90
percent of what it is at age  40.  Citing  the evidence
provided by Jones-Lee et al. (1985), a recent sulfate-
related health benefits study conducted for EPA (U.S.
EPA, 1995)  assumes that the value of a  statistical life
for those 65 and over is 75 percent of what it is for
those under 65. In addition, it might be argued that
because  the elderly have greater average wealth than
those  younger,  the  affected   population  is  also
wealthier, on average, than wage-risk  study subjects,
who tend to be blue collar workers.  It is possible,
however, that among the elderly it is largely the poor
elderly who are  most vulnerable to pollution-related
mortality risk (e.g., because of generally poorer health
care).  If this is the case, the average wealth of those
affected  by  a pollution  reduction relative  to  that of
subjects in wage-risk studies is uncertain. In addition,
                                                 H-33

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
the  workers  in  the  wage-risk  studies  will  have
potentially more years  remaining in which to acquire
streams of income from future earnings.

    There is  substantial evidence  that the  income
elasticity of WTP for health risk reductions is positive
(see, for example, Alberini et al.,  1994; Mitchell and
Carson,  1986; Loehman  and Vo  Hu De, 1982;
Gerking et  al., 1988;  and Jones-Lee et  al., 1985),
although there is uncertainty about the exact value of
this  elasticity.  Individuals with higher incomes (or
greater  wealth) should be willing  to pay more to
reduce risk, all else equal, than individuals with lower
incomes  or  wealth.  This  does  not  imply  that
individuals with higher  incomes are willing to pay
proportionally higher values.  While many analyses
assume income elasticity of willingness to pay is unit
elastic (i.e., ten percent higher income level implies a
ten percent higher willingness to pay to reduce risk
changes),  empirical  evidence  suggests that  income
elasticity is substantially less than one.

    The effects of income changes on WTP estimates
can influence benefit estimates in two different ways:
(i) as longitudinal changes that reflect estimates of
income change in the affected population over time,
and (ii) as cross-sectional changes based on differences
in income between study populations and the attracted
populations.   Empirical evidence  of the effect of
income on WTP gathered to date is based on studies
examining cross-sectional  data.   Income elasticity
adjustments to better account for changes over time,
therefore, will necessarily  be based on  potentially
inappropriate data.23

    The  need  to  adjust wage-risk-based WTP
estimates downward because of the likely upward bias
introduced  by the  age discrepancy has received
significant attention  (see Chestnut,  1995; lEc, 1992).
If the age difference were the only difference between
the population affected by pollution changes  and the
subjects in the wage-risk studies, there might be some
    23For more information on the potential impact of income
elasticity on the valuation of health benefits, see the following
section, "Sensitivity Test for Impact of Income Changes Over
Time."
justification for trying to adjust the point estimate of
$4.8 million downward.  Even in this case, however,
the degree of the adjustment would be unclear.  There
is  good reason to suspect, however, that there are
biases in both directions.  Because in each case the
extent of the bias is unknown, the overall direction of
bias in  the mortality values is similarly unknown.
Adjusting  the  estimate upward or downward to
compensate for any one  source of bias could therefore
increase the degree of bias. Therefore, the range of
values  from the 26 studies is  used in the primary
analysis without adjustment.

    VSLY

    An  alternative valuation of avoided premature
mortality is to use the VSLY. This approach uses life-
years lost  as  the  unit of  measure,  rather  than
estimating a single  value  of  a  statistical life  lost
(applicable to all ages).  With statistical life-years lost
as the unit of measure,  the valuation depends on (1)
how many years of expected  life  are lost, (2) the
individual's discount rate, and (3) whether the value of
an undiscounted statistical life-year is the same no
matter which  life-year  it is (e.g., the undiscounted
value of the seventy-fifth year of life is the same as the
undiscounted value of the fortieth year of life).

    We estimate the value of a statistical life-year
assuming that the value of a statistical life is directly
related to remaining life expectancy and a constant
value for each life-year. Such an approach results in
smaller values of a statistical life  for older people, who
have shorter life expectancies,  and  larger values for
younger  people.  For example,  if  the $4.8 million
mean value of avoiding death  for people with a 35
year life expectancy is assumed to be the discounted
present value of 35 equal-valued statistical life-years,
the  implied value  of  each statistical  life-year  is
$293,000.  This values assumes a five percent discount
rate and that the undiscounted value of a life-year is
the same no matter when it occurs in an  individual's
life.

    To  obtain  estimates  of  the  number  of  air
pollution-related  deaths in each age cohort, it  is
preferable to have age-specific relative risks. Many of
                                                 H-34

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
the epidemiological studies, however, do not provide
any estimate of such age-specific risks.  In this case,
the age-specific relative risks must be assumed to be
identical.   Some epidemiology studies on PM do
provide some estimates of relative risks  specific to
certain age categories. The limited information that is
available  suggests  that  relative  risks  of mortality
associated with exposure to PM are greater for older
people.  Most of the available information  comes
from  short-term  exposure   studies.    There  is
considerable uncertainty in applying the evidence from
short-term exposure studies to results from long-term
(chronic exposure)  studies.   However,  using the
available information on the relative magnitudes of the
relative risks, it is  possible to form a preliminary
assessment  of the  relative  risks by  different age
classes.

    The analysis presented below uses two alternative
assumptions about age-specific risks: (1) there is a
constant relative risk (obtained directly from the
health literature) that is applicable to all age cohorts,
and (2) the  relative risks differ by age, as estimated
from the available literature.  Estimates of age-specific
PM-10 coefficients (and,  from these, age-specific
relative risks) were derived from the few age-specific
PM-10 or  TSP   coefficients  reported  in  the
epidemiological literature.   These  estimates  in the
literature were used to estimate the ratio of each age-
specific coefficient to a coefficient for "all ages" in
such a way  that consistency among the age-specific
coefficients is preserved — that is, that the  sum of the
health  effects  incidences  in the  separate,  non-
overlapping age categories equals the health effects
incidence  for "all  ages."   These ratios  were then
applied to the  coefficient  from Pope et  al.  (1995).
Details of this approach are provided in Post and
Deck (1996).  Because Pope et al. considered only
individuals age 30 and older (instead of all ages), the
resulting age-specific PM coefficients may be slightly
different from what they would have been if the ratios
had been  applied to an "all ages" coefficient.  The
differences, however, are likely to be minimal and well
within the error bounds of this exercise.  The  age-
specific relative risks  used  in the  example  below
assume that the relative risks for people under 65 are
only  16 percent of  the  population-wide average
relative risk, the risks for people from 65 to 74 are 83
percent of the population-wide risk, and people 75
and older have a relative risk 55 percent greater than
the population average. Details of this approach are
provided in Post and Deck (1996).

    The life-years  lost approach also requires an
estimate of the number of life-years lost by a person
dying prematurely at each given age.  The approach
developed for this analysis assumes that exposure to
elevated levels of PM increases the probability of
dying at a specific age. Increasing the probability of
dying at each age lowers the life expectancy for each
age cohort. The average number of life-years lost will
depend on the distribution of ages in the population
in a location.  In addition, this analysis incorporates
the five-year PM mortality lag structure described in
Chapter 5  and Appendix  D.   It  distributes  the
mortality for each cohort across a five-year period (25
percent in each of the first two years, 16.7 percent in
each of the remaining years) and adjusts the loss of
life expectancy accordingly.  That is, when applying
the lag assumption within a given cohort, individuals
who die later are expected to lose fewer life years than
those who die earlier.  Further, this analysis applies a
five percent discount rate when calculating the present
discounted  value  of the  avoided losses  of  life
expectancy  in each cohort  over the five-year lag
period.

    The life-years lost approach used here assumes
that people who die from air pollution are typical of
people in their age group. The estimated value of the
quantity of life lost assumes that the people who die
from  exposure to air  pollution had an average life
expectancy. However, it is possible that the people
who die from air pollution are already in ill health, and
that their life expectancy is less than a typical person
of their age.  If this is true, then the number of life
years  lost per PM-related death would be lower than
calculated here, and the economic value would be
smaller.

    The extent to which adverse effects of particulate
matter exposure are differentially imposed on people
of advanced age and/or poor health is  one  of the
most important current uncertainties in air pollution-
related health studies.  There is limited information,
                                                 H-35

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
primarily from the short-term exposure studies, which
suggests that at least some of the estimated premature
mortality is imposed disproportionately on people
who are elderly and/or of poor health.  Rowlatt, et al.
(1998) indicate that at risk individuals include those
who have  suffered  strokes or are suffering  from
cardiovascular  disease  and  angina.  The  Criteria
Document for Particulate Matter (U.S. EPA, 1996),
however, identifies only two studies which attempt to
evaluate the disproportionality in premature mortality
among people who are elderly and/or sickly. Spix et
al. (1994) suggests that a  small portion of the PM-
associated mortality occurs in individuals who would
have died in a short time anyway.  Cifuentes and Lave
(1996) found that 37 to 87 percent of the deaths from
short-term exposure could have been premature by
only  a  few  days,  although  their  evidence  is
inconclusive.

    Prematurity of death on the order of only a few
days is likely to occur largely among individuals with
pre-existing illnesses.   Such  individuals  might be
particularly susceptible  to a high PM day.  To  the
extent that the pre-existing illness is itself caused by or
exacerbated by chronic exposure to elevated levels of
PM, however, it would be misleading to define  the
prematurity of death as only a few days.  In  the
absence of chronic exposure to elevated levels of PM,
the illness would either not exist (if it was  caused by
the chronic exposure to elevated PM) or might be at
a less advanced  stage of development (if it was not
caused by but was exacerbated by elevated PM levels).
The prematurity of death should be calculated as the
difference between  when  the individual died in  the
"elevated PM" scenario and when he would have died
in the 'low PM" scenario.  If the pre-existing illness
was  entirely unconnected  with chronic  exposure to
PM  in  the  "elevated  PM"  scenario,  and if  the
individual who dies prematurely because of a peak PM
day would have lived only a few more days, then the
prematurity of that PM-related death is only those few
days. If, however, in the absence of chronic exposure
to elevated levels of PM, the individual's illness would
have progressed more slowly, so that, in the absence
of a particular peak PM day the individual would have
lived several years longer, the prematurity of that PM-
related death would be those several years.
    Long-term studies provide evidence that a portion
of the loss of life associated with long-term exposure
is  independent  of  the  death  from  short-term
exposures, and that the loss of life-years measured in
the long-term  studies could be on the order of years.
If much of the premature mortality associated with
PM  represents  short term  prematurity  of death
imposed on people who are elderly and/or of ill
health,  the estimates of the monetary  benefits of
avoided  mortality may overestimate  society's total
willingness to  pay to avoid particulate matter-related
premature  mortality.  On  the  other hand,  if  the
premature mortality measured in the chronic exposure
studies is detecting excess premature deaths which are
largely independent of the deaths predicted from the
short term studies, and the disproportionate effect on
the  elderly and/or sick is  modest, the  benefits
measured in this  report could be underestimates of
the  total value. At  this time  there  is  insufficient
information from both the medical and economic
sciences to satisfactorily resolve these issues from a
theoretical/analytical  standpoint. Until  there  is
evidence from the physical and social sciences which
is sufficiently compelling to encourage broad support
of  age-specific  values  for  reducing  premature
mortality, EPA will continue to use  for its primary
analyses a range of values for mortality risk reduction
which assumes society values reductions in pollution-
related premature mortality equally regardless of who
receives the benefit of such protection.

