5775
450277504
DRAFT
SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDELINES
FOR
LEAD IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
DRAFT
SUPPLEMENTARY GUIDELINES
FOR
LEAD IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
*p—,- •- -
November 1977
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This guideline was prepared under the general editorship of John
S1lvas1 and Joseph Sableskl of the Plans Guidelines Section, Standards
Implementation Branch, Control Programs Development Division. CPDD
gratefully appreciates the following contributions:
Chapter 3—Reporting Requirements
Chapter 5--S1t1ng of Urban Area Ambient A1r
Quality Monitors for Lead
Chapter 7~Source Surveillance; Emission
Sampling
Chapter 8--Determ1nat1on of Lead Point Source
Definition
Appendix A—Tentative Procedure for Determining
Inorganic Lead Emissions from
Stationary Sources
Appendix B--Project1ng Automotive Lead Emissions
for Roadway Configurations
Jacob Summers
MDAD
Alan Hoffman
MDAD
Bill Grlmley
ESED
Mark Scruggs
MDAD
Bill Grlmley
ESED
James Wilson
MDAD
In addition, CPDD wishes to thank those who offered comments and
suggestions on previous drafts of this guideline.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT 2
2.1 Subpart A—General Provisions 2
2.2 Subpart B—• Plan Content and Requirements 4
2.3 Subpart C--ExtensIons 9
2.4 Subpart D--Maintenance of National Standards 11
3.0 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 13
3.1 A1r Quality Data Reporting 13
3.1.1 SAROAD System 13
3.1.2 Reporting Formats 14
3.1.3 Coding Procedures 19
3.1.4 Data Flow 19
3.1.5 References for Section 3.1 20
3.2 Emissions Data Reporting 21
3.2.1 HATREMS System 21
3.2.2 HATREMS Reporting Formats 24
3.2.3 Coding Procedures 32
3.2.4 Data Flow 33
3.2.5 References for Section 3.2 36
4.0 ANALYSIS AND CONTROL STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT 37
4.1 Background Concentrations 37
4.2 Lead Emission Factors 38
4.3 Projecting Automotive Lead Emissions 39
4.3.1 Lead Emissions from Automobiles 39
4.3.2 Lead Emissions from Other Gasoline Powered
Vehicles 41
4.3.3 Example Calculation of Automobile Lead Emissions... 43
5.0 SITING OF URBAN AREA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORS FOR LEAD 53
5.1 Roadway Site 53
5.2 Neighborhood Site 54
5.3 Other Cons 1 deratlons 54
6.0 NEW SOURCE REVIEW 55
7.0 SOURCE SURVEILLANCE; EMISSION SAMPLING 56
111
-------
Chapter Page
8.0 DETERMINATION OF LEAD POINT SOURCE DEFINITION 57
APPENDIX A. Tentative Procedure for Determining Inorganic Lead
Emissions from Stationary Sources 61
APPENDIX B. Projecting Automotive Lead Emissions for Roadway Con-
figurations 95
APPENDIX C. Deposition of Particles and Gases 120
APPENDIX D. Calculation of Critical Ambient Lead Concentration
Below Which the NAAQS will be Attained by 1982 Due to
Mobile Sources 1n Urbanized Areas 128
1v
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(Excluding those 1n Appendices)
Figure Page
3.1-1 SAROAD Site Identification Form 15
3.1-2 SAROAD Dally Data Form 17
3.1-3 SAROAD Composite Data Form 18
3.2-1 National Emissions Data System (NEDS) Point Source Input
Form 28
3.2-2 National Emissions Data System (NEDS) Area Source Input
Form 29
3.2-3 Hazardous and Trace Emissions System (HATREMS) Point Source
Input Form 30
3.2-4 Hazardous and Trace Emissions System (HATREMS) Area Source
Input Form 31
3.2-5 Lead Em1sss1ons Data Flow 34
4.3-1 Percentage of Burned Lead Exhausted vs. Vehicle Cruise
Speed 45
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Excluding those 1n Appendices)
Table Page
3.2-1 Emission Inventory Data for Use 1n the Development of
Pb Control Strategies 25
4.3-1 Probable Pooled Average Lead Content of Gasoline 46
4.3-2 Average Fleet Fuel Economy 47
4.3-3 City/Highway Combined Fuel Economy 48
4.3-4 Fraction of Annual Light-Duty Vehicle Travel by Model
Year 49
4.3-5 Fuel Economy Correction Factors by Model Year 50
4.3-6 Probable Lead Content of Leaded Gasoline 51
1914
4.3-7 Calculation of 1 = tta&i C1K ,E_
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This guideline presents Information on the development of Implemen-
tation plans for lead that are not contained 1n EPA's regulations for
preparation, adoption, and submission of Implementation plans, found 1n
Part 51 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In several cases,
the guidance presented herein 1s referenced 1n those regulations; EPA will
use this guidance 1n determining the acceptability of a plan.
A most detailed summary of the background surrounding the development
of the regulations and the guidelines appears 1n the preambles to both
the proposal and the final version of the regulations pertaining to lead
Implementation plans [citations will appear here].
-------
2.0 GENERAL SIP DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
The discussion below follows the outline of those portions of
the 40 CFR 51 regulations, "Requirements for Preparation, Adoption,
and Subnrittal of Implementation Plans," that were not revised to account
for the lead standard. These requirements are still applicable to the
lead SIPs as appropriate. Items of a peripheral nature, such as "Defini-
tions," are not discussed here. The State should consult the regula-
tions themselves, rather than this discussion, for the detailed
requirements.
2.1 SUBPART A—GENERAL PROVISIONS
—S 51.3 Classification of regions—This section will not apply to
lead SIPs.
—S 51.4 Public hearings—Before the State submits the plan, a
compliance schedule, or a plan revision to EPA, 1t must hold a public:
hearing on the plan, schedule or revision. The State must also give
proper public notice for the hearing at least 30 days prior to the
hearing. Although this section specifies formal requirements for the
notice and holding of public hearings, a State can obtain EPA approval
to use alternative procedures that EPA deems adequate.
--S 51.5 Submission of plans; preliminary review of plans—The
State must submit at least five copies of the plan to the appropriate
Regional Office within nine months after EPA promulgation of a primary
or secondary standard. The State can obtain from EPA an extension of
-------
18 months to submit a plan to Implement the secondary standard; this
provision 1s not applicable to lead plans, however, since the second-
ary standard and primary standard are Identical. Plans for different
AQCRs within a State can be submitted as a single document or as
separate documents.
A State can submit to EPA a plan or portions thereof for pre-
liminary review before 1t 1s due.
--§ 51.6 Revisions--EPA may ask a State to revise Its plan for
three reasons:
(a) Revisions of a national standard.
(b) The availability of Improved or more expeditious methods of
attaining the national standards.
(c) A finding by EPA that the plan 1s substantially Inadequate
to attain or maintain the national standard which 1t Imple-
ments .
After notification that a plan needs revision, the State has
60 days or any longer period specified by EPA to submit the revision.
—§ 51.7 Reports—The State must report air quality data to
EPA on a quarterly basis and must submit the data 1n a specified
format for conversion to machine-readable format.
The State must also report emissions from point sources whenever
there 1s a change 1n emissions, such as a source coming Into compliance,
a new source beginning operation, and a source ceasing operation. The
State must also submit the emissions data 1n a specified format for
conversion to machine-readable format. In addition, States must report
-------
on progress in plan enforcement and on any substantive revisions
the State makes in the plan other than to rules and regulations.
EPA intends to revise these requirements shortly; the revisions
will cover all the pollutants for which implementation plans are
needed, including lead.
2.2 SUBPART B--PLAN CONTENT AND REQUIREMENTS
--S 51.10 General requirements—A plan must provide for attain-
ment of national primary air quality standards within three years
after the date of EPA approval of the plan, although the State can
obtain a two-year extension upon EPA approval of application. A
plan must provide for attainment of national secondary air quality
standards within a reasonable time after the date of EPA approval
of the plan; this provision is inapplicable to the lead plans because
the primary and secondary lead air quality standards are Identical.
Also, the plan for one AQCR must provide that emissions from the AQCR
do not interfere with attainment and maintenance of a national standard
in another AQCR. In addition, the plan must provide for public availa-
bility of emission data from all sources, correlated with allowable emis-
sions.
—S 51.11 Legal authority—The plan must show that the State has
the legal authority to—
—adopt emission limitations;
--enforce laws, regulations, and standards, and seek injunctive
relief;
--abate emissions during an emergency episode;
-------
—prevent construction or modification of facilities that may
result in a violation of a national air quality standard;
--obtain information necessary to determine compliance;
— require source owners to install emission monitoring devices;
and
--make emission data available to the public.
If the plan contains measures for transportation and land use
controls (other than new and modified source review), the plan does
not have to demonstrate that authority for such measures exists at
the time of plan submission. In such cases, however, the plan must
contain a schedule for obtaining the legal authority.
A State may delegate authority and responsibility to a substate
entity for carrying out a plan or portion thereof if the plan demonstrates
that the substate entity has the legal authority for carrying out Its
responsibility and that the State is not relieved of the responsibility
for carrying out the plan or portion thereof 1f the substate entity
fails 1n Its reponslbHity. (S 51.55 of Subpart D, which pertains to
plans 1n AQMAs and like areas, provides an exception to this require-
ment. )
--§51.12 Control strategy; General—This section prescribes
some general requirements for developing and evaluating the control
strategy, which 1s the heart of the implementation plan. The plan
-------
must demonstrate that the control strategy 1s adequate to attain the
standard within the appropriate period and maintain 1t thereafter.
(Subpart D of the regulations, discussed below, specifies additional
maintenance requirements for some areas.)
—S 51.13 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides and participate matter.
--S 51.14 Control strategyj. Carbon monoxide., hydrocarbons.
photochemical oxldants. and nitrogen dioxide.
These two sections set forth requirements specific to the subject
pollutants and do not apply to the lead Implementation plans. The
control strategy requirements for the lead Implementation plan are
found 1n a newly-created Subpart E.
The process of developing and evaluating a control strategy for
attainment of the national standard entails the following:
—Development of an emission and air quality data base.
—Determination of whether the air quality standard 1s being
violated.
—Development of alternative control strategies.
—Evaluation of the control strategies by accounting for emission
reductions and modeling air quality concentrations.
--Choice of an appropriate strategy.
Detailed guidance for performing these tasks appears 1n EPA's
A1r Quality Analysis Workshop. Volume 1 - Manual.
C1r1llo, R.R., et al., A1r Quality Analysis Workshop. Volume 1 -
Manual. Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
A1r and Waste Management, Office of A1r Quality Planning and Stand-
ards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. November 1975.
-------
—S 51.15 Compliance schedules--The plan must contain legally
enforceable compliance schedules that set forth the dates by which
all sources must be 1n compliance with any applicable portion of the
plan. Schedules extending over a period of more than one year from
the date of adoption must provide for legally enforceable Increments
of progress toward compliance. All schedules must provide for compli-
ance by the statutory attainment date or the end of the period covered
by an extension to the attainment date or a postponement under section
110(f) of the Clean A1r Act. Revisions to compliance schedules con-
stitute revisions to the Implementation plan; enforcement orders that
extend beyond the date for attainment of the national standard must be
Issued 1n accordance with the requirements of Section 113(d) of the
Clean A1r Act.
--S 51.16 Prevention of air pollution emergency episodes--As
discussed 1n section 3.5 of the preamble to the proposed regulation, this
section will not apply to lead Implementation plans.
--S 51.17 A1r quality surveillance--These regulations pertain to
pollutants other than lead and therefore do not apply to the lead Imple-
mentation plans. The requirements for lead air quality surveillance
appear 1n a newly-created § 51.17b.
--S 51.17 A1r quality monitoring methods—This section prescribes
precedures for obtaining approval to use nonconformlng analyzers (I.e.,
those analyzers that do not use the reference or equivalent methods),
methods with nonconformlng ranges, and methods that have been modified
by users.
-------
--S 51.18 Review of.new sources and modifications—The plan must
provide legally enforceable procedures to enable the State to determine
whether the construction or modification of a facility will result in
violations of a portion of the control strategy or will interfere with
attainment or maintenance of a national standard. The State must also
have the ability and procedures to prevent construction or modification
of facilities that will result 1n control strategy violations or inter-
fere with a national standard. Before approving or disapproving requests
to construct affected facilities, the State must provide opportunity
for public notice of and comment on the action.
EPA Intends to revise these requirements shortly; the revisions
will cover all pollutants for which implementation plans are needed,
including lead.
--S 51.19 Source surveillance--The plan must provide for moni-
toring the status of compliance with any rules and regulations which
constitute the control strategy. As a minimum, the plan must provide:
--Procedures for requiring owners or operators of sources to
maintain records of emissions and report periodically to the
State;
--Periodic testing and inspection of sources;
--A system of detection of violations of rules and regulations
through enforcement of a visible emission limitation and for
investigating complaints (the provision concerning visible
emission limitations 1s inapplicable to the lead plan);
8
-------
--Procedures for obtaining and maintaining data on emissions
reductions achieved through transportation control measures; and
—Procedures to require sources to Install and use emission
monitoring devices (this provision 1s also Inapplicable to
the lead plan).
--S 51.20 Resources—The plan must provide a description of the
resources available to the State and local agencies at the time of
plan submission and of any additional resources needed to carry out
the plan during the five-year period following Its submission.
--S 51.21 Intergovernmental cooperation—The plan must pro-
vide assurances for the State to submit to other States air quality
and emission data. Also, the plan must Identify local agencies that
will participate 1n Implementing the plan and their responsibilities.
--S 51.22 Rules and regulations—The State must adopt all rules
and regulations necessary for attainment and maintenance of the national
standard. The plan must contain copies of all such rules and regula-
t1ons.
2.3 SUBPART C--EXTENSIONS.
—S 51.30 Request for two-year extension--The Governor of a
State may, at the time he submits a plan to Implement a primary stand-
ard, request EPA to extend the 3-year period for attainment of the
primary standard for a period not exceeding two years. To obtain the
-------
extension, the State must demonstrate a number of Items, particularly
that the necessary technology or alternatives will not be available
soon enough to permit full Implementation of the control strategy
within three years.
—S 51.31 Request for 18-month extension—Upon request of a
State, EPA may extend, for a period not exceeding 18 months, the
deadline for submission of a plan to implement a secondary air quality
standard. As discussed above, this provision 1s inapplicable to the
lead plans, because the primary and secondary ambient lead standards
are identical.
--S 51.32 Request for one-year postponement—The Clean A1r Act
Amendments of 1977 have rendered this section inapplicable; EPA will
amend Part 51 to reflect this.
—S 51.33 Hearings and appeals relating to request for one
year postponement—This section prescribes the procedures relating
to a request for a one year postponement under S 51.32.
--S 51.34 Variances. This section requires States to submit
variances to regulations as revisions to the plan under S 51.6.
10
-------
2.4 SUBPART D--MAINTENANCE OF NATIONAL STANDARDS
This subpart pertains to the detailed analysis to determine whether
a certain area will maintain a national air quality standard and to the
plan to maintain the standard. EPA must select the areas to which the
regulations of this subpart apply, and so the regulations do not apply
to all areas.
The subpart consists of sections 51.41 through 51.63 Inclusive.
Topics of the sections concerning the analysis are submlttal date,
analysis period, guidelines, projection and allocation of emissions,
projection of air quality concentrations, description of data sources,
data bases, description of techniques, accuracy of calculations, and
submlttal of calculations. Topics of the sections concerning the plan
are demonstration of adequacy, strategies, legal authority, Intergovern-
mental cooperation, surveillance, resources, and submlttal. Two other
sections cover both the analysis and the plan and concern data availa-
bility and the use of alternative procedures.
2.5 FORTHCOMING REGULATIONS
In addition to the above mentioned regulations, EPA will shortly
promulgate additional requirements that account for the Clean A1r Act
Amendments of 1977. The new requirements will cover the following topics:
--Provisions for review of new sources 1n nonattalnment areas (this
will not Immediately apply to lead plans).
--Additional transportation-related provisions.
—Accounting for stack heights.
—Assessing adequacy of plan 1n relation to long-term fuel supplies.
11
-------
•Prevention of significant deterioration.
-Permit requirements.
-Indirect source review.
•Delegation of authority to local governments.
•Interstate pollution abatement.
•Consultation with governmental entitles at the local and Federal
level.
-Planning procedures to allow local governments more authority
in developing and implementing plans.
•Noncompllance penalties.
-Permit fees.
-Composition of State air pollution boards.
-Provisions prohibiting loss of pay of employees at facilities
that use supplemental control systems.
•Provisions for public notification of dangers of air pollution.
-Protection of visibility 1n certain areas.
-Emergency episode reporting.
-Energy or economic emergency authority.
-Suspension of transportation control measures.
-Measures to prevent economic disruption or unemployment.
12
-------
3.0 REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
3.1 AIR QUALITY DATA
The quarterly air quality reporting requirements specified in 40
CFR 51.7(a) will apply to lead as well as the other criteria pollutants.
The air quality data for lead will be stored in the Storage and Retrieval
of Aerometric Data (SAROAD) System and utilized by EPA, States, and
private individuals.
3.1.1 SAROAD System
The SAROAD System includes several data files which include the site
file, the parameter-method file, geographical files, raw data files, and
the summary file as well as the software necessary to update these files
and generate reports from the data.
The site file contains a listing of all sites reporting data and
includes a description of the physical characteristics of the site. Each
site is assigned a unique code and this code must be attached to data to
identify the sampling site. Only data with a valid site code will be
accepted on the data bank.
The parameter-method file contains an entry for each valid combina-
tion of sampling and analysis method for each pollutant. Only data with
a valid entry will be accepted on the data bank. The code '92' has been
assigned for lead data collected by H1-Vol and analyzed by atomic absorp-
tion. Additional codes may be requested through the Regional Offices.
The geographic files contain the specific SAROAD codes and the
corresponding names and are utilized to print location names on standard
reports.
13
-------
The raw data files contain 80-90 million Individual data values for
the time period of 1957-present as collected and reported by EPA, State,
and local control agencies. These data are available upon request 1n
standard raw data listings and are utilized by programs to generate
summary statistics.
The summary file contains quarterly and annual summary statistics
which Include frequency distributions, arithmetic and geometric means
and standard deviations, first and second maxlmums, violation counts,
etc. These summary statistics are available in standard reports.
3.1.2 Reporting Formats
The standardized Input formats which will be utilized to report lead
data Include: Figure 3.1-1 SAROAD Site Identification Form, Figure 3.1-2
SAROAD Daily Data Form, and Figure 3.1-3 SAROAD Composite Data Form.
The Site Identification Form 1s utilized to register a new site or
change information for an existing site. The coding Instructions are
given 1n Section 3.4.1 of AEROS User's Manual.1
The Dally Data Form 1s utilized to report air quality concentrations
for lead as determined from individual 24-hour Integrated samples. The
coding Instructions are given in Section 3.4.3 of AEROS User's Manual.
The Composite Data Form is utilized to report data values which
are composites of Individual 24-hour Integrated samples. For lead, these
composites could be done on a calendar month to reduce the resources
required to analyze Individual samples. The coding instructions are
given in Section 3.4.4 of AEROS User's Manual.
14
-------
Figure 3.1-1
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
THE REPORT IS REQUIRED BY LAW Research Triangle Park. N. C. 27711
42 USC 1857; 40 CFR 51 _ ^.« .. ... ... . ,
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE REPORTING AGENCY
(A)
State Project
•l4-*>' City Name (23 characters)
'"-»" County Name (15 characters)
City Population (right justified)
tl 13 54 Si i« 51 M M
Longitude Latitude
Deg. Mm. Sec. Deg. Mm. Sec.
0 0 W [_. Nl 1 L
•0 tl 6? 63 64 «•> »6 «' 64 S» >0 ;i /; 1) 14 "i ;•
UTM Zone Easting Coord., meters Northing Coord., meters
1 1 1
60 (t f 6) <4 64 « 6' •• «1 ro /I 'J »3 '4 ;i ><
"••"l Supporting Agency (61 characters')
Supporting Agency, continued
in
>•«•'•' Optional Comments that will help identify
the sampling site (132 characters)
mi
(14-791
No-,!
J Revised 1 1
DO NOT WRITE HERE
State Area Site
A
_L
Agency Project
n u u
Time
Region Zone t
B
1
Agenc
n
c
State A
I"1 »-•'
y Project
tction
D
HI
rea Si
te
SMSA Act 101
1- 1] 14 IS H l»
State Area Si
_
1 J ) 4 »
Agency Pro ect
1 1
D
1} U
6 ' >
Action
to
State Area
1 3 4 i
Agency Project
n m
II IJ U
10
le
Site
1 > • • 10
Action
D
(0
State Area Site
(El
E
iM-jii Abbreviated Site Address (25 ch-iracters) A '
Agenc
OMB No. 168-R0012 d
y Project
1
Action
D
Approval txpira 2/77.
15
-------
Figure 3.1-1 (cont'd)
SAROAO Site Identification Form (continued)
TO BE COMPLETED BY THE REPORTING AGENCY
DO NOT WRITE HERE
(F).
Sampling Site Address (41 characters)
Check the ONE
major category that
best describes the
location ol the
sampling site.
1. CD CENTER CITY
2. CD SUBURBAN
3,0 RURAL
4O REMOTE
Specify
units
Address, continued
Nexl. check the subcategory
that best describes the dorm
natmy influence on the sampler
within approximately a 1-rmlr
radius ol the sampling site
1 lndustri.ll
? Residential
3. Commercial
4. Mobile
1. Industrial
2 Residential
3. Commercial
4. Mobile
1 Near urban
2. Agricultural
3. Commercial
4. Industrial
5. None of the above
Elevation of sampler above ground
Specify
units _
State
Area
Site
I I [
1 ] 3 ^4 5""
I 1.1.1..1
"I »To"
Agency
n
Project
tzn
Station Type
County Code
AOCR Number
AOCR Population
u n »e er •> 09 m n
Elevation/Gr
Elevation'MSL
Action
Elevation of sampler above mean sea level
Circle pertinent lime zone EASTERN CENTRAL
MOUNTAIN PACIFIC YUKON ALASKA BERING
HAWAII
16
-------
Figure 3.1-2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
National Aerometric Data Bank
Research Triangle Park. N. C. 27711
SARQAD Daily Data Form
24-hour or greater sampling interval
THE REPORT IS REQUIRED BY LAW
42^USC 1857; 40 CFR 51
Agency
State
OMB No. 158-R0012
Approval expires 2/77.
Area Site
City Name
Site Address
Agency Project Time Year Month
Project
Name
PARAMETER
Code
Day
19 .Hi
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
/
8
9
0
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
B
9
U
1
2
3
4
5
8
7
B
9
0
1
St Hr
21 :i
I
JJ 24 ;
Method
•a
5 ;o 3
Units
2P 1"
3J J4 1
7
ji
t J6
1
-
DP
w
Time Interval
Name
PARAMETER
Code
j; is jo .10 41
Method Units
.1!
4J
47
4
»
a.*
4
4
1
•i
>,
DP
n
40
U
II
LU L
12 13 1
Name
PARAMETER
Code
1
X V -,3 VI
Method Unit
5«
L
15
3
'>' 10 •
61 6 .' 63
9
64
J
DP
n
60
J
1
1
15 IB 1
Na
PARAfl
Cc
1
ne
/IET
)de
ER
JJ
7 18
66 67 68 (59
Method Units
71
71 72 73
75 78 77 78
DP
H
74
4 ) i i o
43210
4 i 1 I 0
17
-------
* S J f
«•» * 0 r-
*s I
o
UJ
K
I"
o oc
UJ ^
CC(j
SS
CO
I
CO
* 8
a f
£ K
B
ft
k
"l
i g
> il
J ,.
>- u.
• x\
„ Ull
1 O
* <
UJ
h-
i/i
ut
.. J
! -
s
±u
3
~1
—
- '
—
— —
"
j
n Q. U
s aSqa
- iP"
U H
U.
O trt
U p1 i -.
S _J j 1 r3
MlQ2
m 2 "'
o>
•° ? 1 1 —
»n ui 1 |r^
a 1— J"
4
« ?L3?
«
O m
U '
y
3
j
>!
{£
w
* i
«o
a >
rs
> 7
SCSI
O J J J _
- s J § -«
* 1 !
18
-------
3.1.3 Coding Procedures
The coding procedures for each form will not be discussed in detail
since the appropriate sections of AEROS User's Manual were referenced
above. In addition to the AEROS User's Manual, the AEROS Manual of Codes2
is required as a reference to code the data.
The following additional rules will help to reduce the errors iden-
tified by standard edit checks:
(1) Utilize the correct standard format to submit data.
(2) Utilize the complete 12-digit site code which was assigned
by the Regional Office or the National Air Data Branch.
(3) Utilize only valid combinations of pollutant-method-interval
unit codes.
(4) Code missing values as blanks and values below the minimum
detectable for the sampling-analysis method as '0000'.
3.1.4 Data Flow
The lead air quality data are submitted with other air quality data
in SAROAD standard input formats in the quarterly report. The complete
data flow including specific data processing steps and example edit
error messages is discussed in Section 7.0.0 of AEROS User's Manual.
After the data have been updated, they are available for retrieval
from the data bank through routine reports which are documents in Section
2.3.0.0 of Summary and Retrieval Manual.
19
-------
3.1.5 References for Section 3.1
1. AEROS Manual Series Volume II: AEROS User's Manual, EPA-450/2-
76-029, USEPA, OAQPS.
2. AEROS Manual Series Volume V: AEROS Manual of Codes, EPA-450^2-
76-005, April, 1976, USEPA, OAQPS.
3. AEROS Manual Series Volume III: Summary and Retrieval, EPA-450/2-
76-009, May, 1976, USEPA, OAQPS.
20
-------
3.2 EMISSIONS DATA REPORTING
Under Subpart E to 40 CFR Part 51, the States will be required to
submit a complete Initial emissions Inventory which Includes lead point
source and area source data. Since the National Emissions Data System
(NEDS) was developed for partlculate, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides, the Hazardous and Trace Emissions
Systems (HATREMS) has been developed to calculate and store emissions
data for lead as well as other possible future criteria pollutants and
non-criteria pollutants. HATREMS will also be the system to accept
and store data produced to meet the periodic emission reporting require-
ments.
3.2.1 HATREMS System
To minimize lead emissions data collection and reporting require-
ments, HATREMS utilizes existing NEDS data to calculate and store lead
data. Since HATREMS utilizes NEDS data, the identifiers from NEDS
which Include state, county, AQCR, plant, point, and source classification
code (SCC) are utilized by HATREMS. In addition to utilizing NEDS point
and area source data, HATREMS Includes update and report programs as
well as the following files: (1) point source emission factor file,
(2) area source emission factor file, (3) point source emissions data
file, and (4) area source emissions data file.