Sensitivity Test of Benefits Due to
Reduced Premature Mortality Valuation

    Examining the sensitivity of the total benefits of
reduced premature mortality to alternative valuation
techniques  does  provide some illumination  to  the
potential impacts of alternative approaches.   This
section presents  alternative results to our primary
estimate of mortality valuation using the life-years lost
approach, and also examine the effects of alternative
discount rates.

    The life-years lost approach also  requires an
estimate of the number of life-years lost by a person
dying prematurely at each given age.   The approach
developed for  this analysis assumes that  exposure to
                                                H-36

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
elevated levels of PM  increases the probability of
dying at a specific age.  Increasing the probability of
dying at each age lowers the life expectancy for each
age cohort. The average number of life-years lost will
depend on the distribution of ages in the population
in a location.  In addition, this analysis  incorporates
the five-year PM mortality lag structure described in
Chapter 5 and  Appendix D.   It distributes  the
mortality for each cohort across a five-year period (25
percent in each of the first two years, 16.7 percent in
each of the remaining years) and adjusts the loss of life
expectancy accordingly. That is, when applying the lag
assumption within a given cohort, individuals who die
later are expected to lose  less  live expectancy than
those who die earlier. Further, this analysis applies a
five percent discount rate when summing the value of
the avoided losses of life expectancy in each cohort
over the five-year lag period.

    The alternative central estimates for avoided PM-
related premature mortality using a five percent dis-
count rate are $33 billion in 2000  and $53 billion in
2010.  The VSLY approach results in estimates that
are almost 50 percent lower than  our  primary  est-
imates of benefits due to avoided pre-mature mor-
tality.  The sensitivity analysis, however, indicates that
the pattern of monetized mortality benefits with each
valuation procedure is essentially invariant to the dis-
count rate. We summarize these results in Table H-6.
                                                        We emphasize that the results  of the VSLY
                                                    approach  to  valuing avoided  mortality  benefits
                                                    represent a crude estimate of the value of changes in
                                                    age-specific life expectancy.  These results should be
                                                    interpreted cautiously, due to the several significant
                                                    assumptions  required  to  generate  a  monetized
                                                    estimate  of life years lost  from the relative  risks
                                                    reported in the Pope et al., 1995 study and the
                                                    available  economic literature.  These assumptions
                                                    include, but are not limited to:  extrapolation of the
                                                    age distribution of the U.S. population in  future years;
                                                    assumptions about the age-specificity of the relative
                                                    risk reported by Pope et al., 1995; assumptions about
                                                    the  life   expectancy  of  different  age  groups;
                                                    assumption of a particular lag structure; assumptions
                                                    about the age-specificity of the lag period  (if  any);
                                                    derivation of VSLY estimates from VSL estimates;
                                                    assumptions about the variation in VSLY with age;
                                                    and  selection  of an  appropriate rate at which  to
                                                    discount the  lagged  estimates  of life  years  lost.
                                                    Changes   in   any  of  these  assumptions could
                                                    significantly affect the VSLY benefit  estimate.  For
                                                    example, if we were to assume no lag period  for PM-
                                                    related mortality effects instead of the  five-year lag
                                                    structure,  VSLY benefit  estimates would  increase
                                                    from $53 billion to $61 billion.
Table H-6
Sensitivity Analysis of Alternative Discount Rates on the Valuation of Reduced Premature
Mortality
 Benefit Category &
   Discount Rate
                              2000 (in millions, 1990$)                 2010 (in millions, 1990$)
                        5th %ile     Central      95th %ile      5th %ile      Central       95th %ile
VSL Approach
3% Discount Rate
5% Discount Rate
7% Discount Rate
VSLY Approach
3% Discount Rate
5% Discount Rate
7% Discount Rate

$8,900
8,600
8,300

$4,600
5,000
5,400

$65,000
63,000
61,000

$30,000
33,000
35,000

$150,000
150,000
150,000

$68,000
74,000
80,000

$ 14,000
14,000
14,000

$ 7,400
8,100
8,800

$100,000
100,000
97,000

$48,000
53,000
57,000

$ 250,000
250,000
240,000

$ 110,000
120,000
130,000
Note: The discount rate affects the benefits estimates of VSL and VSLY approach differently.  With the VSL approach, higher
discount rates lead to lower estimates because of the lag structure. With the VSLY approach, the higher discount rates lead to
higher estimates because of its affect on the annualized values.
                                               H-37

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Sensitivity Test for Impact of Income
Changes Over Time

    As   an  illustrative  calculation,  we  adjust
willingness-to-pay (WTP) measures  to  reflect  the
expected increase in real income over the full period
of the analysis,  1990 to 2010. Our procedure results
in an upward adjustment to more accurately reflect the
valuation of improved health as income increases over
time.  In this section, we describe  the procedure we
use and the results of our illustrative calculation.
    Background and Methodology

    Economists use income elasticity to evaluate how
private  and public  goods are valued based on the
interaction between income changes and demand. A
negative relationship between income and demand for
a good implies that the good is an inferior good. An
individual demands less of a good as income rises. A
positive relationship between income and the demand
for a good implies that the good is normal (i.e.,
income  elasticity is greater than zero). As income rises
an individual demands more of a good.  Depending on
the relative responsiveness  of demand  to  income
changes, normal goods are characterized as a necessity
or a luxury. When income elasticity is between 0 and
+ 1, the good is considered a necessity (i.e., demand is
not significantly responsive to income).  In contrast,
when income  elasticity  exceeds  +1,  the good is
considered a luxury (i.e., the relative increase in the
good's demand exceeds the increase in income).

    The determination of a public good as inferior or
normal  based on income elasticity is complicated by
its nonrival nature.  In the  case of a private good,
varying the level  of consumption is measured as  a
marginal change and implies that  an individual will
adjust his or her consumption level of other good(s).
Consequently, income elasticity of demand estimates
a change in quantity consumed, and not necessarily a
change in utility (or the individual's well-being). With
public   goods,  the  conceptual  logic  is  different.
Income elasticity of WTP for public goods measures
changes  in  consumer  surplus.   For  example, one
person  enjoying the benefits of cleaner air does not
reduce the probability of another person enjoying the
same benefits. There are no apparent mechanisms for
regulating who specifically will enjoy the benefits. In
other words, there is no direct relationship between an
individual's WTP and level of consumption.24  The
consumption level of public goods is exogenous to
the individual's budget constraint. At the same time,
WTP for a  public  good  is not  exogenous.   An
individual, therefore, must consider how his or her
WTP affects the allocation of income among private
and public goods.25

    Flores and Carson  (1997) provide examples of
how income elasticity can change depending on how
the good is defined (i.e., private or public). Given the
divergence between  private and public goods, they
conclude that income elasticity of WTP and income
elasticity of demand are related. The relationship does
not  imply that knowledge of income elasticity of
demand is sufficient to estimate  income elasticity of
WTP given that the income elasticity of WTP depends
on factors that cannot be observed.

    In addition  to the theoretical issues associated
with WTP for public goods, there are important
empirical issues.  We  are  interested in how WTP
changes  with respect to increases in  U.S.  median
income. Measuring changes due to growth in median
income reflect shifts in overall preferences and utility
(or in the case of public goods, social welfare).  This
type  of  analysis   requires   time   series  data.
Unfortunately, there are very few relevant studies that
use  this approach  to  estimate  income  elasticity.26
Consequently, we must  rely on income elasticities
estimated from cross-sectional data. The estimates
    24The nonrival nature of public goods implies that the
marginal social cost of consuming an additional unit of benefit is
zero.

    25CV studies solicit WTP estimates that are subject to the
respondent's current budget constraint.  The budget share factor
requires that the income elasticities (for all consumed goods) sum
to one. This generally implies that income elasticity of any single
good is substantially less than one.

    26Available studies  using time  series data estimate income
elasticity of public health care expenditures by analyzing changes
in government spending  relative to gross  domestic product
(GDP).  These  studies are not particularly applicable to the
valuation methodology used in the present study.
                                                H-38

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
reflect differences in willingness to pay for improved
health among  various  income levels.    They  are
measures of an individual's preferences and expected
utility given the person's current state  (i.e., in  the
present).

    There  are  several  issues  associated with  the
application  of  cross-sectional  results to  estimate
longitudinal changes (i.e., changes over time).  Most
important is the potential for misinterpretation of our
recommended  application   of  income   elasticity
adjustment. Although we outline an approach that
uses income elasticities  derived from cross-sectional
data,  the adjustment  is solely a proxy for how
preferences and utility may change as projected overall
average income (i.e., real GDP  per capita) increases
from  1990 to 2010.  Application of these  income
elasticity estimates  does not imply a strategy  for
                      adjusting benefits valuation by level of household
                      income in any given year.

                          Derivation of Elasticity Estimates

                          Based on  our review of the available income
                      elasticity literature, we conducted sensitivity analyses
                      that characterize how the valuation of human health
                      benefits may increase with a rise in real U.S. income.
                      Given  the  range  of  different   methodological
                      approaches and limited available research, we calculate
                      a range of illustrative values. Table H-7 summarizes
                      the  income elasticities  we used  to conduct  the
                      sensitivity analysis.
 Table H-7
 Elasticity Values for Conducting Sensitivity Analysis
     Health Endpoint
Lower Estimate
Central Estimate
Upper Estimate
Minor Health Effect 0.04
Severe and Chronic n 9C-
Health Effects
Premature Mortality 0.08
Note: Sources for the derivation of these values can be found
0.14
0.45
0.40
in Industrial Economics 1999.
0.30
0.60
1.00

    Reported  income  elasticities  suggest  that the
severity of the morbidity endpoint is  a primary
determinant  of the  strength  of the relationship
between changes in income and the willingness to pay.
Without accounting for severity, there is a fairly wide
range of values for income elasticity,  0.04 to 0.60.
Estimates are more closely clustered if we account for
the seriousness of the health effect. For the purposes
of a sensitivity  analysis, we use two different ranges
based on whether morbidity endpoints are minor or
severe. With respect to minor health effects, we use
lower and upper values of 04 and 0.30, respectively.
The central estimate is 0.14.    For conducting a
sensitivity test of the income elasticity effect on WTP
to avoid severe health effects, we use a lower and
upper estiamtes of 0.25  and  0.60, with 0.45 as the
central estimate.   The  lower and upper estimates
                      reflect the lowest and highest estimates derived from
                      our literature review.  The  central estimate is  the
                      midpoint of the averages from each study.

                         With  respect  to VSL,  estimates of income
                      elasticity range from 0.08 to 1.10. We use lower and
                      upper estimates that  reflect the  full range of values.
                      The central estimate, 0.40, represents  the  midpoint
                      between the average low value and the average high
                      value of the studies we reviewed.
                                                H-39

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Illustrative Calculations —
Morbidity Benefits Estimates

    Table H-8 provides a simplified example of how
application of the elasticity ranges we derive could
affect benefits estimates.  For illustrative purposes, we
use the WTP to avoid an asthma attack to represent a
minor  health effect  and "WTP  to avoid a  case of
chronic bronchitis to represent a severe health effect.
By  the year 2010, the effect of income growth on
WTP for a minor health effect can increase between
one and eight percent, with the central  estimate
indicating three percent growth.  The WTP to avoid a
severe health effect grows faster with 2010 estimates,
ranging between seven and sixteen percent and with
the central estimate increasing by thirteen percent.
                                            Table H-8
                  Illustrative Adjustment to Estimates of WTP to Avoid Morbidity
WTP Estimate (1990 Dollars)1
Year
Minor Health
1990
2000
2010
US Population
(in millions)
Effect- Asthma
249,440
274,634
297,716
Severe Health Effect- Chronic
1990
2000
2010
249,440
274,634
297,716
Real GDP
(in millions)

5,744
7,123
8,959
Bronchitis
5,744
7,123
8,959
Income

23,026
25,936
30,092

23,026
25,936
30,092
Lower
Estimate
Ey=0.04
$32
$32.20
$32.30
Ey=0.25
$260,000
$267,850
$277,990
Central
Estimate
Ey=0.14
$32
$32.50
$33.20
Ey=0.45
$260,000
$274,300
$293,280
Upper
Estimate
Ey=0.30
$32
$33.20
$34.70
Ey=0.60
$260,000
$279,240
$305,290
 Note:
 1 WTP estimates are reported in undiscounted 1990 dollars and represent value per case.
                                               H-40

-------
                                                  The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Illustrative Calculations —
VSL Estimate

    We characterize the potential effect of income
elasticity on the VSL estimate in Table H-9.   An
income elasticity of 0.08 demonstrates the effect of a
slight adjustment to  the  VSL estimates as median
income gradually rises.  As  shown  in the  figure,
between 1990 and 2010, the VSL estimates increase by
approximately two percent. The central estimate, 0.40,
demonstrates that by 2010, a thirty percent increase in
median income would result in VSL increasing by
approximately eleven percent. The upper bound value
demonstrates the effect of assuming one as  the value
of income elasticity. In this twenty year period of the
prospective analysis, the VSL estimate would increase
from $4.8 to $6.3 million if income elasticity equals
one.
 Table H-9
 Illustrative Adjustment to Estimates of The Value of Statistical Life
Value of Life Estimate (in thousands)1
Year
1990
2000
2010
US Population
(in millions)
249,440
274,634
297,716
Real GDP
(in millions)
5,744
7,123
8,959
Income
23,026
25,936
30,092
Lower
Estimate
Ey=0.08
$4,800
$4,848
$4,905
Central
Estimate
Ey=0.40
$4,800
$5,036
$5,345
Upper
Estimate
£,=1.0
$4,800
$5,410
$6,271
 Note:
 1 Value of life estimates reported in undiscounted 1990 dollars.
                                               H-41

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
References

Abbey, D.E., F. Petersen, P. K. Mills, and W. L. Beeson. 1993. "Long-Term Ambient Concentrations of
       Total Suspended Particulates, Ozone, and Sulfur Dioxide and Respiratory Symptoms in a
       Nonsmoking Population." Archives of Environmental Health 48(1): 33-46.

Abt Associates, Inc.  1992.  The Medical Costs of Five Illnesses Related to Exposure to Pollutants. Prepared
       for U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC.

Abt Associates, Inc.  1996.  Section 812 Retrospective Analysis: Quantifying Health and Welfare Benefits.
       Draft. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation, Washington DC. May.

Alberini, A., A. Krupnick, M. Cropper, and W. Harrington. 1994. "Air Quality and the Value of Health in
       Taiwan." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Economics Association, Boston,
       Massachusetts, March.

Beggs, Steven D. 1984.  Diverse Risks and the Relative Worth of Government Health and Safety Programs:
       An Experimental Survey.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-223-04-85-005. June.

Blumenschein, Karen and Magnus Johannesson.  1998. "Relationship Between Quality of Life Instruments,
       Health State Utilities, and Willingness to Pay in Patients with Asthma." Annals of Allergy, Asthma,
       and Immunology 80:189-194.

Brookshire, David S., Ralph C. d'Arge, William D. Schulze and Mark A. Thayer.  1979. Methods
       Development for Assessing Air Pollution Control Benefits, Vol. II:  Experiments in Valuing Non-
       Market Goods:  A Case Study of Alternative Benefit Measures of Air Pollution Control in the South
       Coast Air Basin of Southern California. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
       Office of Research and Development.

Chestnut, Lauraine G. 1995. Dollars and Cents: The Economic and Health Benefits of Potential Particulate
       Matter Reductions  in the United States. Prepared for the American Lung Association.

Chestnut, Lauraine G. and Robert D. Rowe. 1989. "Economic Valuation of Changes in Visibility:  A State of
       the Science Assessment for NAPAP,"  as cited in National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program,
       Methods for Valuing Acidic Deposition and Air Pollution Effects.  NAPAP State of Science and
       State of Technology Report No. 27, Part B. December.

Chestnut, Lauraine G. and Robin Dennis. 1997.  "Economic Benefits of Improvements in Visibility: Acid
       Rain Provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act Ammendments." Journal of Air and Waste Management
       Association 47:395-402.

Cifuentes, L. and L.B. Lave. 1996.  "Association of Daily Mortality and Air Pollution in Philadelphia, 1983-
       1988." J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc.: in press.

Crocker T. D. and R.  L. Horst, Jr. 1981. "Hours of Work, Labor Productivity, and Environmental
       Conditions:  a Case Study."  The Review of Economics and Statistics 63:361-368.
                                              H-42

-------
                                                The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Cropper, M.L. and AJ. Krupnick.  1990.  "The Social Costs of Chronic Heart and Lung Disease," Resources
        for the Future Discussion Paper QE 89-16-REV.

Cropper, Maureen L. and Frances G. Sussman. 1990. '"Valuing Future Risks to Life." Journal of
        Environmental Economics and Management. 19:160-174.

Cutler, David M. and Elizabeth Richardson. 1998.  "The Value of Health:  1970—1990."  The American
        Economic Review. 88(2):97-100. May.

Desvouges, William H., F. Reed Johnson, and H. Spencer Banzhaf. 1998. Environmental Policy Analysis with
        Limited Information, Principles and Applications  of the Transfer Method.  Edward Elgar Publishing
        Limited: Northampton.

Dickie, M. et al. 1991. Reconciling Averting Behavior and Contingent Valuation Benefit Estimates of
        Reducing Symptoms of Ozone Exposure (draft), as cited in Neumann, J.E., Dickie, M.T., and R.E.
        Unsworth.  1994.  Industrial Economics, Incorporated. Memorandum to Jim DeMocker, U.S. EPA,
        Office of Air and Radiation. March 31.

Elixhauser, A., R.M. Andrews, and S. Fox. 1993. Clinical Classifications for Health Policy Research:
        Discharge Statistics by Principal Diagnosis and Procedure. Agency for Health Care Policy and
        Research (AHCPR), Center for General Health Services Intramural Research, U.S. Department of
        Health and Human Services.

Fisher, Ann, Lauraine G. Chestnut, and Daniel M. Violette. 1989.  "The Value of Reducing Risks of Death:
        A Note on New Evidence." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 8(1):88-100.

French, Michael T. and Josephine A. Mauskopf.  1992.  "A Quality-of-Life Method for Estimating the Value
        of Avoided Morbidity." American Journal of Public Health. 82(11):1553-1555. November.

Garber, Alan M. and Charles E. Phelps. 1997.  "Economic Foundations of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis."
       Journal of Health Economics.  16:1-31.

Gerking, S., M. DeHaan, and W. Schulze. 1988.  "The Marginal Value of Job Safety: A Contingent Valuation
        Study." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1: 185-199.

Industrial Economics, Incorporated (lEc). 1992. Approaches to Environmental Benefits Assessment to
        Support the Clean Air Act Section 812 Analysis. Prepared by Robert E. Unsworth, James E.
        Neumann, and W. Eric Browne, for Jim DeMocker, Office of Policy Analysis and Review, Office of
        Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  6 November.

Industrial Economics, Incorporated (lEc). 1993a. "Analysis of Visibility Valuation Issues for the Section
        812 Study," Memorandum to Jim DeMocker, Office of Policy Analysis and Review, Office of Air
        and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, prepared by Jim Neumann, Lisa Robinson,
        and Bob Unsworth.  September 30.
                                              H-43

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Industrial Economics, Incorporated (lEc).  1997. "Visibility Valuation for the CAA Section 812
        Retrospective Analysis," Memorandum to Jim DeMocker, Office of Policy Analysis and Review,
        Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, prepared by Michael H. Hester
        and James E. Neumann. 18 February.

Industrial Economics, Incorporated (lEc).  1999. "Recommended Approach to Adjusting WTP Estimates to
        Reflect Changes in Real Income," Memorandum to Jim DeMocker, Office of Policy Analysis and
        Review, Office of Air and Radiation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, prepared by Naomi
        Kleckner and James E. Neumann.  3 June.

Ireland, Thomas R. and Roy Gilbert.  1998.  "Supramonetary Values, the Value of Life, and the Utility
        Theory Meanings of Tort Recovery." Journal of Forensic Economics. 11:189-201.
Irwin, Julie, William Schulze, Gary McClelland, Donald Waldman, David Schenk, Thomas Stewart, Leland
        Deck, Paul Slovic, Sarah Lictenstein, and Mark Thayer.  1990.  Valuing Visibility: A Field Test of the
        Contingent Valuation Method.  Prepared for Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency. March.

Johannesson, Magnus and Per-Olov Johansson. 1996. "To Be or Not to Be, That is the Question: An
        Empirical Study of the WTP for an Increased Life Expectancy at an Advanced Age." Journal of
        Risk and Uncertainty.  13:163-174.

Johannesson, Magnus and Per-Olov Johansson. 1997. "The Value of Life Extension and the Marginal Rate of
        Time Preference: A Pilot Study." Applied Economic Letters. 4:53-55.

Johannesson, Magnus, Per-Olov Johansson, and Karl-Gustav Lofgren.  1997.  "On the Value of Changes in Life
        Expectancy: Blips Versus Parametric Changes." Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 15:221-239.

Johansson, Per-Olov.  1995. Evaluating Health Risks: An Economic Approach. Cambridge University
        Press: Great Britain.