The point source emission factor file contains an entry for each
valid SCC which emits lead. Each entry contains the following:
(1) Emission factor - emission rate of lead per unit process.
21
-------
(2) Default multiplier - average lead content 1n the process
material. This parameter 1s utilized the same way sulfur
content is utilized to calculate S02 emissions.
(3) Default multiplier units - units in which the lead content is
expressed (% or ppm).
(4) Control efficiency multiplier - the % of the NEDS control
efficiency which 1s applied to lead emission.
(5) Pollutant flag - Indicates the NEDS pollutant control efficiency
to utilize. For lead, the particulate control efficiency
will be utilized and the control efficiency multiplier will
be 100.
The area source emission factor file contains an entry for each
valid area source category (ASC) which emits lead; each entry contains
an emission factor, a default multiplier, and the default multiplier
units. These parameters are the same as the corresponding parameters in
the point source emission factor file.
The point source emissions data file contains the emissions data
for individual processes within plants. This file is routinely recreated
by combining operating rates and control efficiencies from NEDS with
emission factors from the point source emission factor file utilizing
the following formula:
Y
100-W
M = OR x EF x DM x 100 (1)
2000
22
-------
where:
M = emissions 1n T/Y
OR = operating rate from NEDS
EF = emission factor from HATREMS point source emission factor file
DM = default multiplier from HATREMS point source emission factor
file
W = NEDS control efficiency for the pollutant flagged
Y = control efficiency multiplier from the HATREMS point source
emission factor file.
As mentioned previously, the HATREMS point source emissions data
file 1s routinely updated from NEDS data utilizing formula 1. Point
source data are also manually updated as described 1n the following sec-
tions. Once a data record has been manually updated, data from NEDS will
not override 1t.
The area source emissions data file contains the emissions data for
each ASC for each county. This file 1s rountlnely recreated by combining
area source rates from NEDS with emission factors from the area source
emission factor file utilizing the following formula:
M = SR x EF x DM
2000 (2)
where:
M = emissions 1n T/Y
SR = area source rate for Individual counties
23
-------
EF = emission factor from HATREMS area source emission factor file
DM = default multiplier from HATREMS area source emission factor
file.
As mentioned previously, the HATREMS area source emissions data file 1s
routinely updated from NEDS utilizing formula 2. Area source data are
also manually updated as described in the following sections. Once a
data record has been manually updated, data from NEDS will not override
1t.
Table 3.2-1 lists the data Items which are utilized from NEDS as
well as the data Items which are stored 1n HATREMS. The data Items which
are utilized from NEDS can also be updated and stored 1n HATREMS utilizing
the Input forms which are described below.
3.2.2 HATREMS Reporting Formats
To insure that the volume of data can be automatically processed,
HATREMS utilizes standarlzed Input formats. Since HATREMS utilizes NEDS
data, the Input formats include Figure 3.2-1, NEDS Point Source Form, and
Figure 3.2-2, NEDS Area Source Form, as well as Figure 3.2-3, HATREMS
Point Source Form, and Figure 3.2-4, HATREMS Area Source Form. The NEDS
point and area source forms have been utilized for several years and
will not be discussed further.
The HATREMS point source form is utilized to manually update HATREMS
with data which are not available from NEDS. The form defines six
unique card formats for data coding. The first two cards are Identical
to the first two for NEDS except the card code. The other cards (3P,
4P, 5P, and 6P) allow inputting data to HATREMS which are specific to
24
-------
Table 3.2-1: EMISSION INVENTORY DATA FOR USE
IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF Pb CONTROL STRATEGIES
System 1n
Which Data
Will be Stored
GENERAL SOURCE INFORMATION
A. Establishment name and location (address and Unlver- NEDS
sal Transverse Mercator grid coordinates)
B. Person to contact on air pollution matters NEDS
C. Source Classification Code (SCC) NEDS
D. Operating Schedule NEDS
1. hours/day
2. days/week
3. week/year
E. Year 1n which data are recorded NEDS
F. Future activities (% Increase 1n production or through- HATREMS
put 1n 10 and 20 years)
II. FUEL COMBUSTION
A. Number of boilers NEDS
B. Type of fuel burning equipment for each boiler NEDS
C. Rated capacity of each boiler, BTU/hr NEDS
D. Types of fuel burned, quantities and characteristics
1. Type of each fuel used NEDS
2. Maximum quantity per hour NEDS
3. Average quantity per hour HATREMS
4. Quantity per year NEDS
5. Lead content of throughput HATREMS
6. Heat content of fuel NEDS
E. Percent used for space heating and process heat NEDS
F. A1r Pollution control equipment
1. Type NEDS
2. Pb collection efficiency (actual), % HATREMS
25
-------
Table 3.2-1 (cont'd)
System in
Which Data
W111 be Stored
G. Stack data
1. List stacks by boilers served NEDS
2. Stack height, ft. NEDS
3. Stack diameter (Inside, top), ft. NEDS
4. Exit gas temperature, °F NEDS
5. Exit gas volume, cfm NEDS
H. Emission data
1. Estimate of Pb emissions (tons/year) HATREMS
2. Results of any stack tests conducted (tons/year) HATREMS
III. MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES
A. Process name or description for each product NEDS
B. 1. Quantity of raw materials used and handled for each NEDS
product or quantity of each product manufactured,
maximum quantity per hour and average quantity per
year.
2. Pb content (% by weight) for ore crushing and HATREMS
grinding.
C. A1r pollution control equipment 1n use
1. Type NEDS
2. Pb collection efficiency (actual), % HATREMS
D. Stack data
1. List stacks by equipment served NEDS
2. Stack height, ft. NEDS
3. Stack diameter (Inside, top), ft. NEDS
4. Exit gas temperature, °F NEDS
5. Exit gas volume, cfm NEDS
E. Emission data
1. Estimate of Pb emissions by the source HATREMS
2. Results of any stack tests conducted HATREMS
IV. REFUSE DISPOSAL
A. Amount and description of refuse generated, quantity NEDS
per year
B. Percent of total that 1s combustible NEDS
26
-------
Table 3.2-1 (cont'd)
C. Method of disposal
D. Description of on-slte disposal method, 1f applicable
1. Type of Incinerator
2. Auxiliary fuel used
3. A1r pollution control equipment
a. Type
b. Pb collection efficiency (design), %
4. Emission data
a. Estimate of Pb emissions by the source
b. Results of any stack tests conducted
E. Waste oil combustion tnew SCC)
1. Amount burned (10 gal)
2. Pb content (% by wt)
3. Estimated Pb emissions
System in
Which Data
Will be Stored
NEDS
NEDS
NEDS
NEDS
HATREMS
HATREMS
HATREMS
NEDS
HATREMS
HATREMS
V. AREA SOURCES
A. Gasoline combustion 3
1. Amount consumed (10 gal)
2. Pb content (gPb/gal)
3. Estimated Pb emissions
B. Coal combustion 3
1. Amount consumed (10 tons)
2. Pb content (ppm by weight)
3. Estimated Pb emissions
C. 011 combustion 3
1. Amount consumed (10 gal)
2. Pb content (% by wt.)
3. Estimated Pb emission
D. Solid waste incineration
1. Amount burned (10 tons)
2. Estimated Pb emissions
NEDS
HATREMS
HATREMS
NEDS
HATREMS
HATREMS
NEDS
HATREMS
HATREMS
NEDS
HATREMS
27
-------
-------
3*3"
SifigSKtfe*'^
f 3 ~~^~-~-.
if
Hi
ii
CM
CM
•
m
t
J? s!
I
i
Wlp
L
Oil
FUC
*
Res
10«
ag
s*
3!
U .
iw O
5 S
Ss
II
I-
2s
s= «
S °S
ji
uoipy
•i -^
*3
it «,-
£9 £
S5 S
!Ei^
«s
< ^ a
K A S
LU « —
fit
5?
LH
uotpv
rban Roads
]ff< Miles
LE S
Sutwfcw Re
D4 Miles
MILES
s~:
O -S
li?
*?
inted Access Road
I0« Miles
EV
n( Ri
IMS
K -
|3
31
5*
u^
uoipvl
HOIPV
29
-------
^ 3
~ ;S
" '8;
e
O)
OLJ
<5
oo
I1
|s
?!
I
COUNTY
S
r>
IM
-
2
»
«
K
0
0
V
ft
IV
-
I
•£+-
_aL.
dp
LSJ_J
lip
$ '
SMI i
,Hlr!—-4
,1 K| ™ f
PI
ft::~
t.g4-
)"•»"
ujs.
= ffc
£ t-P-_
I »-SJ—
c ' IL_
'' r »^
'FS
'i-ff-H
ll-j "
-tl]~l £
I u^l_'d
" Sll -I •
|2lM*1 *S |_JX p^a;"^"" |«
'gl~B| !S?rrwr-l-^L' is
^S-^t-i-r— ria=l-
s shth-i II? -!
Klirz
TP^
"SM
OOHJ.3KJ
iTt;'
tl-fj—
- C V; v— - v
o jJ"1"1! ' - T~""~j * ^ "."",;
o E •, _^i „« - ;
aS;c'r-' ",V-.
•-il.
i—1
"i^4p
"E~-|l i
So -r-l 1
O IM
K 0
« 0
NOU3V
COMMENTS
J?S?|X
1°
. fl.
o
o»
£
P
g
a.
«
£ 1
"
_r-
?J
^
fe
(9
£
8
5
4
a
O
40
S
fe
3
S
2
S
?
•
1
g
$
^
y
^
0
V
•
8
fj
?l
P
H
^
o
a
i?
t:
«
i5
4-
-^L
^
N
o
*
0
t*.
*
V
Ss
88?
*i*
•- o<
-------
CM
•
CO
I
O)
o
I/I
<
s
6
m
CD
n ^~
ifl to
1 ;H
f- o
(^
~"
o
<7>
co
o "•
r- uj
lln
•Ow
10
w
O
en
00
ot
T^
^E
2
N
—
0
5!
00
ot
in ^o
1 3=i
t v
to
(M
—
d
W
O
51
CO
0^
(\J ^o
1?)
- —'
S'l
J«£
£
o
§
J
^g
e
a ai
= "8
•5 u
<2
"HV
8DDV
1(40003
•4D4C
<
—
<
-
.
•
.
.
•J
J
-
•
.
•
.
.
•
•
-
.
-
-
.
J
;
J
-
.
-
-
-
.
-
;
-
.
-
.
•
.
•
-
-
;
•
•
.
•
.
-
-
•
-
•
;
-
j
-
-
••
«
^
•
.
•
.
-
•
-
.
i
;
•
-
•
.
-
-
-
•
.
.
.
-
•
•
-
-
•
-
-
•
.
•
.
-
m
•
•
•
•
•
-
.
•
•
•
•
•
•
m
•
31
-------
lead. Multiple cards 4P, 5P, and 6P are for multiple processes per point,
multiple pollutants other than lead per process, and multiple comments at
the point, process, and pollutant level.
The HATREMS area source form Is utilized to supplement NEDS area source
data. The form describes only one card which may be Input for each area
source category pollutant combination per county which 1s reported.
3.2.3 Coding Procedures
To Insure that the data are correctly coded, the coding procedures for
NEDS and HATREMS which appear 1n AEROS Users Manual1 should be utilized.
Codes which are necessary to complete the forms are located 1n AEROS Manual
of Codes.2
Table 3.2-1 lists the data Items which must be collected. Since
HATREMS utilizes NEDS for specific data Items, sources of lead must be
coded and updated 1n NEDS as well as HATREMS. Since NEDS coding procedures
have been utilized for several years, no further discussion will be given.
The control agency must Insure that the NEDS data are correctly coded
because they will be utilized by HATREMS.
The coding procedures for the HATREMS point source form are given 1n
Section 3.6.1 of AEROS User's Manual. These Instructions are general for
all HATREMS coding, and the following additional Instructions should also
be followed for lead:
(1) Since HATREMS utilizes NEDS data and a NEDS form must be submitted
for each lead source, cards IP and 2P are not required for lead sources 1n
NEDS. Card 3P 1s not required unless a third control device exists. In
order for HATREMS to utilize NEDS data, the HATREM's Identifier (state,
county, plant, point, SCC) must be the same as the NEDS Identifier.
32
-------
(2) All Individual data Items on cards 4P and 5P must be manually
updated. When any data on 4P or 5P are updated, the remaining data for
cards 1P-5P of that point are transfered from NEDS to HATREMS. After these
data are transfered from NEDS, all future updates for that point must be
manually Input utilizing the HATREMS point source form.
The coding procedures for the HATREMS area source form are given 1n
Section 3.6.2 of AEROS User's Manual. These Instructions are general for
all HATREMS coding and apply for lead data.
3.2.4 Data Flow
As discussed 1n Section 3.2.1, the HATREMS point and area source data
files are created from the NEDS point and area source data. The States
will be provided this Initial emission Inventory and will be required to
utilize the coding procedures from Section 3.2.3 to compile the lead Inven-
tory for SIP development and for reporting to EPA. The data flow for the
lead emissions data 1s presented 1n Figure 3.2-5.
The States will be provided with the following reports to assist
them 1n compiling an emissions Inventory for lead: (1) HATREMS point
source report for lead point sources from the NEDS data base, (2) HATREMS
emission summary report for lead point and area sources from the NEDS
data bases, and (3) a plant name report for all plants 1n NEDS. The
State should Initially review the point source and emission summary
reports to ensure that all sources are Included. If a known lead source
1s missing, the plant name report should be reviewed to determine 1f 1t
1s 1n NEDS. The source could be 1n NEDS but missing from HATREMS 1f the
source classification code 1s Incorrect or 1f the source classification
code 1s not 1n the HATREMS point source emission factor file.
33
-------
CM
j£
o
I
V)
-------
The States must complete NEDS and HATREMS coding forms to update
the emission Inventory to a common base year which will be utilized 1n
the strategy development. The NEDS forms must be completed to update
existing sources, add new sources of lead, and update all data to a
common base year. The HATREMS forms must be completed to supply data
which can not be stored 1n NEDS.
The NEDS and HATREMS forms or computer readable format will be sub-
mitted to the appropriate Regional Office. The NEDS data will be rountlnely
processed utilizing the procedures defined 1n AEROS Users' Manual. These
data will be updated on the standard monthly update schedule. The HATREMS
data will be converted to computer readable format and forwarded to the
National A1r Data Bank. These data will be updated to HATREMS on a
standard schedule.
The HATREMS report programs will be provided to the Regional Office
NEDS contact to provide data requests to States as well as the other user
community. New report programs will be developed as requested by the user
and Identified as being useful.
35
-------
3.2.5 References for Section 3.2
1. AEROS Manual Series, Volume II: AEROS Users' Manual, EPA-450/2-76-029,
December 1976, USEPA, OAQPS.
2. AEROS Manual Series, Volume V: AEROS Manual of Codes, EPA-450/2-76-
005, April 1976, USEPA, OAQPS.
3. AEROS Manual Series, Volume III: Summary and Retrieval, EPA-450/2-76-
009, May 1976, USEPA, OAQPS.
4. Development of HATREMS Data Base and Emission Inventory Evaluation,
EPA-450/3-77-011, April, 1977, USEPA, OAQPS.
36
-------
4.0 ANALYSIS AND CONTROL STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
As Indicated above in section 2.2, detailed guidance on the process
of analysis and control strategy development appears 1n EPA's A1r Quality
Analysis Workshop. Volume 1 - Manual.
4.1 BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS
Natural concentrations of lead 1n the air have been estimated
3 2
to be about 0.0006 j-ig/m ! resulting mainly from airborne dust con-
3 4
talnlng 10 to 15 ppm of lead. Chow, et a!., have recommended that
3
0.008 fKj/m be considered as the baseline concentration for atmospheric
lead for the continental United States. Most areas, however, will
experience greater concentrations that cannot be accounted for by
sources 1n the Immediate vicinity or by natural background. The
majority of these concentrations not accounted for by nearby sources
or background can probably be attributed to airborne lead transported
from sources outside the study area 1n question. Therefore, a plan
to control emissions 1n the study area will not reduce the concen-
trations due to the outside sources. To account for the phenomenon of
transport of lead partlculate matter from outside the study area,
C1r1llo, R.R., et al., A1r Quality Analysis Workshop, Volume 1-Manual.
Prepared for the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of A1r and
Waste Management, Office of A1r Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. November 1975.
2
Patterson, C.C., Contaminated and Natural Lead Environments of Man.
Archives of Environmental Health. 11: 334-363, 1965.
Chow, T.J., and C.C. Patterson. The Occurrence and Significance of
Lead Isotopes 1n Pelagic Sediments. Geochlm. Cosmochlm. Act. (London)
26: 263-308. 1962.
4 :
Chow, T.J., et al. Lead Aerosol Baseline: Concentration at White
Mountain and Lagulna Mountain, California. Science 178: 401-402.
October 1972.
37
-------
States should assume a "background" equal to the levels of airborne
lead 1n a representative nonurban area that 1s not significantly Influ-
enced by stationary or mobile lead sources.
For the purposes of SIP development, States may account for the
future reduction of background lead concentrations that may result
from the federal programs for the reduction of lead 1n gasoline, the
prohibition of the use of leaded gasoline 1n catalyst-equipped vehicles,
and reduced gasoline consumption 1n vehicles 1n future years.
States should discuss their choice of background lead concentra-
tions with cognizant persons 1n the appropriate EPA Regional Offices.
4.2 LEAD EMISSION FACTORS
In performing the analysis to determine whether an area needs
a control strategy to attain and maintain the national air quality
standard for lead, a State will have to compile an Inventory of lead
emission sources and the quantity of emissions produced by each source.
Emission factors that relate source activity to the quantity of emis-
sions appear 1n EPA's Control Techniques for Lead A1r Emissions.
Control Techniques for Lead A1r Emissions. U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Office of A1r Quality Planning and Standards, Research
Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, November 1977.
38
-------
4.3 PROJECTING AUTOMOTIVE LEAD EMISSIONS
Lead emissions from mobile sources are calculated based on emis-
sions at different vehicle speeds, the lead content of gasoline, and
an average fleet fuel economy. The lead content of gasoline and fuel
economy are a function of the calendar year of Interest. The background
for the computation procedure presented below appears 1n Appendix B
of this guideline. Appendix B also presents lead emission rates for
seven example roadway configurations.
4.3.1 Lead Emissions from Automobiles
The emission rate from automotive sources 1s calculated by the
following equation:
where: e_ = emission rate for calendar year n and speed s (g/veh1cle-
n ,s
mile/day);
a = percentage of lead burned that 1s exhausted; available
from Figure 4.3-1 (nondlmenslonal; expressed as a decimal);
for roadway portions subject to full-throttle acceleration
(0-60 mph), assume a = 10.0;
5
Pb = probable pooled average lead content of gasoline 1n year
n from Table 4.3-1 (g/gal);
T = average dally traffic (vehicles/day);
f« c = average fleet fuel economy for calendar year n and speed
n ,s
s; calculation described below (ml./gal/veh1cle).
To calculate the emission rate 1n units of grams/meter/second, e can
n ,s
o
be corrected by dividing by 1.39 x 10 .
39
-------
For calculation of automotive emissions as area sources rather
than specific line sources, use f = average fleet fuel economy from
n jS
Table 4.3-2. The fuel economies for calendar years not shown 1n Table
4.3-2 can be determined using a straight line interpolation. For
automotive emissions from specific line sources (roadway configurations),
f_ . is calculated by the following equation; the calculation is based
n ,s
on a base year of 1974:
fn,s '
- 1974 1
<"
jS P f\ p- n
I*'"' "* /\/~nr L« jt • mj _J
s 1967 L s,1 c,1 1
L E,, J
Enct
(2)
where: Ce * - speed-dependent fuel economy correction factor for model
s ,i
year 1; calculation 1s described below 1n equation (3)
(nondlmenslonal);
E j = city/highway combined fuel economy for model year 1 from
c ,i
Table 4.3-3 (ml./gal./vehicle);
m, = fraction of annual travel by model year 1 vehicles from
Table 4.3-4; assume 1974 model year vehicles are one year
old, 1973 model year vehicles are two years old, etc.
(nondlmenslonal);
E74 = base year (1974) fuel economy from Table 4.3-2 (m1./gal./
vehicle);
E = average fleet fuel economy for projection year n from Table
4.3-2 (ml./gal./vehicle);
40
-------
C = traffic flow correction factor; Ct = 1.2297 for free-flow
traffic; Ct = 0.866 for city (stop-and-go) traffic (non-
dimensional).
C H, the nondlmenslonal speed-dependent fuel economy correction factor
5,1
for model year 1, 1s calculated by the following equation:
C j = ^ A. SJ (3)
s'1 j=0 J
where: A = correction factors from Table 4.3-5;
S = vehicle speed (miles/hour). [Note: S = 1.]
4.3.2 Lead Emissions from Other Gasoline Powered Vehicles
Motorcycles and dlesel-powered vehicles are assumed to emit quantities
of lead that are Insignificant compared to other gasoline-powered vehicles.
There are no known measurements of lead emissions from either 11ght-
or heavy-duty trucks. Therefore, for purposes of calculating emissions, the
percentage of lead burned that 1s exhausted from these vehicles at various
speeds 1s assumed to be the same as that for automobiles (Figure 4.3-1).
Light-duty gasoline-powered trucks are assumed to have the same gaso-
line economy as automobiles; new light-duty trucks are assumed to require the
use of non-leaded gasoline to meet emissions standards for CO and hydro-
carbons through the use of catalysts. Therefore, the emission rate for
light-duty gasoline-powered trucks 1s calculated using the same procedures
and parameters as for automobiles.
41
-------
Heavy duty gasoline-powered trucks are assumed to burn leaded gasoline
for all future years. Also, their fuel economy 1s different from that of
light duty trucks. Therefore, the emission rate for heavy-duty gasoline-
powered trucks 1s calculated by equation 1, but the following parameters
are modified:
Pb = probable lead content of leaded gasoline 1n year n from
Table 4.3-6.
f = average fleet fuel economy in calendar year r\ s 5.7 miles/gal
(taken from Kennedy, G.J. , et al. Exhaust Emissions from
Heavy-Duty Trucks Testing on a Road Course and by Dynamometer.
Society of Automotive Engineers, Automobile Engineering Meeting,
Detroit, M1ch., October 13-17, 1975).
42
-------
4.3.3 Example Calculation of Automobile Lead Emissions
Problem: For a city street with a speed of 16 miles per hour and
average dally traffic of 28,000 vehicles, calculate the lead emission rate
for the year 1983.
Solution: We use Equation (1):
e83,16 = a!6Pb83T
r 83,16
(1A)
From Figure 4.3-1, for a cruise speed of 16 mph, we find that approxi-
mately 10.5 percent of the lead being burned 1s emitted. Therefore, a,g =
0.105.
From Table 4.3-1, we find that Pbg3» the probable pooled average
lead content for 1983, 1s estimated to be 0.25 g/gal.
We are given the average dally traffic, T, as 28,000 vehicles/day.
We must now calculate the average fleet fuel economy for 1983 by using
Equation 2:
L4
F83,16
1'
I967 Cc16.1Ec.1m13
E83Ct
E74
(2A)
To do this, however, we must first calculate C,g , ,the speed-dependent
fuel economy correction factor for model years 1967 through 1974 using
Equation (3):
(3A)
43
-------
The A. coefficients appear 1n Table 4.3-5. Table 4.3-7 presents the
results of that calculation. That table also presents the values for
EC .j from Table 4.3-3 and m^ from Table 4.3-4 for each model year,
together with the product of these three factors and the sum of the
products. As Table 4.3-7 Indicates,
J974
1^967 Cl6,1Ec,1m1 = 11'45-
The factors E74 and Eg3 from Equation (2A) are found 1n Table 4.3-2;
E74 = 12.4 ml./gal./vehicle and EQ3 = 19.1 ml./gal./vehicle. Since
the roadway 1s a city street, the traffic flow correction factor C. =
0.866. Substituting this Information Into Equation (2A), we obtain:
cn ic • 11-25 x 19.1 x 0.866
83,16
- 15.3 ml. /gal. /vehicle.
Substituting the above results Into equation (1A), we obtain:
25 g/gal x 28 x IP3 ve
15.3 1 miles/gal /vehicle
= 0.105 x 0.25 g/gal x 28 x IP3 vehicles/day
= 48.0 g/m1le/day.
In units of g/m/sec, this becomes
48.0 _7
= 3.45 x 10 7 g/m/sec.
R
1.39 x 10°
44
-------
Figure 4.3-1
90
80-
70r
Percentage of Rtirned Lead Exhausted
vs. Vehicle Cruise Speed
50-
CO
o 40-
01
30
20
10
"10"
I
30
20 30 40 50
VEHICLF CRIMSt Sf'Ltn (MILES/HOIIP)
60
70
45
-------
TABLE 4.3-1
PROBABLE POOLED AVERAGE
LEAD CONTENT OF GASOLINE
(grams/gal)
Year Lead Content
1974 2.0
1975 1.7
1976 1.4
1977 1.0
1978 0.8
1979 0.5
1980 0.5
1981 0.5
1982 0.34
1983 0.25
1984 0.19
1985 0.15
1986 0.13
1987 0.11
1988 0.09
1989 0.08
1990 0.05
46
-------
TABLE 4.3-2
AVERAGE FLEET FUEL ECONOMY
(miles/gallon)
Calendar Year Fuel Economy
1974 12.4
1977 13.3
1978 14.0
1979 14.8
1980 15.7
1981 16.8
1983 19.1
1985 21.7
1990 26.2
1995 27.4
Ref: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, A Report on Automotive
Fuel Economy, Washington, D.C., February, 1974.
Ref:2 15 USC 2002, enacted December 22, 1975.