Jones-Lee, M.W., et al. 1985. "The Value of Safety: Result of a National Sample Survey." Economic Journal
        95(March): 49-72.

Jones-Lee, M.W. 1992. "Paternalistic Altruism and the Value of Statistical Life." The Economic Journal.
        102:80-90. January.

Jones-Lee, M.W., M. Hammerton, and P.R. Philips. 1985. "The Value of Safety:  Results of a National Sample
        Survey. Economic Journal.  95: 49-72. March.

Krupnick, AJ. and M.L. Cropper.  1992. "The Effect of Information on Health Risk Valuations," Journal of
        Risk and Uncertainty 5(2): 29-48.

Krupnick, AJ. and RJ. Kopp.  1988. Health and Agricultural Benefits of Reductions  in Ambient Ozone in
        the United States. Resources for the Future.
                                              H-44

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Loehman, E.T., S.V. Berg, A.A. Arroyo, R.A. Hedinger, J.M. Schwartz, M.E. Shaw, R.W. Fahien, V.H. De,
       R.P. Fishe, D.E. Rio, W.F. Rossley, and A.E.S. Green. 1979. "Distributional Analysis of Regional
       Benefits and Cost of Air Quality Control." Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
       6: 222-243.

Loehman, E.T. and Vo Hu De. 1982.  "Application of Stochastic Choice Modeling to Policy Analysis of
       Public Goods: A Case Study of Air Quality Improvements." The Review of Economics and
       Statistics 64(3): 474-480.

Manuel, E.H., R.L. Horst, K.M. Brennan, W.N. Lanen, M.C. Duff, and J.K Tapiero.  1982. Benefits Analysis
       of Alternative Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur Dioxide and Total
       Suspended Particulates, Volumes I-IV. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
       of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.

McClelland, Gary, William Schulze, Donald Waldman, Julie Irwin, David Schenk, Thomas Stewart, Leland
       Deck and Mark Thayer.  1991. Valuing Eastern Visibility: A Field Test of the Contingent Valuation
       Method.  Prepared for Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection
       Agency. June.

Miller, T.R., C. Calhoun, and W.B. Arthur.  1990.  Utility-adjusted Impairment Years:  A Low-Cost Approach
       to Morbidity Valuation. Federal Highway Administration. March.

Mitchell, R.C. and R.T. Carson. 1986.  "Valuing Drinking Water  Risk Reductions Using the Contingent
       Valuation Methods: A Methodological Study of Risks from THM and Giardia." Paper prepared for
       Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.

Moore, MJ. and W.K. Viscusi. 1988.  "The Quantity-Adjusted Value of Life". Economic Inquiry 26(3): 369-
       388.

Murray, Christopher J.L. and Alan D. Lopez, eds.  1996 The Global Burden of Disease. Harvard School of
       Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and the World Bank.

National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). 1991.  Acidic Deposition:  State of Science and
       Technology (Summary Report).  (Washington, DC: NAPAP).  September.

Neumann, J.E., M. T. Dickie, and R.E. Unsworth. 1994.  Industrial Economics, Incorporated.
       Memorandum to Jim DeMocker, U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation.  Linkage Between Health
       Effects Estimation and Morbidity Valuation in the Section 812 Analysis — Draft Valuation
       Document.  March 31.

O'Conor, Richard M. and Glenn C. Blomquist, 1997.  "Measurement of Consumer-Patient Preferences
       Using a Hybrid Contingent Valuation Method." Journal  of Health Economics  16:667-683.

Ostro, B.D., MJ. Lipsett, J.K. Mann, H. Braxton-Owens, and M.C. White.  1995.  "Air Pollution and Asthma
       Exacerbations Among African American Children in Los Angeles."  Inhalation Toxicology.
                                              H-45

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
Pope, C.A., III, MJ. Thun, M.M. Namboodin, D.W. Dockery, J.S. Evans, F.E. Speizer, and C.W. Heath, Jr.
        1995.  "Particulate Air Pollution as a Predictor of Mortality in a Prospective Study of U.S. Adults."
        Am. J. Respir. Grit. Care Med. 151: 669-674.

Post, Ellen and L. Deck.  1996. Abt Associates Inc.  Memorandum to Tom Gillis, U.S. EPA, Office of
        Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation. September 20.

Rowe, R.D. and L.G.  Chestnut. 1986. "Oxidants and Asthmatics in Los Angeles: A Benefits Analysis--
        Executive Summary."  Prepared by Energy and Resource Consultants, Inc.  Report to the U.S.  EPA,
        Office of Policy Analysis. EPA-230-09-86-018. Washington, B.C. March.

Rowlatt, Penelope, Michael Spackman, Sion Jones, Michael Jones-Lee, and Graham Loomes.  1998. Valuation
        of Deaths from Air Pollution. For the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions and
        the Department of Trade and Industry. February.

Salkever, D.S.  1995.  "Updated Estimates of Earnings Benefits from Reduced Exposure of Children to
        Environmental Lead." Environmental Research 70:  1-6.

Schwartz, J.  1994.  "Societal Benefits of Reducing Lead Exposure."  Environmental Research 66: 105-124.

Selvin, Steve. 1996. Statistical Analysis of Epidemiologic Data. Second Edition. Monographs in
        Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Volume 25. Oxford University Press.

Smith, David H., Daniel C. Malone, Kenneth A. Lawson, Lynn J. Okamoto, Carmelina Battista, and William
        B. Saunders, 1997. "A National Estimate of the Economic Costs of Asthma," Am. J. Respir. Crit.
        Care Med.  156:787-793.

Smith, V. Kerry, George Van Houtven, Subhrendu Pattanayak, 1999. "Benefit Transfer as a Preference
        Calibration."  Resources for the Future, Discussion Paper 99-36. May.

Spix, C., J. Heinrich, D. Dockery, J. Schwartz, G. Volksch, K Schwinkowski, C. Collen, and H.E. Wichmann.
        1994.  Summary of the Analysis and Reanalysis Corresponding to the Publication Air Pollution and
        Daily Mortality in Erfurt, East Germany 1980-1989.  Summary report for:  Critical Evaluation
        Workshop on Particulate Matter—Mortality Epidemiology Studies; November; Raleigh, NC.
        Wuppertal, Germany: Bergische Universitat-Gesamthochschule Wuppertal.

Taylor, T.N., P.H. Davis, J.C. Torner, J. Holmes, J.W. Meyer, and M. F. Jacobson.  1996.  "Lifetime Cost of
        Stroke in the  United States." Stroke 27(9): 1459-1466.

Tolley, G.S. et al. 1986.  Valuation of Reductions in Human Health Symptoms and Risks. University of
        Chicago. Final Report for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. January.

Tolley, George, Donald  Kenkel, and Robert Fabian, eds. 1994. Valuing Health for Policy:  An Economic
        Approach. The University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration. 1992. Statistical Abstract of the
        United States, 1992: The National Data Book.  112th Edition, Washington, D.C.
                                              H-46

-------
                                                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).  1994.  Documentation for Oz-One Computer Model
        (Version 2.0).  Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Prepared by: Mathtech, Inc., under
        EPA Contract No. 68D30030, WA 1-29.  August.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).  1995.  Human Health Benefits From Sulfate Reductions
        Under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Prepared by Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.
        for U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Atmospheric Programs.  November 10.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).  1996.  Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,
        Volume III of III.  Office of Research and Development, Washington DC.  EPA/600/P-95/001cF

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).  1997 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970
        to 1990.  Prepared for U.S. Congress.  October.

Violette, D.M. and L.G. Chestnut. 1983. Valuing Reduction in Risks: A Review of the Empirical Estimates.
        Report prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. EPA-230-05-83-
        002.

Viscusi, W.K. 1992. Fatal Tradeoffs: Public and Private Responsibilities for Risk. (New York: Oxford
        University Press).

Viscusi, W.K., W. A. Magat, and J. Huber. 1991. "Pricing Environmental Health Risks: Survey Assessments
        of Risk-Risk and Risk-dollar Tradeoffs." Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
        201: 32-57.

Viscusi, W.  Kip. 1992. Fatal Tradeoffs: Public & Private Responsibilities for Risk. Oxford University Press:
        New York.

Viscusi, W. Kip. 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health." Journal of Economic Literature. 31(4):  1912-
        46. October.

Wittels, E.H., J.W. Hay, and A.M. Gotto, Jr.  1990. "Medical Costs of Coronary Artery Disease in the United
        States." The American  Journal of Cardiology 65: 432-440.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1996. Final Consultation on Updating and Revision of the Air Quality
        Guidelines for Europe.  Bilthoven, The Netherlands 28-31 October, 1996 ICP EHH 018 VD96
        2.11.
                                              H-47

-------
                 The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act,  1990 to 2010
[This page left blank intentionally.]
              H-48

-------
Implications  for
Future  Research
                                 C
                                 0)
                                 Q.
                                 Q.
   Throughout this report we have attempted to
accurately characterize and, where possible, quantify
the major sources  of uncertainties that affect  our
primary estimate of the costs  and benefits of the
CAAA.  In many cases, these uncertainties are the
result of gaps in data or methods that  might be
addressed through additional  research.   In this
Appendix, we provide a summary of important areas
for new research which,  if carried out,  have  the
potential to increase accuracy and reduce uncertainty
in future assessments.
Overview

   The uncertainties in the primary estimates and the
controversies which persist regarding model choices
and valuation paradigms highlight the need for a
variety of new and continued research efforts. Based
on the findings of this study, the highest priority
research needs are:

   •   Improved   emissions   inventories   and
       inventory management systems

   •   Improved tools for assessing the full range of
       social costs  associated   with  regulation,
       including the tax-interaction effect

   •   A more geographically comprehensive air
       quality monitoring network, particularly for
       fine particles and hazardous air pollutants

   •   Development  of  integrated  air  quality
       modeling tools based on an open, consistent
       model architecture

   •   Increased basic and targeted research on the
       health effects of air pollution, especially
       particulate matter
    •   Continued efforts to assess the cancer and
       noncancer health  effects  of  air toxics
       exposure

    •   Development of tools and data to assess the
       significance  of  wetland,   aquatic,  and
       terrestrial ecosystem changes associated with
       air pollution

    •   Continued  development   of  economic
       valuation  methods and  data,  particularly
       valuation  of changes in risks of premature
       mortality associated with air pollution

We discuss each of these research needs in greater
detail in the sections that follow.
Emissions Modeling

    Our analysis of emissions suggests several areas of
research that  could improve emissions  data and
modeling tools. The overall importance of ambient
particulate  matter estimates to the results of this
analysis makes improved modeling of  particulate
matter  and precursor emissions  a high  priority.
Ambient monitoring of particulate composition, for
example, indicates that particulate  matter of crustal
origin (e.g., from agricultural tilling, construction, and
wind erosion)  may be  over-represented in our
emissions inventories. As we discuss in the  report, one
possible explanation for this apparent inconsistency
may be  the extent to which these emissions  are
transported beyond their point of emission.  Some
preliminary evidence suggests that the mobility of a
large fraction  of these particles  may be relatively
limited, but further research is needed to confirm this
hypothesis.