47
-------
TABLE 4.3-3
CITY/HIGHWAY COMBINED FUEL ECONOMY
(miles/gallon)
Model Year Fuel Economy
1974 15.15
1973 14.89
1972 15.20
1971 15.24
1970 15.42
1969 15.47
1968 15.60
1967 16.15
48
-------
TABLE 4.3-4
FRACTION OF ANNUAL LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE
TRAVEL BY MODEL YEAR
Age
Years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
>8
Fraction of
Annual Travel
.112
.143
.130
.121
.108
.094
.079
.213
Ref: AP-42, Supplement 5
49
-------
TABLE 4.3-5
FUEL ECONOMY CORRECTION FACTORS BY MODEL YEAR
(NORMALIZED TO 32.7 MILES/HOUR)
Model Year
An
_AL
Pre-controlled 2.4697E-2 7.55258E-2
1968 1.75941E-2 6.90954E-2
1969 3.43032E-3 7.24956E-2
1970 6.00124E-3 6.90443E-2
1971 9.76255E-3 6.84494E-2
1972 8.57745E-2 7.0882E-2
1973-74 6.29988E-2 5.96559E-2
-2.42452E-3 4.01469E-5
-2.01359E-3 3.19426E-5
-2.18976E-3 3.54015E-5
-1.98463E-3 3.13931E-5
-1.96781E-3 3.13719E-5
-2.15219E-3 3.57324E-5
-1.59874E-3 2.59441E-5
-2.68893E-7
-2.12343E-7
-2.36485E-7
-2.09286E-7
-2.11167E-7
-2.44316E-7
-1.84877E-7
Ref: AP-42, Supplement 8
Fuel Econorny Correction Factor = Ag+
where S = vehicle speed
+A3S
50
-------
TABLE 4.3-6
PROBABLE LEAD CONTENT OF LEADED GASOLINE*
(grams/gal)
Year
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981 and beyond
Lead Content
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.2
1.6
2.0
*Source: Appendix B of this Guideline, Table 5, p. B-18.
51
-------
TABLE 4.3-7
1974
CALCULATION OF 1 =H967 Cl6,1Ec,1m1
Model Year
pre-1968
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
Fuel Econoniy
Speed Correction
Factors
C16,1
0.759
0.725
0.732
0.718
0.716
0.799
0.702
0.702
City/Highway
Combined Fuel
Econonry
Ec,1
16.15
15.60
15.47
15.42
15.24
15.20
15.89
15.15
FOR EXAMPLE CALCULATION
Fraction of
Annual LDV
Travel by
Model Year
m1
0.213
0.079
0.094
0.108
0.121
0.130
0.143
0.112
1974 Fuel
Economy
at 16 mph
Cl6Ec,,1m1
2.61
0.893
1.06
1.20
1.32
1.58
1.60
1.19
= 11.45
52
-------
5.0 SITING OF URBAN AREA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORS FOR LEAD
This section provides information on the procedures for locating
urban ambient air quality monitors for lead. To monitor in support of
the implementation plans, the State must install two types of monitoring
sites as part of the monitoring network under S 51.17b. The require-
ments for location of these sites follow:
5.1 ROADWAY SITE
The roadway site must be located adjacent to major roadways. These
roadways may be arterials, freeways, expressways, or interstate highways
with total average daily traffic (ADT) exceeding 50,000. If there is no
roadway in the urbanized area with ADT exceeding 50,000, then the roadway
with the largest traffic volume should be selected. The site should be
placed at least five meters but no greater than 15 meters from the closest
traffic lane. It would be preferrable to locate the site 1n an area where
the roadway passes through areas where people reside or work. The monitor
must be placed near residences and no greater than 5 meters above ground
level.
Roadways that are at or below grade level should be selected where
possible since the differing heights of elevated roadways make represen-
tative long-term monitoring of high concentrations very difficult. The
monitors must not be placed near areas such as toll gates or metered ramps.
In monitoring lead from roadways that are below grade, the monitors should
be placed near the road but not actually in the cut section Itself, since
this would not be representative of population exposure.
53
-------
5.2 NEIGHBORHOOD SITE
This site must be located in an area of high traffic and population
density but not necessarily near a major roadway. A minimum separation
distance of 15 m between the monitor and the nearest roadway is recommended
for purposes of data comparability. Areas at or near play areas or schools
are good candidates for monitoring, since children are the most susceptible
members of the population at risk. The monitors must be placed as close
to ground level as practicable, but no greater than 5 meters above ground
level, so that measurements will be taken in the breathing zone.
5.3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
If the sampler is located on a roof or other structure, then there
should be a minimum of 2 meters separation from walls, parapets, pent-
houses, etc. The sampler should be placed at least 20 meters from trees
since trees absorb particles as well as restrict air flow. The sampler
should also be located away from obstacles such as buildings, so that the
distance between obstacles and the sampler are at least twice the height
of the obstacle. There should be unrestricted air flow in at three out
of the four major wind directions.
54
-------
6.0 NEW SOURCE REVIEW
Procedures for the review of new stationary lead sources will be
similar to those for sources of other pollutants. As explained in the
preamble to the proposed regulations, EPA is developing regulations for
new stationary sources of all pollutants. Procedures for performing
review of new stationary sources appear in EPA's Guidelines for Air Quality
Maintenance Planning and Analysis, Volume 10: Procedures for Evaluating
Air Quality Impact of New Stationary Sources.
"Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis, Volume
10: Procedures for Evaluating A1r Quality Impact of New Stationary
Sources." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. OAQPS No.
1.2-029R, October, 1977.
55
-------
7.0 SOURCE SURVEILLANCE; EMISSION SAMPLING
For lead emission source sampling and analysis, EPA recommends a
modified EPA Method 5 sampling train for sample collection, with lead
analysis by atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS).
In this adaptation of the Method 5 sampling train, 100 ml of 0.1N
HN03 1s placed 1n each of the first two 1mp1ngers to facilitate collection
of gaseous lead. Since no separation of gaseous and particulate lead
1s attempted, a filter, which 1s of high purity glass fiber, 1s located
between the third and fourth 1mp1ngers as a backup collector. After
sampling 1s completed, the filter portion 1s extracted for lead 1n a nitric
add reflux procedure.
A rigorous pretreatment with HN03 of all sample-exposed surfaces and
containers, blank analyses of filters and 0.1N HN03> and the most recent
revisions of the Method 5 sample recovery procedure are all employed to
Insure that high quality samples are obtained.
As a precaution against the problem of sample matrix effects, the
analytical technique known as the Method of Standard Additions 1s used
for the filter portion of the sample. For the more general lead emission
measurement method required by the SIP regulations, EPA 1s now planning
to extend this technique (which 1s commonly employed by those who use AAS)
to the total sample. Additionally, the 1mp1nger portion will also be
refluxed to Insure solubH1zat1on of all lead compounds. Work has been
Initiated to confirm those approaches on a variety of sources.
A detailed description of the emission sampling and analysis tech-
niques appears 1n Appendix A of this guideline.
40 CFR Part 50, "Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources,"
Appendix A, "Reference Methods," Method 5, "Determination of Particulate
Emissions from Stationary Sources."
56
-------
8.0 DETERMINATION OF LEAD POINT
SOURCE DEFINITION
Estimates of lead air quality concentrations from several stationary
source categories were made using the Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion
Model. A summary of the modeling results 1s provided 1n Table 8-1.
An estimate of a lead point source definition was extracted from
these data by using the following expression:
Q =-
(VV
where: Q = the approximation to the point source definition (t/y);
S = the assumed NAAQS for lead (jjg/m );
Q = the lead emission rate (t/y); and
-» - the maximum 90-day concentration (ug/m ): "]( /Q values are
A \J r r
given 1n column 4 of Table 1.
This equation yields the emission rate above which the standard 1s violated.
The results of this calculation for all the sources for three possible
levels of the standard appear 1n Table 8-2. The lowest point source defini-
tion for a standard of 1.5 ug/m monthly arithmetic mean, 1s 2 tons/year,
based on the estimated Impact from hypothetical secondary lead smelters,
grey Iron foundries, and ferroalloy plants.
57
-------
Table 8-1: SUMMARY OF STATIONARY SOURCE MODELING RESULTS FOR SOURCES WITH
NOMINAL PRODUCTION CAPABILITIES AND AVERAGE SIP CONTROL
Industry
Type
Primary Lead
Primary Copper
TEL Plants
Secondary Lead
Grey Iron
Ferroalloy
Lead
Emission
Rate (T/YR)
109
118
245
63
2.1
0.3
Maximum Monthly
Concentration
(yg/m3)
3.7
3.1
15.7
56.6
1.8
0.3
(ug/m3/T/YR)
.033
.026
.064
.898
.857
.933
Battery Manufacturer
(500 BPD) 1.6
w/o Pbo Production
Battery Manufacturer
(6500 BPD) 21.0
w/Pbo Production
0.9
7.6
.563
.362
58
-------
Table 8-2: SUGGESTED LEAD POINT SOURCE DEFINITIONS (T/YR)
Assumed NAAQS for
Lead (pg/m3/month)
Source
Primary Lead
Primary Copper
TEL
Secondary Lead
Grey Iron
Ferroalloy
1.0 1.5 2.0
30 45 61
38 58 77
16 23 31
1 2 2
1 2 2
1 2 2
Battery Manufacturer
(500 BPD)
Battery Manufacturer
(6500 BPD)
59
-------
The predominant cause of the elevated concentrations from these three
facilities was assumed to be fugitive emissions. The emission factors
used to estimate the fugitive emissions from these facilities were derived
indirectly from ambient particulate data and assumptions concerning lead
content of the particulate matter. Thus, they are of questionable validity.
The point source definition will only be used in two functions: emission
Inventory development and possibly new source review. A slightly larger
point source definition would not unduly affect the accuracy of the control
strategy analysis or the number of sources that would have to be reviewed
under the new source review requirements (which will not be Included 1n
the lead Implementation plan regulations but will appear 1n a subsequent
rulemaking). Because of this and the uncertainties in the emission factors,
and because State resources for gathering lead emission data are severely
limited, it appears that a less stringent point source definition of 5
tons/year 1s warranted.
60
-------
APPENDIX A
TENTATIVE PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING
INORGANIC LEAD EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
61
-------
APPENDIX A
TENTATIVE PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING
INORGANIC LEAD EMISSIONS FROM STATIONARY SOURCES
1. Principle, Applicability, and Range
1.1 Principle. Participate and gaseous lead emissions are
withdrawn isokinetically from the source. The collected samples are
digested in acid solution and analyzed by atomic absorption spectro-
photometry.
1.2 Applicability. This method is applicable for the determina-
tion of inorganic lead emissions from stationary sources.
1.3 Range. The upper limit can be considerably extended by
dilution. For a minimum analysis accuracy of + 10 percent, a minimum
lead mass of 50 yg should be collected 1n each sample fraction.
2. Apparatus
2.1 Sampling Train. A schematic of the sampling train used in
this method is shown 1n Figure A-l. Complete construction details are
o
given 1n APTD-0581 ; commercial models of this train are also avail-
able. For changes from APTD-0581 and for allowable modifications
of the train shown 1n Figure A-l, see the following subsections. The
use of a flexible line between the probe and first 1mp1nger 1s not
allowed.
The operating and maintenance procedures for the sampling train
are described 1n APTD-0576 . Since correct usage 1s Important
1n obtaining valid results, all users should read APTD-0576 and
adopt the operating and maintenance procedures outlined in 1t, unless
otherwise specified herein. The sampling train consists of the
following components:
62
-------
c
2
**>
D>
"a.
•o
CO
I
. 3 H- -"
i- oE ~
o in o o
u,x ccec
_ i- a. u-
63
-------
2.1.1 Probe Nozzle. Stainless steel (316) or glass with
sharp, tapered leading edge. The angle of taper shall be <_ 30° and
the taper shall be on the outside to preserve a constant internal
diameter. The probe nozzle shall be of the button-hook or elbow
design, unless otherwise specified by the Administrator. If made of
stainless steel, the nozzle shall be constructed from seamless tubing;
other materials of construction may be used, subject to the approval
of the Administrator.
A range of nozzle sizes suitable for Isokinetic sampling should
be available, e.g., 0.32 to 1.27 cm (1/8 to 1/2 1n.)--or larger if
'higher volume sampling trains are used--ins1de diameter (ID) nozzles
in increments of 0.16 cm (1/16 in.). Each nozzle shall be identified
and calibrated (see Section 5.2).
2.1.2 Probe Liner. Borosilicate or quartz glass tubing with a
heating system capable of maintaining a gas temperature at the exit end
during sampling of 120 +_ 14°C (248 +.25°F); note that lower exit
temperatures are acceptable, provided that they exceed the stack gas
dew point. Since the actual temperature at the outlet of the probe Is
not usually monitored during sampling, probes constructed according to
APTD-0581 and utilizing the calibration curves of APTD-0576 (or cali-
brated according to the procedure outlined in APTD-0576) will be
considered acceptable.
Either borosilicate or quartz glass probe Hners may be used for
stack temperatures up to about 480°C (900PF); quartz liners shall be
64
-------
used for temperatures between 480 and 900°C (900 and 1650°F).
Both types of liners may be used at higher temperatures than
specified for short periods of time, subject to the approval of
the Administrator. The softening temperature for borosilicate
is 820°C (1508°F), and for quartz it is 1500°C (2732°F).
Whenever practical, every effort should be made to use
borosilicate or quartz glass probe liners. Alternatively, metal
liners (e.g., 316 stainless steel, Incoloy 825,* or other corrosion
resistant metals) made of seamless tubing may be used, subject to
the approval of the Administrator.
2.1.3 P1tot Tube. Type S, as described in Section 2.1 of
Method 2, or other device approved by the Administrator. The
pitot tube shall be attached to the probe (as shown in Figure A-l)
to allow constant monitoring of the stack gas velocity. The impact
(high pressure) opening plane of the pitot tube shall be even with
or above the nozzle entry plane (see Method 2, Figure 2-6b) during
sampling. The Type S pitot tube assembly shall have a known coef-
ficient, determined as outlined 1n Section 4 of Method 2.