    Comparison  of  emissions  inventories with
monitoring data also suggests that our inventory may
                                            1-1

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
underestimate the  organic  and  elemental  carbon
fraction of directly emitted particulates, particularly in
urban areas. In this case, it is more difficult to assess
the potential  sources of  underestimation.   One
hypothesis is that current emissions estimation tools
may underestimate organic particulate emissions from
mobile sources.  Continued research into emissions
rates for mobile sources could yield increased accuracy
for  particulate  emissions.    Additional   tailpipe
emissions  studies  may be needed,  and emissions
estimation techniques need to be developed to better
reflect the results  of those  studies.   In general,
continued research to better reconcile monitoring data
on the composition of ambient particulate matter on
the one hand, with emissions estimates  for primary
and secondary sources of particulate matter on the
other hand, should help in improving our ability to
predict changes in fine PM concentrations.

    One other emissions uncertainty that could be
reduced  by  additional research involves  volatile
organic compound  (VOC) emissions. Estimates of
VOC emissions  tend  to be highly variable — in the
summer months  especially, they can be closely linked
to variations  in  temperature.   As  ambient  ozone
modeling becomes more  sophisticated,  however,
better temporal  and  spatial  resolution  of VOC
emissions  inventories  may  be  needed  to take
advantage of the increased capabilities of air quality
models to process more highly resolved data.

    In  a broader  sense, our  current  inability to
quantitatively  characterize  and  carry through the
analysis the impact of key uncertainties in emissions
estimation may give the misleading impression that
these uncertainties  are less important  than other
quantifiable sources  of uncertainty. For example, the
statistical simulation modeling analysis we present here
reflects only quantifiable sources of uncertainty in the
concentration-response and economic valuation steps
of the analysis. Uncertainties in emissions estimates,
however, may be among the most important in the
entire analysis. Emissions estimates are a critical first
step in our  approach, so  errors in  this step can
magnify as we work through the subsequent steps of
the analysis. One way to enhance the quantification of
emissions   estimation   uncertainties   in   future
assessments,  and to reduce any potential errors of
inconsistency with the subsequent air quality modeling
steps,  is to  develop a  tool  that both integrates
emissions and  air quality analyses and provides a
means to more  cost-effectively  perform multiple
scenario analyses.  The Models-3 development effort,
described below,  may provide a modeling platform
that is more  amenable  to  sensitivity  testing of
alternative emissions results.
Cost Estimation

    The first  prospective analysis relies on direct
expenditure estimates to characterize the costs of the
CAAA. As  we state  in the  report, this approach
probably does not represent a large source of error in
our estimate of social costs,  though there  is some
evidence it may provide conservative estimates. The
direct cost approach does not provide information on
other potential categories of impact that may be of
interest,  however, including  total  employment,
employment by sector, capital accumulation patterns,
and the pace  of technological change.  Additional
cost-effective tools are needed to better estimate the
secondary impacts  of direct cost estimates for broad,
programmatic assessments such as the section 812
series.

    One potentially important area where  research
may  enhance  our  ability   to  conduct  broader
assessments is development of computable general
equilibrium (CGE) models that can be implemented
in a resource-effective manner.  The potential for
introducing additional  error when  using  such  a
forecasting tool, however, demands the model be
capable of processing many scenarios of important
economic  inputs   (e.g., alternative  interest  rate
scenarios) to  better bracket the  range of  future
outcomes relevant to CAAA implementation.

    A well-designed CGE model may also  enhance
our capability to  estimate  the  effects of  the  tax-
interaction effect,  both on the cost and the benefit
side. Additional empirical work will also be needed to
confirm that the magnitude of the effect estimated in
                                                 1-2

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
the current literature, which is largely confined to the
electric utility sector, is applicable for other economic
sectors where the competitive dynamics and capital-
intensity of production may differ from those in the
electric utility industry.
Air Quality Modeling

    Our current limited ability to disaggregate  the
overall benefits of the CAAA is largely attributable to
the complexity of the relationships between changes
in precursor emissions and the ambient concentration
outcomes.   For example, nitrogen oxides are pre-
cursors of both fine participate matter and ozone, and
their presence  in  the  atmosphere also affects  the
conversion  of sulfur dioxide to  fine particles.  In
addition, while low levels of nitrogen oxides can
contribute to elevated ozone concentrations, very high
levels of nitrogen  oxides, in the  right  combination
with VOCs and certain meteorological conditions, can
suppress ozone concentrations. These complex inter-
relationships among pollutants affected by the CAAA,
coupled  with the national scope  of the analysis
conducted  here, demand the use of an air quality
modeling technique  that accurately  reflects   the
complexities of atmospheric chemistry. Estimating
the incremental impact of various combinations of
emissions changes would require the repeated exercise
of the model for  each alternative set  of  emissions
scenarios of interest.

    The models we chose for this analysis, while they
represent the current  state of  the art in  modeling
atmospheric chemistry, are difficult and expensive to
run for a wide range of scenarios. To  improve our
ability  to disaggregate the benefits of the CAAA, we
need  a fully integrated air quality  modeling and
emissions input system that accounts for the full range
of pollutant interactions and relevant atmospheric
chemistry. The current Models-3 effort holds promise
in this area, but must be adequately funded to achieve
these goals.  Pursuit of a fully integrated  modeling
system  also holds promise  for  generating more
accurate ambient particulate matter estimates. The
current best modeling  systems  for this purpose
provide estimates  based solely on changes in the
concentrations of sulfate- and nitrate-derived particles,
with limited abilities to assess changes associated with
organic precursors of fine particles. Gaining a good
understanding of organic particle formation may also
be an important goal in better characterizing the full
range of impacts of efforts to control air toxics under
Title III. In addition, a more cost-effective air quality
modeling tool may also enhance our ability to conduct
comparative analyses and explore the sensitivity of air
quality modeling and emissions estimation outcomes
to alternative assumptions and modeling paradigms.

    Improvements in exposure analysis might also be
made with additional research  into techniques for
extrapolating the results of monitor-based analyses to
unmonitored areas. In particular, we suggest further
exploration and development of methods that base
extrapolation on the causes of ambient air quality (e.g.,
local   land   use,   emissions    characterizations,
meteorology, and terrain), rather than the outcomes of
air quality modeling (e.g., simple extrapolation  of air
quality concentrations).  In  the course of developing
this  analysis, we began development of such an
approach,   termed   the  "homology   mapping"
technique.  Continued development of this tool  could
improve the accuracy  of  our  estimates in  future
analyses for  those  areas  that are  distant  from
monitors.
Human Health Effects Estimation

    The results of our analysis clearly highlight the
importance of the link between premature mortality
and air pollution. The wide range of current research
on this link, including the several short-term and long-
term  cohort studies, provides a  strong  basis for
establishing that  particulate  matter  contributes to
premature mortality among the exposed population.
The existing studies, however, are  limited by the
availability and resolution of air quality monitoring
data,   data  on  the characteristics  of  exposed
populations, and, in the case of the long-term studies,
extensive time-series of these data.  The continued
enhancement of our air quality monitoring network,
                                                 I-3

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
particularly for fine particles, is critical to the better
understanding  of the  relationships  between  fine
particles and human health effects. Developing long-
time  series  of  fine  particle  data  will  take  time,
however. In the meantime, it is important to continue
efforts to better isolate the separate and joint impacts
of  ambient  pollutants  on  premature  mortality,
including better resolution of the incremental impacts
of ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfates,
and particles in the ultrafine and fine fraction, as well
as the coarse particles within PM10.

    In addition, the sensitivity analyses presented in
Appendix D show that a resolution  of competing
alternative  hypotheses   about  the  presence  and
potential time period of a lag in the incidence  of
premature  mortality  following  exposure may  be
important.   Although in our judgment assuming a
distributed five-year lag period  may  be warranted,
there is no scientific basis for either the assumption of
a lag or for determining the appropriate time period.
We believe it will continue to be important to evaluate
the existing evidence and develop new  studies  to
clarify the extent to which the premature mortality
outcomes reflected in the existing epidemiological
literature ought  to  reflect  a lag period between
exposure and the mortality effect.

    For premature mortality and for other health
effects, our analysis is based on the premise that the
available  literature   provides  broadly   applicable
characterizations   of  the  relationships  between
exposure to air pollutants and the incidence of health
effects. We use the results of available studies on a
national basis, although in many cases the underlying
literature  may   be   based  on  analysis of  the
concentration-response  relationship  in a particular
region. It is possible, however,  that region-specific
factors may play a role in the results of these studies.
For example, the composition of air pollutants such as
particulate matter varies by region, and it is possible
that other, perhaps unobservable factors may have a
synergistic or  mitigating effect on  the incremental
incidence  of health  effects.  The literature on  air
pollution's influence on health is not yet broad enough
for us to implement  a  regional  approach to health
effects estimation.  As the literature base develops,
however, a regional approach may be an option for
future assessments. In the meantime, it is important
to continue to develop a broader base of regional
estimates of the effects of multiple pollutants on key
health   outcomes,   including  mortality,  chronic
bronchitis, and hospital admissions, to better reflect
the  impact   of  potentially  important  regional
differences in the composition  of particulate matter
and other human  health stressors.  Expanding the
current literature base may also provide a better means
for evaluating the effects of air  pollution on  sub-
populations of individuals, such as children and the
infirm, that may be of increasing importance in the
Federal government regulatory effort.
Evaluation of the Effects of Air
Toxics

    In order to develop a meaningful estimate of the
benefits  of  air  toxics  controls  for  future  812
Prospective  analyses,  we  must  address existing
knowledge gaps and other methodological barriers
that prevent more realistic analyses of the benefits of
air toxics control.  We have already begun developing
a detailed research plan for improving the assessment
of air toxics  in future prospective  analyses.   For
example, EPA has agreed to sponsor workshops that
bring together experts in toxicology, exposure and risk
assessment,  and  economics  with   the  goal  of
establishing  a framework  for air  toxics  benefit
estimation.  In establishing such a framework, we will
need to address issues  and research needs related to
estimating  both air toxics exposure and the hazard
posed by individual air toxics.

    Exposure-related research needs include both the
development  of a database of air toxics measurements
and the extent to which individuals, on average, would
be exposed  to the measured  concentrations.  To
address the first issue, we plan to explore the potential
for compiling a database of air toxics data  from
established state air toxics monitoring networks. We
also plan to explore design options for the "super-
site" monitoring programs that will permit them to be
exploited to better understand exposure to air toxics
                                                 1-4

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
linked to key health effects categories, and to improve
the performance of ambient concentration modeling
efforts.