2.1.4 Differential Pressure Gauge. Inclined manometer or
equivalent device (two), as described in Section 2.2 of Method 2.
One manometer shall be used for velocity head (Ap) readings, and the
other, for orifice differential pressure readings.
*rtention of trade names or specific products does not constitute
endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
65
-------
2.1.5 Filter Holder. Borosilicate glass, with a glass frit
filter support and a silicons rubber gasket. Other materials of
construction (e.g., stainless steel, Teflon, Viton) may be used,
subject to the approval of the Administrator. The holder design
shall provide a positive seal against leakage from the outside or
around the filter. The filter holder shall be inserted between the
third and fourth impingers.
2.1.6 Impingers. Four impingers connected in series with
leak-free ground glass fittings or any similar leak-free noncon-
taminatlng fittings. The first, third, and fourth Impingers shall
.be of Greenburg-Smith design, modified by replacing the tip with
•a 1.3 cm (1/2 1n.) ID glass tube extending to about 1.3 cm (1/2 1n.)
from the bottom of the flask. The second 1mp1nger shall be of the
Greenburg-Smith design with the standard tip. The first and second
impingers shall contain known quantities of 0.1 normal nitric acid
(Section 4.1.3), the third shall be empty, and the fourth shall
contain a known weight of silica gel, or equivalent desiccant. A
thermometer, capable of measuring temperature to within 1°C (2°F)
shall be placed at the outlet of the fourth 1mp1nger for monitoring
purposes.
2.1.7 Metering System. Vacuum gauge, leak-free pump, ther-
mometers capable of measuring temperature to within 3°C (5.4°F), dry
gas meter capable of measuring volume to within 2 percent, and
related equipment, as shown 1n Figure A -1. Other metering systems
capable of maintaining sampling rates within 10 percent of 1sok1net1c
and of determining sample volumes to within 2 percent may be used,
66
-------
subject to the approval of the Administrator. When the metering
system 1s used in conjunction with a pitot tube, the system shall
enable checks of isokinetic rates.
Sampling trains utilizing metering systems designed for higher
flow rates than that described in APTD-0581 or APTD-0576 may be
used provided that the specifications of this method are met.
2.1.8 Barometer. Mercury, aneroid, or other barometer capable
of measuring atmospheric pressure to within 2.5 mm Hg (0.1 in. Hg).
In many cases, the barometric reading may be obtained from a nearby
national weather service station, in which case the station value
(which is the absolute barometric pressure) shall be requested and
an adjustment for elevation differences between the weather station
and sampling point shall be applied at a rate of minus 2.5 mm Hg
(0.1 in. Hg) per 30 m (100 ft) elevation increase or vice versa for
elevation decrease.
2.1.9 Gas Density Determination Equipment. Temperature sensor
and pressure gauge, as described in Sections 2.3 and 2.4 of Method 2,
and gas analyzer, if necessary, as described in Method 3; The
temperature sensor shall, preferably, be permanently attached to
the pitot tube or sampling probe in a fixed configuration, such that
the tip of the sensor extends beyond the leading edge of the probe
sheath and does not touch any metal. Alternatively, the sensor may
be attached just prior to use 1n the field. Note, however, that if
the temperature sensor is attached in the field, the sensor must be
placed in an interference-free arrangement with respect to the Type S
67
-------
pltot tube openings (see Method 2, Figure 2-7). As a second
alternative, provided that a difference of not more than 1 percent
1n the average velocity measurement 1s Introduced, the temperature
gauge need not be attached to the probe or pltot tube. (This
alternative is subject to the approval of the Administrator.)
2.2 Sample Recovery. The following Items are needed:
2.2.1 Probe-Liner and Probe-Nozzle Brushes. Nylon bristle
brushes with stainless steel wire handles. The probe brush shall
have extensions (at least as long as the probe) of stainless steel,
Nylon, Teflon, or similarly Inert material. The brushes shall be
properly sized and shaped to brush out the probe liner and nozzle.
2.2.2 Glass Wash Bottles—Two.
2.2.3 Glass Sample Storage Containers. Chemically resistant,
borosilicate glass bottles, for 0.1 N HN03 Impinger and probe
solutions and washes, 1000 ml. Screw cap liners shall either be
rubber-backed Teflon or shall be constructed so as to be leak-free
and resistant to chemical attack by 0.1 N HNO,. (Narrow mouth glass
bottles have been found to be less prone to leakage.)
2.2.4 Petrl Dishes. For filter samples, glass or polyethylene,
unless otherwise specified by the Administrator.
2.2.5 Graduated Cylinder and/or Balance. To measure condensed
water to within 1 ml or 0.5 g. The graduated cylinder shall have a
minimum capacity of 500 ml, and subdivisions no greater than 5 ml.
Most laboratory balances are capable of weighing to the nearest 0.5 g
or less. Any of these balances 1s suitable for use here and 1n
Section 2.3.4.
68
-------
2.2.6 Plastic Storage Containers. Air-tight containers
to store silica gel.
2.2.7 Funnel and Rubber Policeman. To aid in transfer of
silica gel to container; not necessary if silica gel is weighed in
the field.
2.2.8 Funnel. Glass, to aid in sample recovery.
2.3 Analysis.
2.3.1 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer. With lead hollow
cathode lamp and burner for air/acetylene flame.
2.3.2 Steam Bath.
2.3.3 Hot Plate.
2.3.4 Reflux Condensers. 300 mm, 24/40 ? to fit Erlenmeyer
flasks.
2.3.5 Erlenmeyer Flasks. 125 ml 24/40 I.
2.3.6 Membrane Filters. MilUpore SCWPO 4700 or equivalent.
2.3.7 Filtering Apparatus. Millipore filtering unit, consisting
of one of the assemblies shown 1n Figure A-2.
2.3.8 Volumetric Flasks. 100ml.
3. Reagents
3.1 Sampling.
3.1.1 Filters. High purity glass fiber filters, without organic
binder, exhibiting at least 99.95 percent efficiency («_0.05 percent
penetration) on 0.3 micron dloctyl phthalate smoke particles. The
filter efficiency test shall be conducted 1n accordance with ASTM
Standard Method D 2986-71. Test data from the supplier's quality
69
-------
FILTER
CLAMP
CLAMP
BELL JAR
TO ASPIRATOR
Figure A-2.
70
-------
control program are sufficient for this purpose. Filters shall be
Gelman Spectro Grade, or equivalent, with lot Assay for Pb. Reeve
Angel 934 AH and MSA 1106 BH filters have been found to be equivalent.
3.1.2 Silica Gel. Indicating type, 6 to 16 mesh. If previously
used, dry at 175°C (350°F) for two hours. New silica gel may be used
as received. Alternatively, other types of deslccants (equivalent or
better) may be used, subject to the approval of the Administrator.
3.1.3 Nitric Acid, 0.1 Normal (N). Prepared from reagent grade
HNO., and deionlzed, distilled water (Reagent 3.4.1, below). It may
be desirable to run blanks prior to field use to eliminate a high blank
.on test samples. Prepare by diluting 6.5 ml of concentrated nitric
"add (69 percent) to 1 liter with deionized, distilled water.
3.1.4 Crushed Ice.
3.1.5 Stopcock Grease. HNOg insoluble, heat stable sillcone
grease. This is not necessary if screw-on connectors with Teflon
sleeves, or similar, are used. Alternatively, other types of stopcock
grease may be used, subject to the approval of the Administrator.
3.2 Pretest Preparation.
3.2.1 Nitric Add, 6 N. Prepared from reagent grade HN03 and
deionized, distilled water. Prepare by diluting 390 ml of concentrated
nitric acid (69 percent) to 1 liter with deionized, distilled water.
3.3 Sample Recovery.
3.3.1 Nitric Add, 0.1 N. Same as 3.1.3 above.
3.4 Analysis.
3.4.1 Water. Deionized, distilled to conform to ASTM Specification
D 1193-74, Type 3.11
71
-------
3.4.2 Nitric Acid. Redistilled ACS reagent grade, concentrated.
3.4,3 Nitric Acid, 4.6 N. Dilute 300 ml of redistilled
concentrated nitric acid to 1 liter with deionized, distilled water.
3.4.4 Stock Lead Standard Solution (100 yg Pb/ml). Dissolve
0.1598 g of reagent grade Pb (N03)2 in about 700 ml of deionized
distilled water, add 10 ml redistilled concentrated HN03, and dilute
to 1000 ml with dlonized, distilled water.
3.4.5 Lead Standards.
3.4.5.1 Solution Sample Standards. Pipet 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 and
20.0 ml aliquots of the 100 yg/ml stock lead standard solution
.(Reagent 3.4.4) Into 100 ml volumetric flasks. Add 30 ml redistilled
"concentrated HN03 to each flask and dilute to volume with deionized,
distilled water. These working standards contain 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 and
20.0 yg Pb/ml, respectively. Additional standards at other concen-
trations should be prepared as needed. Use 4.6 N HN03 (Reagent 3.4.3)
as the reagent blank.
3.4.5.2 Filter Sample Standards. Pipet 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 and 20.0 ml
aliquots of the 100 yg/ml stock lead standard solution Into 125 ml
Erlenmeyer flasks. Place a glass fiber filter (Section 3.1.1), cut
Into strips, in each flask. Use filters from the same lots as those
used for sampling. Add 30 ml of redistilled concentrated nitric acid
to each flask and sufficient distilled, deionized water to make a
total volume of 60 ml. Reflux each solution for two hours and cool
to room temperature. Rinse the condenser column with a small amount
of deionized, distilled water and remove the flask. Filter each
72
-------
standard through a mi Hi pore membrane filter into a TOO ml volumetric
flask. Rinse the membrane filter and the remaining glass fiber mass
with several small portions of deionized, distilled water, and
combine with the filtrate. Dilute each standard to 100 ml.
3.4.6 Air. Of a quality suitable for atomic absorption analysis.
3.4.7 Acetylene. Of a quality suitable for atomic absorption
analysis.
4. Procedure
4.1 Sampling. The complexity of this method is such that, in
order to obtain reliable results, testers should be trained and
•experienced with the test procedures.
4.1.1 Pretest Preparation. All the components shall be maintained
and calibrated according to the procedure described in APTD-0576,
unless otherwise specified herein. In addition, prior to testing,
all sample-exposed surfaces shall be rinsed, first with 6 N HN03 and
then with deionized, distilled water.
Weigh several 200 to 300 g portions of silica gel in air-tight
containers to the nearest 0.5 g. Record the total weight of the
silica gel plus container, on each container. As an alternative, the
silica gel need not be preweighed, but may be weighed directly in its
Impinger just prior to train assembly.
Check filters visually against light for Irregularities and flaws
or pinhole leaks. Label the shipping containers (glass or plastic
petri dishes) and keep the filters In these containers at all times
except during sampling and analysis.
73
-------
4.1.2 Preliminary Determinations. Select the sampling site and
the minimum number of sampling points according to Method 1 or as
specified by the Administrator. Determine the stack pressure,
temperature, and the range of velocity heads using Method 2; it is
recommended that a leak-check of the pitot lines (see Method 2,
Section 3.1) be performed. Determine the moisture content using
Approximation Method 4 or its alternatives for the purpose of making
isokinetic sampling rate settings. Determine the stack gas dry
molecular weight, as described in Method 2, Section 3.6; if integrated
Method 3 sampling is used for molecular weight determination, the
'integrated bag sample shall be taken simultaneously with, and for
the same total length of time as, the sample run.
Select a nozzle size based on the range of velocity heads, such
that it is not necessary to change the nozzle size in order to
maintain isokinetic sampling rates. During the run, do not change
the nozzle size. Ensure that the proper differential pressure gauge
is chosen for the range of velocity heads encountered (see Section 2.2
of Method 2).
Select a suitable probe liner and probe length such that all
traverse points can be sampled. For large stacks, consider sampling
from opposite sides of the stack to reduce the length of probes,.
Select a total sampling time such that (1) the sampling time per
point 1s not less than 2 minutes (or some greater time Interval as
specified by the Administrator), and (2) a minimum lead mass of
74
-------
50 ug 1s collected 1n the sample. The sampling time and volume
will therefore vary from source to source.
It 1s recommended that the number of minutes sampled at each
point be an Integer or an Integer plus one-half minute, in order to
avoid timekeeping errors.
In some circumstances, e.g., batch cycles, It may be necessary
to sample for shorter times at the traverse points and to obtain
smaller gas sample volumes. In these cases, the Administrator's
approval must first be obtained.
4.1.3 Preparation of Collection Train. During preparation and
"assembly of the sampling train, keep all openings where contamination
can occur covered until just prior to assembly or until sampling is
about to begin.
Place 100 ml of 0.1 HN03 in each of the first two impingers,
leave the third impinger empty, and transfer approximately 200 to
300 g of preweighed silica gel from its container to the fourth impinger.
More silica gel may be used, but care should be taken to ensure that
it 1s not entrained and carried out from the Impinger during sampling.
Place the container 1n a clean place for later use 1n the sample
recovery. Alternatively, the weight of the silica gel plus impinger
may be determined to the nearest 0.5 g and recorded.
Using a tweezer or clean disposable surgical gloves, place a
filter 1n the filter holder. Be sure that the filter 1s properly
centered and the gasket properly placed so as to prevent the sample
75
-------
gas stream from circumventing the filter. Check the filter for tears
after assembly is completed.