    More generally,  there is a need to  continue to
pursue  research aimed at  the  following  goals: (a)
improving methods to estimate current levels and
future changes in acute and chronic ambient exposure
conditions  nationwide;  (b)  evaluating  the  full
distribution of concentration-response relationships
linking exposure and health outcomes, with the goal
of providing a better estimate of the central tendency
of  the  relationships  to  support  primary benefits
estimation; and  (c)  tailoring economic  valuation
methods  for the broad  array of potential serious
health  effects such  as renal damage, reproductive
effects  and fatal and  non-fatal  cancers,  including
accurate characterization of the impact on valuation of
latency periods for these effects, where applicable.
Ecological Effects Estimation

    The  research needs for future analysis of the
CAAA's ecological benefits can be viewed from two
perspectives. The first is the valuation of additional
first order, acute ecological effects that change the
level  of   service  flows  society  receives   from
ecosystems, and the second is assessing and valuing
the broader changes to the structure and function of
ecosystems.  Our analysis reflects the state of the
current data and methods in this area by characterizing
and quantifying ecosystem service flows affected by air
pollutants, but many gaps remain. Pursuing a strategy
of enlarging the array of quantified service  flows
would entail further development of economic models
and collection of data.  However, notably absent in
this report is quantitative treatment of the changes of
ecosystem   structure   and  function  that do not
measurably affect the provision of service flows to
society, such as nutrient cycling, species composition,
and  the resistance  and resilience of ecosystems to
disturbance. Because many ecological benefits of the
CAAA fall into  this category, future research  could
adopt a strategy of developing analytic tools to assist
in the valuation of these impacts.
    Our current analysis suggests several ways we can
enhance the comprehensiveness  of coverage for
potentially important service flows.   For example,
while we  can develop estimates of the changes in
mercury emissions attributable to CAAA provisions,
and there is an extensive literature on the effects of
mercury  in  ecological  systems,  there  are  great
uncertainties in estimating the fate and transport of
incremental increases in airborne mercury emissions.
The persistence of this element, the potentially long
recovery times  for ecological systems contaminated
with mercury,  and the potentially global  scale of
mercury transport suggest that overcoming this barrier
will be challenging; however, existing tools may
provide a good starting point for bounding analyses.
Similar issues are present in assessing the ecological
effects of air toxics.  Some toxics are persistent in
natural systems, can be attributed to multiple airborne
and other  sources, and have been accumulating in the
environment for many years.  Analyses  aimed at
characterizing effects at the watershed level, however,
may  be more successful in capturing many of the
complexities of source-receptor  relationships and
receptor sensitivities than the national analyses we
have traditionally pursued.

    Analyses of nitrogen deposition in the  current
report are based on a displaced cost approach. The
uncertainties and potential circularity of this  approach
limit its applicability to a subset of the aquatic systems
susceptible  to  eutrophication.    A  more  widely
applicable and therefore more promising approach for
future analyses  will be an avoided damages analysis.
To complete such an approach, however,  further
research is needed to better explain the dose-response
relationships between  increased  nitrogen  loads,
thresholds  of  nitrogen  loading  that  lead  to
eutrophication, and the ecological  mechanisms that
lead to the loss of service flows such as recreational
and commercial fishing. Some recent analyses attempt
to bridge  this gap  through  the  development  of
reduced form relationships  between nitrogen  loads
and  service  flow disruption, but these  types  of
approaches also have only limited applicability unless
they can be shown to hold for long periods of time
and across a wider range of marine environments,
climate conditions, and species types.
                                                 I-5

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
    In some cases acute impacts to ecosystems, such
as the disappearance of game species from particular
ecosystems  or foliar damage to trees,  attract  the
attention of the public and policy makers.  Such acute
impacts generally have effects that are observable and
alter  the provision  of ecosystem services  in  a
measurable  way.    Less  often  noticed  are  the
ecosystem-level   ecological  impacts   that  change
ecosystem  structure  and   function  but  do not
immediately affect service flows received from that
ecosystem. By focusing on acute impacts it is possible
to lose sight of ecosystem-level changes to structure
and function that could eventually lead to large-scale
impacts far greater in degree and geographic extent
than the contemporaneous, acute effects.

    Ecosystems   generally    maintain    multiple
interchangeable elements that may drive  a particular
process, as hypothesized by Odum  (1985) for  forest
ecosystems and Howarth (1991) for aquatic systems.
This allows for natural variation in these elements as
well as long-term cycles in  which some  elements
dominate over others.  Explicit in the definition of
ecological structure and function is  the ability of an
ecosystem to  adapt  to  natural  changes  in   its
environment.   When pollution affects  ecosystem
functions such as nutrient cycling, water filtration,
biological diversity, and provision of habitat, it may
also be precluding the system's ability  to adapt and
respond to change and perform these functions  in the
future.   The  ultimate effects  of  such  changes  in
ecosystems are sometimes unpredictable in scale and
nature.  Ecosystems  impacted  by  mankind may
respond in a discontinuous manner around critical
thresholds that are boundaries between locally  stable
equilibria (Common and Perrings 1992; Constanza et
al 1993). Complexity in ecosystems prevents analysts
from using linear methods to "add  up" the discrete
ecological effects  of pollution.

    Additional research is  also needed  to develop
economic valuation methods  that can  adequately
characterize the monetized benefits of maintaining
ecosystem structure and function  in  their current
states.  Contingent valuation approaches  may  prove
valuable, but the scientific basis for evaluating changes
in ecosystems needs to be sufficiently advanced that
analysts  can   construct  plausible   scenarios  of
alternative ecosystem outcomes  for respondents to
react to. To lay the groundwork for these efforts,
there  is an immediate need to identify  the key
attributes of ecosystems  that are most valued by
individuals.  The results of those types of scoping
analyses might  be  useful in  targeting subsequent
scientific and ecological research, with the goal of
developing pilot analyses  that integrate robust and
realistic characterizations of the changes in ecological
resources attributed to air  pollution  with careful
economic valuation approaches to assess the value of
avoiding those changes.

    The isolation of service flows,  while  a useful
interim tool for quantifying and monetizing the effects
of  air  pollutants  on  ecosystems,  may imply an
oversimplified cause and effect relationship between
pollution and the provision of the service  flow. As
our analysis suggests, often the service flow is affected
by  complex  non-linear relationships  that govern
ecosystem structure and function.   Pursuit of the
short-term goal  of enhancing our understanding of
ecological effects on service flows may ultimately
provide new insights into our understanding of these
complex relationships.  At the same time, we suggest
that it  will  continue  to  be important to pursue
methods to  estimate the effects  of air pollution on
other ecological indicators of concern, including those
that may not be directly linked to service  flows,
recognizing  that accurate assessment of changes in
nutrient cycling, water filtration,  biological diversity,
provision of habitat, and  other  valuable aspects of
ecosystems may ultimately demand a broader view of
these effects.
Economic Valuation

    The importance of the economic valuation step in
our benefits assessment is highlighted by our analysis
of the influence of key variables on the overall range
of uncertainty from our statistical simluation modeling
analysis. Our analysis clearly shows that uncertainty in
the measurement of the  value  of  statistical life
dominates the quantifiable uncertainty in our overall
                                                 1-6

-------
                                                    The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
estimates. In addition, there remain several important
non-quantified uncertainties in the use of labor market
studies  to  value  avoidance of environmental risks
from air pollution.   These uncertainties were  also
highlighted in the section 812 retrospective analysis
report,  and  as a result many are  currently being
pursued  as   part  of  federally  sponsored  and
independent  research studies.

    First, to  the extent we must continue to rely on
the value of statistical life (VSL) approach to value
avoided mortality risks,  we need more  advanced
methods for discerning an appropriate VSL from the
extensive literature on this topic.  The application of
meta-analysis  techniques  may  help  us   better
understand the impact of important methodological
and measurement choices that are made in conducting
these studies, and provide a basis for narrowing the
range of appropriate VSL estimates for environmental
risk estimates.  Second, we need to develop a better
means for adjusting VSL estimates to address the key
benefits transfer  issues  from  the risk  scenarios
presented in  existing studies to the specific mortality
risk  presented by particulate matter  air pollution.
Pursuit  of this goal would include developing better
adjustment techniques for differences  in age, health
status, and the risk context, including such attributes
of risk perception as dread and the involuntary nature
of environmental exposures.

    Third, and perhaps most importantly, we need to
develop a better literature basis for directly valuing the
commodity provided by air pollution reductions, that
is, reductions in the risk of dying prematurely or, put
another way,  changes  in  individual's  survival
probabilities.  Several research efforts are currently
underway  that are attempting to directly  value life
extensions  similar in magnitude to those provided by
air quality improvements.  These research efforts
necessarily rely on stated preference methods, which
in most cases are considered less reliable than the
revealed preference  estimates used as the basis for
VSL  approaches.   Substantial  analytic  challenges
remain  in making  the  risk  reduction  scenarios
presented to respondents clear and understandable to
the lay person, but the results of this new work will
need to be carefully considered for their implications
for a new paradigm for valuation  of mortality risk
reduction.

    Beyond  the valuation of  avoided  premature
mortality, there are several other areas of research
that, if pursued, can enhance our ability to value the
health outcomes of reductions in air pollutants.  For
example, we must develop a broader research base for
valuation of avoided effects  to children, including
construction of an overall framework for considering
the welfare and utility of children within the broader
family context, to better characterize the effects of air
pollutants to this important sub-population.  It may
also be fruitful to pursue the potential cost-effective
advantages of developing a more flexible means of
valuing health  effects  through  health-state  utility
approaches.  More research is needed to assess the
trade-offs in accuracy and precision of these results
with  the advantages  of  a  broader set  of WTP
estimates to apply to relevant endpoints (for example,
to value the avoidance of hospital admissions).

    Additional research is also needed to enhance our
ability to value important welfare effects.  Visibility
continues to be one of the most important welfare
endpoints for analyses of particulate air pollutants, but
it  would  be useful if  the  literature  base were
periodically updated to better reflect the current state-
of-the-art in stated preference technique. For example,
an important research direction  would be to pursue
development of additional estimates for residential
visibility valuation  to  corroborate  those currently
available, and develop insights into the potential for
double-counting in application of the location-specific
residential   and  recreational  visibility   valuation
estimates.    The  literature  on  materials  damage
valuation is also in need of updating. We chose not to
include an estimate for household  soiling effects in
our primary benefits estimates because of the age of
the original research, its reliance on an older measure
of  particulate  air  pollution   (total   suspended
participates), and its reliance on  outdated household
expenditure data. Updating existing estimates of the
effects  of  air  pollutants  on  household  soiling
expenditures would be a  relatively straightforward
research project.   Agricultural  analyses could also
benefit from a broader  assessment of the crops
                                                  1-7

-------
                                                   The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010
potentially affected by ozone and other pollutants, and
by the joint analysis of not only the damaging effects
of some pollutants but also the yield-enhancing effects
of others (e.g., nitrogen deposition).

    The  results  of this first prospective  analysis
continue to suggest that our nation's investment in
clean air has been a wise one. At the same time, we
recognize that we  should continue  to assess  the
progress of the clean air program, as  implemented
under the Clean Air Act, to ensure  that benefits are
achieved in the most cost-effective means possible.
Pursuit  of the research goals  outlined above will
continue to enhance our ability to provide accurate
and timely assessments of the costs and benefits of all
provisions of the Clean Air Act.
                                                 I-8

-------
of the           19, 1999
by                      on
                  on
         of                  of
          of

-------
                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
                                   November 19, 1999

EPA-SAB-COUNCIL-ADV-00-003
                                                                      OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR
                                                                       SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
Honorable Carol M. Browner
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460

      RE:   Final Advisory by the Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis on
             the 1999 Prospective Study of Costs and Benefits (1999) of Implementation of the
             Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)

Dear Ms. Browner:

      On October 1, 1999, the Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis (Council)
held a public teleconference to review a draft Agency document, The Benefits and Costs of the
Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010; EPA Report to Congress (U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation
and Office of Policy, September 1999) and held a follow-up teleconference on October 15, 1999
to review an October draft of that  same document. These two closure meetings represented the
culmination of a multi-year series of review meetings during which the Council provided advice
to the Agency on the study design, methodologies, and intermediate results. The Council
submits this Advisory to complete its review responsibilities as defined in Section 812 of the
CAAA.1

      The Council believes that The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1990 to 2010 is a
serious, careful study that, in general, employs sound methods and data. While we do not
endorse all details of the study, we believe that the study's conclusions are generally consistent
with the weight of available evidence. The Council also appreciates the Agency's
responsiveness over the many years of this study's development to advice conveyed by the
Council and its technical subcommittees. While the Project  Team has not followed our advice in
every instance, we believe that they have done a remarkable job on an extremely difficult
project.
       1 Specifically, subsection (g) of CAA §312 (as amended by §812 of the amendments) states:
"(g) The Council shall -- (1) review the data to be used for any analysis required under this section
and make recommendations to the Administrator on the use of such data, (2) review the methodology
used to analyze such data and make recommendations to the Administrator on the use of such
methodology; and (3) prior to issuance of a report required under subsection (d) or (e), review the
findings of such report, and make recommendations to the Administrator concerning the validity and
utility of such findings."


                                                                      Recycled/Recyclable
                                                                      Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper trial
                                                                      contains at toast 50% recycled fiber

-------
       We would, however, like to bring to your attention two major issues that arose in our
review of the study. These pertain to the study's measurement of costs and representation of
uncertainty regarding costs.  Following our discussion of these points, we present suggestions to
improve future Prospective Studies. Because of their importance, we would like to highlight
these suggestions here:

       a)      We believe that benefits and costs must be disaggregated by individual provision
              of the Clean Air Act if benefit-cost analysis is to be useful in informing
              regulation.

       b)      Future studies must attempt to quantify uncertainties about regulatory costs, as
              well as uncertainties about the benefits of regulations. Failure to quantify cost
              uncertainties may give the impression that costs cannot exceed point estimates.

       c)      Cost estimates should include tax-interaction effects; i.e., they should reflect the
              fact that environmental regulations may exacerbate the disincentive  effects of the
              personal and corporate income taxes.  This may raise cost estimates  considerably.

       d)      The Agency should revise its estimates of the Value of a Statistical Life.

       e)      The impact of air quality regulations should be stated in terms of a Net Cost per
              Life Saved and a Net Cost per Life-year Saved to facilitate comparisons with
              other health and safety regulations.

       f)      Attempts should be made to increase the set of ecosystem benefits valued and to
              improve estimates of the exposure and effects of air toxics.

1.     Comments on the Drafts Provided for Council Review

       a)      The Relationship between Direct and Social Costs  of Compliance. Social cost is
              the type of cost that is most relevant to the evaluation of the 1990 Clean Air Act.
              However, the draft Prospective Study relies primarily on estimates of the  "direct"
              compliance costs for affected industries or pollution sources. The reliance on
              direct costs is understandable, since it is more difficult to assess the  social costs.
              At the same time, it is important to articulate clearly and without bias the
              relationship between direct and social costs.

              The Council believes that the study's discussion of this issue lacks balance and is
              prone to misinterpretation.  The study describes in detail two factors that might
              cause direct costs to overstate true social costs (absence of attention to producer
              and consumer responses, and the assumption of a static technology). The October
              review draft contained a discussion of the tax-interaction effect, which can cause
              direct costs to understate social costs, possibly by a very large amount. In the
              Council's view, this effect merited discussion in  the text and should  not be
              relegated to a footnote.  There is now a substantial body of published theoretical

-------
       and empirical research that indicates that, under typical conditions,
       tax-interactions can cause social costs to exceed direct costs by at least 25
       percent, and in some cases by 100 percent or more.  Table 3-3 further contributes
       to potential misinterpretation. It explicitly mentions a factor that would cause
       direct cost to overstate social cost (lack of attention to producer and consumer
       responses) but fails to mention explicitly the factor (tax interactions) that works in
       the opposite direction. By minimizing attention to the tax-interaction effect, the
       study gives readers the erroneous impression that the EPA's use of direct costs  is
       likely to overstate social costs.

       Tax interactions occur when environmental regulations exacerbate the distortions
       in labor and capital markets caused by prior income, profit, or sales  taxes.  These
       interactions may result from any regulations that raise production costs and
       thereby lower the real purchasing power stemming from given real wages. Even
       "small" regulations can produce significant tax-interaction effects. The
       Prospective Study fails to indicate the general relevance of these effects. The
       study states that general equilibrium effects are important where the regulatory
       action is known to have an impact on many sectors of the US economy.  Although
       this statement is technically correct, it allows for the impression that such general
       equilibrium effects are unusual. It fails to point out the key finding  from the
       tax-interaction literature: namely, that all regulatory actions have impacts on other
       sectors (particularly labor and capital markets) and that these general equilibrium
       impacts, under typical conditions, raise social costs substantially relative to direct
       costs.

       In sum, the Council would urge the EPA to give more attention to the tax-
       interaction effect in order to achieve a more balanced and straightforward
       presentation of the relationship between direct costs and overall social cost.  This
       is necessary to avoid giving the false impression that direct costs are likely to
       overstate social cost.

b)     Characterization of Uncertainty with Respect to Cost Estimates. The main results
       of the first Prospective Study are summarized in a table of costs and benefits that
       appears both in the Executive Summary and in Chapter 8.  Uncertainties about the
       benefits of the CAAA are nicely  illustrated by a lower bound and an upper bound
       (90% confidence interval).  In contrast, the cost of this environmental protection
       is represented only by a central estimate. (Cost uncertainties are discussed via
       sensitivity analyses in other tables,  but these uncertainties are not combined into
       an overall set of bounds on the central cost estimate.)

       Thus the benefit-cost ratios in that main summary table vary only with
       uncertainties about benefits. These ratios would vary even more if they
       incorporated some uncertainty about costs.  Since costs are indeed uncertain, the
       table implicitly understates  the true degree of uncertainty about the  net benefits of
       the CAAA.

                                      3

-------
             Even rough representations of uncertainty about these costs would be better than
             the current implication that costs are certain.  One possibility would be to assume
             a uniform distribution about each element of cost, ranging from 50% to 150% of
             the central estimate.  A second possibility is to show an additional row of
             benefit-cost ratios where the costs have been multiplied by 1.3 to account for the
             tax-interaction effect. A third possibility is suggested by reference to the fact that
             the Retrospective Study produced a central estimate of direct cost equal to $523
             billion, while the modeling approach provided welfare effects between $493
             billion and $621 billion. Since these bounds are 6% below and 19% above the
             central estimate, the same  percentage bounds could be applied to the central
             estimate of costs in the Prospective Study.  True bounds on costs in the
             Prospective Study would be preferred, but one of these rough estimates of bounds
             is better than using no bounds at all.

2.      Suggestions to Improve Future  Prospective Studies

       a)     Disaggregate Benefits and Costs by Title or Provision. The Council reiterates its
             strong recommendation for presenting the benefits as well as the costs of the
             CAAA by title and, preferably, by provision, in future studies. Without this level
             of disaggregation, the study cannot be used directly to identify how the CAAA
             might be improved in the future. The Council recognizes that a thorough
             disaggregation analysis was not feasible for the current study since resources
             were not available for exercising several air quality models to create the needed
             data base for the analysis.  Future studies should not be limited in this regard
             since more universal and versatile platforms for air quality modeling, such as
             Models-3, are expected to be available. With careful design, using such a system,
             a small number of additional comprehensive modeling simulations can provide
             the information needed for a thorough bottom-up assessment of the CAAA
             benefits by individual title and even by some provisions. If, in the  design phase
             of the next prospective study, it becomes apparent that resources cannot be
             allocated for these analyses, then an alternative design strategy combining use of
             top-down or screening model approaches combined with carefully  selected
             essential comprehensive model simulations should be pursued.

       b)     Characterize Uncertainty about Costs. The costs imposed by air pollution
             regulations are highly uncertain. For example, the costs of sulfur dioxide
             abatement under the 1990 Clean Air Act have turned out to be a fraction of what
             was estimated in 1990.  Unfortunately, uncertainty can lead to higher as well as
             lower costs.

             EPA has relied on engineering estimates of abatement costs.  Even if these
             estimates were accurate estimates of the cost of equipment and operating costs,
             they would understate social costs because of tax-interaction and other effects.
             EPA needs to discuss and to quantify the following sources of uncertainty:

-------
              (1)     Uncertainty in the engineering cost estimates.

              (2)     Costs in addition to the engineering estimates, such as tax-interactions.

              (3)     Technical change due to the technology forcing that lowers costs.

              (4)     Changes in the wage rate or prices of materials due to the changes in
                     demand.

       c)      Include Tax-Interaction Effects in Future Cost Estimates.  One of the most
              important insights to emerge in Environmental Economics in the past 25 years is
              that regulations, by exacerbating existing distortions in the economy, can have
              social costs considerably in excess of direct compliance costs. An environmental
              regulation that raises the price of purchased goods and lowers the real wage will
              tend to, other things equal, cause a substitution of leisure for labor.  This
              compounds the deadweight loss of the tax system, which,  by driving a wedge
              between the gross and net of tax wages, causes individuals to substitute leisure for
              labor.  This tax-interaction effect can, in some cases, double the costs of a
              regulation (Goulder et al. 1999, Parry et al. 1999).2

              It is important for tax-interaction effects to be included in future Prospective
              Studies for two reasons.  First, these costs are real.  They represent real losses in
              output, and they occur even for small regulations. Second, the tax-interaction
              effect can at least to some degree be offset if the environmental program raises
              revenues, which are used to reduce the rates of other,  distorting taxes.  This
              implies that the costs  of a program will depend on how a standard is achieved,
              which has implications for the choice of regulatory  approach.  For example, a
              permit market will have lower social costs if permits are auctioned and revenues
              recycled than if permits are given away (Goulder et al. 1997; Parry 1997).3

       d)     Revise Mortality Risk Estimates. The Council is uncomfortable with the
              Agency's use of $4.8 million (1990 U.S. dollars) for the Value of a Statistical Life
              (VSL) and $293,000 for the Value of a Statistical Life-year (VSLY) to value
              mortality risk reductions from reduced air pollution.  We question the
       2 Goulder, Lawrence H., Ian W. H. Parry, Roberton C. Williams III, and Dallas Burtraw, 1999, "The Cost-
Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Journal of Public
Economics 72(3):329-360; and Parry, Ian, W. H., R. C. Williams III, and L. H. Goulder, 1999. "When Can Carbon
Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets," Journal of
Environmental Economics and Management 37:52-84.