When glass liners are used, install the selected nozzle using
a Viton A 0-ring when stack temperatures are less than 260°C (500°F)
and an asbestos string gasket when temperatures are higher. See
APTD-0576 for details. Other connecting systems using either 316
stainless steel or Teflon ferrules may be used. When metal liners
are used, install the nozzle as above or by a leak-free direct
mechanical connection. Mark the probe with heat resistant tape or
by some other method to denote the proper distance into the stack or
duct for each sampling point.
Set up the train as in Figure A-l, using (if necessary) a very
light coat of silicone grease on all ground glass joints, greasing
only the outer portion (see APTD-0576) to avoid possibility of con-
tamination by the silicone grease.
Place crushed ice around the impingers.
4.1.4 Leak-Check Procedures.
4.1.4.1 Pretest Leak-Check. A pretest leak-check is recommended,
but not required. If the tester opts to conduct the pretest leak-check,
the following procedure shall be used.
After the sampling train has been assembled, turn on and set the
probe heating system at the desired operating temperature. Allow time
for the temperature to stabilize. If a Viton A 0-r1ng or other leak-
free connection is used in assembling the probe nozzle to the probe
liner, leak-check the train at the sampling site by plugging the nozzle
and pulling a 380 mm Hg (15 1n. Hg) vacuum.
76
-------
Note: A lower vacuum may be used, provided that it is not
exceeded during the test.
If an asbestos string is used, do not connect the probe to the
train during the leak-check. Instead, leak-check the train by first
plugging the inlet to the impingers and pulling a 380 mm Hg (15 in.
Hg) vacuum (see note immediately above). Then connect the probe to
the train and leak-check at about 25 mm Hg (1 in. Hg) vacuum;
alternatively, the probe may be leak-checked with the rest of the
sampling train, in one step, at 380 mm Hg (15 in. Hg) vacuum. Leakage
rates in excess of 4 percent of the average sampling rate or 0.00057
o
m/min (0.02 cfm), whichever is less, are unacceptable.
The following leak-check instructions for the sampling train
described in APTD-0576 and APTD-0581 may be helpful. Start the pump
with bypass valve fully open and coarse adjust valve completely closed.
Partially open the coarse adjust valve and slowly close the bypass
valve until the desired vacuum is reached. Do not reverse direction
of bypass valve; this will cause 0.1 N HNO-, to back up into the probe.
If the desired vacuum is exceeded, either leak-check at this higher
vacuum or end the leak check as shown below and start over.
When the leak-check is completed, first slowly remove the plug
from the inlet to the probe and immediately turn off the vacuum pump.
This prevents the 0.1 N HN03 in the impingers from being forced backward
and silica gel from being entrained backward.
4.1.4.2 Leak-Checks During Sample Run. If, during the sampling
run, a component (e.g., filter assembly or 1mp1nger) change becomes
77
-------
necessary, a leak-check shall be conducted immediately before the
change 1s made. The leak-check shall be done according to the
procedure outlined in Section 4.1.4.1 above, except that it shall
be done at a vacuum equal to or greater than the maximum value
recorded up to that point in the test. If the leakage rate is found
to be no greater than 0.00057 m3/min (0.02 cfm) or 4 percent of the
average sampling rate (whichever is less), the results are acceptable,
and no correction will need to be applied to the total volume of dry
gas metered; if, however, a higher leakage rate is obtained, the tester
shall either record the leakage rate and plan to correct the sample
volume as shown in Section 6.3 of Reference Method 5, or shall void the
sampling run.
Immediately after component changes, leak-checks are optional;
if such leak-checks are done, the procedure outlined 1n Section 4.1.4.1
above shall be used.
4.1.4.3 Post-test Leak-Check. A leak-check is mandatory at the
conclusion of each sampling run. The leak-check shall be done 1n
accordance with the procedures outlined 1n Section 4.1.4.1, except
that 1t shall be conducted at a vacuum equal to or greater than the
maximum value reached during the sampling run. If the leakage rate
•a
1s found to betio greater than 0.00057 m /min (0.02 cfm) or 4 percent
of the average sampling rate (whichever 1s less), the results are
acceptable, and no correction need be applied to the total volume of
dry gas metered. However, 1f a higher leakage rate 1s obtained, the
tester shall either record the leakage rate and correct the sample
78
-------
volume as shown 1n Section 6.3 of Method 5, or shall void the
sampling run.
4.1.5 Sampling Train Operation. During the sampling run,
maintain an isokinetic sampling rate (within 10 percent of true
isokinetic unless otherwise specified by the Administrator).
For each run, record the data required on a data sheet such
as the one shown in Figure A-3. Be sure to record the initial dry
gas meter reading. Record the dry gas meter readings at the beginning
and end of each sampling time increment, when changes in flow rates
are made, before and after each leak check, and when sampling is halted.
•Take other readings required by Figure A-3 at least once at each
"sample point during each time increment and additional readings when
significant changes (20 percent variation in velocity head readings)
necessitate additional adjustments in flow rate. Level and zero the
manometer. Because the manometer level and zero may drift due to
vibrations and temperature changes, make periodic checks during the
traverse.
Clean the portholes prior to the test run to minimize the chance
of sampling deposited material. To begin sampling, remove the nozzle
cap, verify that the probe heating system is up to temperature, and
that the pitot tube and probe are properly positioned. Position the
nozzle at the first traverse point with the tip pointing directly Into
the gas stream. Immediately start the pump and adjust the flow to
Isokinetic conditions. Nomographs are available, which aid in the
rapid adjustment of the Isokinetic sampling rate without excessive
79
-------
AMtlENT TEMKIATUK
IAIOMITIUC ntssua
*
vfl
O
MOM UNGTH, m((r.)
T
i
5
NOZZU IDENTIFICATION NO.
AVEKAGI CAUUATED NOZZII
nOW KATEl StTTING
(*).,
UEAJC «ATE m3/mbt. (eh.)
,
5 8
lih
S 9
? § 2
5 I i
t I
i
5
.•
i
,l
I
1
' V
t
a
5
»
u
X
S
p
)
? ,
* '
«
fj ,
- 5 - '
fi = 8
3 u r u
1.
i
J
tf «£
gB
o|t
i|*
uT
;| 5?
i s?
e3
3 ° ?
]R
?
g|<8 15
9,
ggj,*
s*-t
§|_
K i~u
S ->
< U
Ir»
I"2
I
!'
I
i
i
g
i
f
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
ii
i
IO
•«->
•I—
u_
co
-------
computations. These nomographs are designed for use when the
Type S pitot tube coefficient 1s 0.85 +_0.02, and the stack gas
equivalent density (dry molecular weight) is equal to 29 +_4.
APTD-0576 details the procedure for using the nomographs. If C and
M. are outside the above stated ranges, do not use the nomographs
unless appropriate steps (see Citation 7 in Section 7) are taken to
compensate for the deviations.
When the stack 1s under a significant negative pressure (1 a
water column the height of the 1mp1nger stem), take care to close the
coarse adjust valve before Inserting the probe Into the stack to pre-
vent 0.1 N HN03 from backing Into the probe. If necessary, the pump
may be turned on with the coarse adjust valve closed.
When the probe 1s 1n position, block off the openings around the
probe and porthole to prevent dilution of the gas stream.
12
Traverse the stack cross-section, as required by Method 1 or as
specified by the Administrator, without bumping the probe nozzle Into
the stack walls when sampling near the walls or when removing or
Inserting the probe through the portholes.
During the test run, add 1ce and, 1f necessary, salt to the 1ce
bath, to maintain a temperature of less than 20°C (68°F) at the
1mp1nger/s1l1ca gel outlet. Also, periodically check the level and
zero of the manometer.
A single train shall be used for the entire sample run, except
1n cases where simultaneous sampling 1s required 1n two or more
separate ducts or at two or more different locations within the same
81
• / '< r t
-------
duct, or, 1n cases where equipment failure necessitates a change of
trains. In all other situations, the use of two or more trains will
be subject to the approval of the Administrator.
Note that when two or more trains are used, separate analyses of
the sample fractions from each train shall be performed, unless other-
wise specified by the Administrator. Consult with the Administrator
for details concerning the calculation of results when two or more
trains are used.
At the end of the sample run, turn off the coarse adjust valve,
remove the probe and nozzle from the stack, turn off the pump, record
the final dry gas meter reading, and conduct a post-test leak-check, as
outlined in Section 4.1.4.3. Also, leak-check the pltot lines as
described in Method 2, Section 3.1; the lines must pass this leak-check,
1n order to validate the velocity head data.
4.1.6 Calculation of Percent Isokinetic. Calculate percent
isokinetlc (see Section 6.11 of Method 5), to determiQe whether the
run was valid or another test run should be made. If there was
difficulty 1n maintaining isoklnetic rates due to source conditions,
consult with the Administrator for possible variance on the Isoklnetic
rates.
4.2 Sample Recovery. Proper cleanup procedure begins as soon
as the probe 1s removed from the stack at the end of the sampling
period. Allow the probe to cool.
When the probe can be safely handled, wipe off all external
particulate matter near the tip of the probe nozzle and place a cap
82
-------
over it. Do not cap off the probe tip tightly while the sampling
train is cooling down as this would create a vacuum in the filter
holder, thus drawing liquid from the impingers into the probe.
Before moving the sample train to the cleanup site, remove the
probe from the sample train, wipe off the silicone grease, and cap
the open outlet of the probe. Be careful not to lose any condensate
that might be present. Wipe off the silicone grease form the glassware
inlet where the probe was fastened and cap the inlet. Remove the
umbilical cord from the last impinger and cap the impinger. Either
ground-glass stoppers, plastic caps, or serum caps may be used to close
these openings.
Transfer the probe and filter-impinger assembly to the cleanup
area. This area should be clean and protected from the wind so that
the chances of contaminating or losing the sample will be minimized.
Save a portion of the 0.1N HNCL used for sampling and cleanup
as a blank. Place 200 ml of this 0.1N HN03 taken directly from the
bottle being used into a glass sample container labeled "0.1N HN03
blank."
Inspect the train prior to and during disassembly and note any
abnormal conditions. Treat the samples as follows:
Container No. 1. Carefully remove the filter from the filter
holder and place in its identified petri dish container. If it is
necessary to fold the filter, do so such that the sample-exposed side
is inside the fold. Carefully transfer to the petri dish any visible
sample matter and/or filter fibers which adhere to the filter holder
83
-------
gasket by using a dry Nylon bristle brush and/or a sharp-edged
blade. Seal the container.
Container No. 2. Taking care to see that dust on the outside
of the probe or other exterior surfaces does not get into the sample,
quantitatively recover sample matter or any condensate from the
probe nozzle, probe fitting, probe liner, and front half of the
filter holder by washing these components with 0.1N HNO- and placing
the wash into a glass container. Measure and record (to the nearest ml)
the total amount of 0.1N HNO, used for each rinse. Perform the 0.1N
HNO., rinses as follows:
Carefully remove the probe nozzle and clean the inside surface
by rinsing with 0.1N HNO, from a wash bottle while brushing with a
stainless steel, Nylon-bristle brush. Brush until the 0.1N HN03 rinse
shows no visible particles, and then make a final rinse of the inside
surface with 0.1N HN03-
Brush and rinse with 0.1N HN03 the inside parts of the Swagelok
fitting in a similar way until no visible particles remain.
Rinse the probe liner with 0.1N HNO- by tilting the probe and
squirting 0.1N HNO, into Its upper end, while rotating the probe so
that all Inside surfaces will be rinsed with 0.1N HNO. Let the
0.1N HN03 drain from the lower end into the sample container. A glass
funnel may be used to aid 1n transferring liquid washes to the container.
Follow the 0.1N HN03 rinse with a probe brush. Hold the probe 1n an
Inclined position, squirt 0.1N HN03 Into the upper end of the probe
as the probe brush 1s being pushed with a twisting action through the
84
-------
probe; hold a sample.container underneath the lower end of the
probe, and catch any 0.1N HNO- and sample matter which 1s brushed
from the probe. Run the brush through the probe three times or
more until no visible sample matter is carried out with the 0.1N HNO~
and none remains on the probe liner on visual inspection. With
stainless steel or other metal probes, run the brush through in the
above prescribed manner at least six times since metal probes have
small crevices in which sample matter can be entrapped. Rinse the
brush with 0.1N HN03 and quantitatively collect these washings in the
sample container. After the brushing make a final 0.1N HNO- rinse
'of the probe as described above.
It 1s recommended that two people be used to clean the probe to
minimize loss of sample. Between sampling runs, keep brushes clean
and protected from contamination.
After ensuring that all joints are wiped clean of sllicone grease,
clean the inside of the front half of the filter holder by rubbing
the surfaces with a Nylon bristle brush and rinsing with 0.1N HNO~.
Rinse each surface three times or more if needed to remove visible
sample matter. Make a final rinse of the brush and filter holder.
After all 0.1N HNO- washings and sample matter are collected 1n the
sample container, tighten the lid on the sample container so that
0.1N HN03 will not leak out when it 1s shipped to the laboratory. Mark
the height of the fluid level to determine whether leakage occurred
during transport. Label the container to clearly Identify Its contents.