       3 Goulder, Lawrence H., Parry, Ian W. H., and Dallas Burtraw, "Revenue-Raising vs. Other Approaches to
Environmental Protection: The Critical  Significance of Pre-Existing Tax Distortions," RAND Journal of
Economics, Winter 1997; and Parry, Ian W. H.,  "Environmental Taxes and Quotas in the Presence of
Distorting Taxes in Factor Markets," Resource and Energy Economics, Winter 1997,19:203-20.

-------
      appropriateness of the $4.8 million VSL even as a measure of prime-aged
      individuals' willingness to pay (WTP) for risk reductions, and we question the
      application of a WTP estimate for prime-aged individuals to a population of older
      individuals and people who are in poor health. Time limitations did not permit a
      thorough treatment of this issue prior to completing the first Prospective Study;
      hence we recommended that the Project Team use the $4.8 million figure. For
      future studies, however, we recommend that the Agency revisit the literature on
      the value of mortality risk reductions. The following points should be kept in
      mind when examining this literature:

      (1)    It is WTP for risk reductions that is the appropriate concept when valuing
             the mortality benefits of environmental regulations. The costs of
             environmental regulations are spread broadly over many individuals who,
             indeed, are paying for the resulting risk reductions.

      (2)    Labor market studies measure willingness to accept (WTA) compensation
             for increased risk of death. This is likely to exceed what people will pay
             (WTP) for the same risk reductions.

      (3)    Averting behavior and consumer product safety studies, which are omitted
             from the current list of 26 studies, do measure WTP.  These studies should
             be considered in the review.

      (4)    In reviewing studies the population whose preferences are measured
             should be noted, as should the magnitude of the risk reduction valued.
             Studies should be identified that measure WTP for risk reductions among
             the populations that benefit from air quality regulation, especially older
             people, and that value risk reductions of the same magnitude as those in
             future Prospective Studies.

      (5)    There should be well-defined criteria for selecting studies, which are
             clearly stated and consistently applied. For example, compensating wage
             studies should adequately control for inter-industry wage differentials;
             contingent valuation studies  should test for sensitivity to scope.

e)    Present Cost-Effectiveness Results.  Improvements in human health remain a
      major motivation behind air quality  regulation and account for over 90% of the
      quantified benefits from Titles I-IV  of the 1990 CAAA. Reductions in premature
      mortality, in turn, account for over 90%  of these health benefits.  Because
      mortality risk reductions are such a large component of the benefits from air
      quality regulation, the Council urges the Agency to express the outcomes of the
      CAAA in terms of: (1) Net Cost per Life Saved, and (2) Net Cost per Life-Year
      Saved.  These are calculated by subtracting the value of non-mortality benefits
      from costs and dividing the result by: (1) the number of statistical lives saved, and
      (2) the number of statistical life-years saved.

-------
       By taking this approach the Agency would: (1) provide a measure of program
       effectiveness that avoids the use of flawed measures of VSL and VSLY and, more
       generally, avoids the controversies surrounding the valuation of mortality risk
       change; (2) be in line with standard practice in the public health community,
       where different programs are routinely compared using cost-effectiveness
       analysis; and (3) facilitate comparisons of the cost effectiveness of various health
       and safety programs with health-based environmental regulations. The Council
       feels such comparisons are necessary for improving public decisions about the
       allocation of society's scarce resources among competing ends.

f)      Increase Set of Ecosystem Benefits Valued. The current Prospective Study has
       made important advances in identifying ecosystem services that can be linked to
       air pollution, and in trying to value these endpoints. For the purposes of
       valuation, it is convenient to categorize the impact of pollution on ecosystems as
       follows: (1) impacts that occur through markets (e.g., impacts of pollution on
       commercial timber stands or fish populations); (2) impacts that affect recreation
       (e.g., damage to National Parks from air pollution or to recreational fishing from
       acid rain); (3) impacts on ecosystems for which people have well-defined non-use
       values (e.g., damage to forest canopy, the value of reduced fish populations to
       non-anglers); and (4) other impacts on ecosystem functions and services, not
       otherwise classified, for example water and nutrient recycling, maintenance of
       biodiversity, climate stabilization.  These indirect and more subtle effects may not
       be well understood or even perceived by people;  yet they may have important
       impacts on human well being.

       Techniques for valuing the first 3 categories of benefits are well-established, but
       the set of applied studies is sparse. The Agency might consider funding new
       studies, after determining which categories of benefits are likely to have the
       largest impact on regulatory decisions. When commissioning studies to measure
       non-use values, care should be taken in defining: (1) the geographical scope of
       what is to be valued (for example, are people asked only for non-use values in  .
       their state?); (2) the nature of substitutes (i.e., conditions at other locations); and
       (3) how many endpoints to value at the same time. For example, in regard to this
       last point, if a regulation to reduce nitrogen oxides (NOx) affects forests through
       ozone and fish population through acid rain, people should be asked to value the
       entire package of ecosystem benefits brought about by NOx reduction. Adding
       up WTP values from individual studies might overstate the value of the NOx
       reduction program if there are important substitution effects across ecosystem
       services.

       A problem for policy analysis is that the endpoints that affect markets or for
       which people have well-defined use (recreation)  and non-use values (e.g.,
       damages to forests, fish and wildlife populations) do not capture the totality of
       ecosystem  damages associated with pollution control decisions. In particular,
       they do not capture ecosystem functions and services such as nutrient recycling

                                     7

-------
              and habitat provision.  Nor do they capture the more subtle changes in ecosystem
              functioning that may to lead to non-marginal changes in ecosystem performance.
              Before these changes can be valued, however, it is essential that ecologists
              characterize the ecosystem outcomes (or indicators) that are important to
              ecosystem functioning and then relate these outcomes (or indicators) to particular
              activities or pollutants.  This information is an essential foundation for economic
              valuation.

       g)     Estimate Exposure and Effects of Air Toxics. The Retrospective Study and the
              first Prospective Study do not contain any quantitative benefit-cost analyses of
              Toxic Air Pollutants (TAP). As the Council's Health and Ecological Effects
              Subcommittee (HEES) has stated,4 the Agency does not currently have analytical
              methodologies available to establish population exposure estimates, or to define
              realistic risk estimates for the  general population. The HEES, with approval by
              the full Council, suggested an approach to identifying the research and
              methodological developments needed to overcome these deficiencies.  The effort
              requires coordination with the SAB Executive Committee, various  SAB
              Committees, the Office of Research and Development and Office of Air Quality
              Planning and Standards. Implementation of the plan of action outlined for the
              Agency will begin a process that can lead to quantitative estimates  of health, and
              possibly ecological benefits for the next Prospective Study.

3.     Conclusion

       The purpose of conducting benefit-cost analyses is to improve the efficiency of
regulation. The suggestions we have made in this Advisory are designed to help achieve this
goal.  Increasing the accuracy of benefit-cost analyses will entail measuring certain categories of
benefits (e.g., certain ecological benefits, benefits of reduced exposure to hazardous air
pollutants) and costs (tax-interaction effects) not included in the current Prospective Study.  It
will also entail refining estimates of the value of mortality benefits, which continue to dominate
the monetized benefits of improved air quality. Of all the suggestions made above, however, we
believe that disaggregating the benefits and costs of individual provisions of the CAA is,
perhaps, the most important.  If our recommendation to provide more disaggregated benefit-cost
estimates can be implemented, the specific programs which have the highest potential payoff to
society can be more readily identified. We strongly encourage the Agency to make the research
investment and analytical commitments required to ensure this objective is met in the next
prospective study.
       4
        See HEES Letter Advisories, "The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) Section 812 Prospective Study of Costs and Benefits
(1999): Advisory by the Health and Ecological Effects Subcommittee on Initial Assessments of Health and Ecological Effects, Part 1", EPA-
SAB-COUNCIL-ADV-99-012 and "Part 2", EPA-SAB-COUNCIL-ADV-00-001.

-------
      We thank the Agency for the opportunity to review the first Prospective Study and to
make recommendations to improve the methods and data to be used in future prospective
studies. We look forward to your response to this Advisory.
                        Sincerely,


                       ?7             ~X /""
                       /M^^^^r^n. ^L^^^-^
                        Dr. Maureen L. Cropper, Cnpr^
                        Advisory Council on Clean Air Compliance Analysis
                        Science Advisory Board

-------
                                      NOTICE
       This report has been written as part of the activities of the Science Advisory Board, a
public advisory group providing extramural scientific information and advice to the
Administrator and other officials of the Environmental Protection Agency.  The Board is
structured to provide balanced, expert assessment of scientific matters related to problems facing
the Agency.  This report has not been reviewed for approval by the Agency and, hence, the
contents of this report do not necessarily represent the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor of other agencies in the Executive Branch of the Federal government, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute a recommendation for use.
Distribution and Availability: This Science Advisory Board report is provided to the EPA
Administrator, senior Agency management, appropriate program staff, interested members of the
public, and is posted on the SAB website (www.epa.gov/sab). Information on its availability is
also provided in the SAB's monthly newsletter (Happenings at the Science Advisory Board).
Additional copies and further information are available from the SAB Staff.

-------
                 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                       SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD (SAB)
          ADVISORY COUNCIL ON CLEAN AIR COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS

CHAIR
Dr. Maureen L. Cropper, The World Bank, Washington, DC

MEMBERS
Dr. Gardner M. Brown, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Dr. Trudy Ann Cameron, University of California, Los Angeles, CA,

Dr, Don Fullerton, University of Texas, Austin, TX

Dr. Lawrence H. Goulder, Stanford University, Stanford, CA

Dr. Jane V. Hall, California State University, Fullerton, CA

Dr. Charles Kolstad, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA

Dr. Paul Lioy, Robert Wood Johnson School of Medicine, Piscataway, NJ

Dr. Paulette Middleton, RAND Center for Science & Policy, Boulder, CO

CONSULTANTS
Dr. A. Myrick Freeman, Bowdoin College, ME

Dr. Alan J. Krupnick, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC

SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF
Dr. Angela Nugent, Designated Federal Officer, Science Advisory Board, U.S. Environmental
      Protection Agency, Washington, DC

Mrs. Diana L. Pozun, Management Assistant, Science Advisory Board, U.S. Environmental
      Protection Agency, Washington, DC

-------