85
-------
Container No. 3. Check the color of the Indicating silica gel
to determine if it has been completely spent and make a notation of
its condition. Transfer the silica gel from the fourth impinger to
the original container and seal. A funnel may make it easier to pour
the silica gel without spilling. A rubber policeman may be used as an
aid in removing the silica gel from the impinger. It is not necessary
to remove the small amount of dust particles that may adhere to the
walls and are difficult to remove. Since the gain in weight is to be
used for moisture calculations, do not use any water or other liquids
to transfer the silica gel. If a balance is available in the field,
follow the procedure for Container No. 3 under "Analysis."
Container No. 4. Due to the large quantity of liquid involved,
the impinger solutions are placed together in a separate container.
However, they may be combined with the contents of Container No, 2 at
the time of analysis 1n order to reduce the number of analyses required.
Clean each of the first three impingers and connecting glassware in
the following manner:
1. Wipe the Impinger ball joints free of sillcone grease and
cap the joints.
2. Rotate and agitate each impinger, so that the impinger contents
might serve as a rinse solution.
3. Transfer the contents of the Impingers to a 500 ml graduated
cylinder. The outlet ball joint cap should be removed and the contents
drained through this opening. The Impinger parts (inner and outer
tubes) must not be separated while transferring their contents to the
cylinder.
86
-------
Measure the liquid volume to within +_ 1 ml. Alternatively,
determine the weight of the liquid to within +_ 0.5 g by using a
balance. The volume or weight of liquid present, along with a
notation of any color or film observed in the impinger catch, is
recorded in the log. This information is needed, along with the
silica gel data, to calculate the stack gas moisture content (see
Method 5, Figure 5-3).
4. Transfer the contents of the first three impingers to
Container No. 4.
5. Pour approximately 30 ml of 0.1N HNO., into each of the first
'three impingers and agitate the impingers. Drain the 0.1N HN03
through the outlet arm of each impinger into the No. 4 sample container.
Repeat this operation a second time; inspect the impingers for any
abnormal conditions.
6. Wipe the ball joints of the glassware connecting the impingers
free of silicone grease and rinse each piece of glassware twice with
0.1N HNO-; this rinse is collected in Container No. 4. (Do not rinse
or. brush the glass-fritted filter support.)
Mark the height of the fluid level to determine whether leakage
occurred during transport. Label the container to clearly identify its
contents.
Note: In steps 5 and 6 above, the total amount of 0.1N HN03 used
for rinsing must be measured and recorded.
87
-------
4.3 Analysis.
4.3.1 Container No. 3. This step may be conducted in the
field. Weigh the spent silica gel (or silica gel plus impinger)
to the nearest 0.5 g using a balance.
4.3.2 Lead Sample Preparation and Analysis.
4.3.2.1 Container No. 1 (Filter). Cut the filter Into strips
and transfer the strips and all loose particulate matter to a 125 ml
Erlenmeyer flask. Rinse the petri dish with 30 ml of distilled water
to insure complete transfer of the sample; add the rinse to the flask.
Add 30 ml redistilled concentrated nitric acid. Reflux for two hours
•and cool to room temperature. Rinse the condenser column with a small
amount of deionized, distilled water and remove the flask. Filter the
sample through a millipore membrane filter into a 100 ml volumetric
flask. Rinse the membrane filter and the remaining glass fiber mass
with several small portions of deionized, distilled water, and combine
with the filtrate. Dilute to 100 ml with distilled, deionized water.
4.3.2.2 Container No. 4 (Impinger Samples). Evaporate the liquid
sample just to dryness on a steam bath and transfer to an Erlenmeyer
flask using 30 ml of distilled, deionized water followed by 30 ml of
redistilled concentrated nitric acid. Reflux for two hours. Rinse
the condenser column, cool to room temperature, and dilute to 100 ml
with deionized, distilled water.
4.3.2.3 Container No. 2 (Probe Wash). Treat in the same manner
as directed in Section 4.3.2.2. As an option, this solution can be
combined with the Impinger solution prior to analysis.
-------
Note: Prior to analysis, the liquid level in Containers No. 2
and/or No. 4 should be checked; confirmation as to whether or not
leakage occurred during transport should be made on the analysis
sheet. If a noticeable amount of leakage has occurred, either void
the sample or take steps, subject to the approval of the Administrator,
to correct the final results.
4.3.2.4 Filter Blank. Determine a filter blank using two filters
from each lot of filters used in the sampling train. Cut each filter
into strips and treat each filter individually as directed in
Section 4.3.2.1.
4.3.2.5 0.1M HN03 Blank. Treat the entire 200 ml of 0.1N HN03
'as directed in Section 4.3.2.2.
4.3.2.6 Spectrophotometer Preparation. Turn on the power, set
the wavelength, slit width, and lamp current as instructed by the
manufacturer's manual for the particular atomic absorption spectro-
photometer. Adjust the burner and flame characteristics as necessary.
4.3.2.7 Lead Determination. After the absorbance values have
been obtained for the standard solutions (Section 5), determine the
absorbances of the filter blank and each sample against the reagent
blank. If the sample concentration falls above the limits of the curve,
make an appropriate dilution with 4.6 N HN03> such that the final con-
centration falls within the range of the curve. Determine the lead
concentration in the filter blank (i.e., the average of the two blank
values from each lot). Next, using the appropriate standard curve,
determine the lead concentration in each sample fraction.
4.3.2.8 Lead Determination at Low Concentration. Flame atomic
absorption spectrophotometry 1s a very good analytical method for lead
89
-------
concentrations as low as 1 mg/1. If 1t 1s necessary to determine
quantities of lead at the microgram per liter level, the graphite
rod or tube furnace, available as accessory components to all
atomic absorption spectrophotometers, is recommended. Manufacturer's
instructions should be followed in the use of such equipment.
4.3.2.9 Mandatory Check for Matrix Effects on the Lead Results.
The analysis for lead by atomic absorption is sensitive to the chemical
composition and to the physical properties (viscosity, pH) of the
sample (matrix effects). Since the lead procedure described here will
be applied to many different sources, it can be anticipated that many
.different sample matrices will be encountered. Thus, it 1s mandatory
"that at least one sample from each source be checked using the Method
of Additions to ascertain that the chemical composition and physical
properties of the sample did not cause erroneous analytical results.
Three acceptable "Method of Additions" procedures are described in
the General Procedure Section of the Perkin Elmer Corporation Manual.
If the results of the Method of Additions procedure on the source
sample do not agree to within 5 percent of the value obtained by the
conventional atomic absorption analysis, then all samples from the
source must be reanalyzed using the Method of Additions procedure.
5. Calibration
Maintain a laboratory log of all calibrations.
5.1 Standard Solutions. Determine the absorbance of the solution
sample standards and filter sample standards (see Section 3.4.5) against
90
-------
a reagent blank of 4.6N HNCL (Reagent 3.4.3). These absorbances
should be checked frequently during the analysis to insure that
baseline drift has not occurred. Prepare two standard curves of
absorbance versus concentration, one for the solution sample
standards and one for the filter sample standards. (Note: For
instruments equipped with direct concentration readout devices,
preparation of a standard curve will not be necessary.) In all cases,
the manufacturer's instruction manual should be consulted for proper
calibration and operational procedures.
5.2 Sampling Train Calibration. Calibrate the sampling train
components according to the indicated sections of Method 5: probe nozzle
.(Section 5.1); pitot tube assembly (Section 5.2); metering system
(Section 5.3); probe heater (Section 5.4); temperature gauges
(Section 5.5); barometer (Section 5.7). Note that the leak check of
the metering system (Section 5.6 of Method 5) applies to this method.
6. Calculations
6.1 Nomenclature
A =100 ml/aliquot = sample volume
C. = Concentration of lead as read from the standard curve,
a
yg/ml.
C, - Lead concentration in stack gas, dry basis, converted
to standard conditions, g/dscm (g/dscf).
F. = Dilution factor = 1 if the sample has not been diluted.
M » Total mass of lead collected in a specific part of the
sampling train, yg.
M. » Total mass of lead collected in the sampling train, yg.
91
-------
V / , .x = Volume of gas sample measured by the dry gas meter,
corrected to standard conditions, dscm (dscf);
calculated using Equation 5-1 of Method 5.
6.2 Calculate the average stack gas velocity, according to
Equation 2^-9 of Method 2; use data obtained from this method (see
Figure A-2).
6.3 Referring to the Indicated sections of Method 5, perform
the following calculations: Average gas meter temperature and orifice
pressure drop (Section 6.2); dry gas volume (Section 6.3); volume of
water vapor (Section 6.4); moisture content (Section 6.5); isokinetic
variation (Section 6.11). Note that for the purposes of this method,
any references made to Figure 5.2 should be interpreted as references
to Figure A-2!.
6.4 Amount of Lead Collected.
6.4.1 Calculate the amount of lead collected in each part of the
sampling train, as follows:
Mn = Ca A Fd Equation A-l
6.4.2 Calculate the total amount of lead collected in the
sampling train as follows:
Mt « Mn (filter) + Mn (probe)+ Mp (1mp1ngers) - Mp (filter blank)
Equation A-2
6.5 Calculate the lead concentration 1n the stack gas (dry basis,
adjusted to standard conditions) as follows:
C1 - (1 x 10"6 g/yg) (Mt/Vm(std)) Equation A -3
-------
6.6 Conversion Factors.
From
scf
g/ft3
g/ft3
3
g/ftr
Bibliography
To
m3
gr/ft3
lb/ft3
3
g/nr
Multiply by
0.02832
15.43
2.205 x 10"3
35.31
1. Addendum to Specifications for Incinerator Testing at Federal
Facilities. PHS, NCAPC. Dec. 6, 1967.
2. Martin, Robert M. Construction Details of Isokinetic Source-
Sampling Equipment. Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle
Park, N. C. APTD-0581. April, 1971.
3. Rom, Jerome J. Maintenance, Calibration, and Operation of
Isokinetic Source Sampling Equipment. Environmental Protection
Agency. Research Triangle Park, N. C. APTD-0576. March, 1972.
4. Smith, W.S., R.T. Shigehara, and W. F. Todd. A Method of
Interpreting Stack Sampling Data. Paper Presented at the 63d Annual
Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, St. Louis, Mo.
June 14-19, 1970.
5. Smith, W.S., et al. Stack Gas Sampling Improved and Simplified
With New Equipment. APCA Paper No. 67-119. 1967.
6. Specifications for Incinerator Testing at Federal Facilities.
PHS, NCAPC. 1967.
7. Shigehara, R.T. Adjustments in the EPA Nomograph for
Different Pi tot Tube Coefficients and Dry Molecular Weights. Stack
Sampling News .2:4-11. October, 1974.
93
-------
8. Vollaro, R.F. A Survey of Commercially Available
Instrumentation For the Measurement of Low-Range Gas Velocities.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Measurement Branch.
Research Triangle Park, N.C. November, 1976 (unpublished paper).
9. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Part 26. Gaseous Fuels;
Coal and Coke; Atmospheric Analysis. American Society for Testing
and Materials. Philadelphia, Pa. 1974. pp. 617-622.
10. Analytical Methods for Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry.
Perkin Elmer Corporation. Norwalk, Connecticut. September, 1976.
11. Annual Book of ASTM Standards. Part 31; Water, Atmospheric
Analysis. American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia,
PA. 1974. pp. 40-42.
12. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40, Part 60, Appendix
A "Reference Methods." (Published in the Federal Register of August
18, 1977, p. 41754). Method I—Sample and Velocity Traverses for
Stationary Sources.
13. Method 2--Determ1nation of Stack
Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S P1tot Tube).
14. Method 3—Gas Analysis for Carbon
Dioxide, Oxygen, Excess A1r, and Dry Molecular Weight.
15. Method 4--Determ1 nation of Moisture
Content in Stack Gases.
16. Method 5—Determination of Partlcu-
late Emissions from Stationary Sources.
94
-------
APPENDIX B
PROJECTING AUTOMOTIVE LEAD EMISSIONS
FOR ROADWAY CONFIGURATIONS
95
-------
APPENDIX B
Projecting Automotive Lead Emissions for Roadway Configurations
>.
The characterization of automotive lead emissions has been described in
\
journal articles and in minimal EPA testing. In this work, it is generally
agreed that (1) only a percentage of the lead burned in the fuel is exhausted
and (2) that the percentage of lead exhausted varies with vehicle operating
conditions. Experimental evidence shows that 70-80 percent of the lead burned
in gasoline is emitted into the atmosphere, while 20-30 percent is retained in
the engine, oil, and exhaust system (Hirschler, et a!., 1964, Ter Haar, et al.,
1972).
The Hirschler and Gilbert study obtained data from three passenger cars
during a city-type driving cycle. These data showed that, on the average, the
exhaust gas contained from 28.2% to 44.8% of the lead burned by the cars. At
the completion of exhausted lead tests in all three cars, the amount of lead
left in various zones of the engine and exhaust system was determined. From
21.1% to 27.8% of the lead burned by the cars was recovered from deposits in
the exhaust system and engine, and in the lubricating oil and oil filters.
Therefore, something less than 75% of the lead burned could have been present
in the exhaust gas.
During operation under a test cycle of moderate speeds similar to city-
type driving, three cars exhausted from 28% to 45% of the lead burned. When
exhaust systems were fairly free of deposits, the emissions of lead were in
the 20-25% range, but after the cars had been operated for several thousands
of miles at moderate speeds, emissions increased into the 35-55% range. Indi-
vidual tests showed wide variations which indicate tlrat a random factor, prob-
ably deposit flaking in the exhaust system, is involved in the process of
exhausting lead.
96
-------
The Ter Haar study calculated a lead balance based on the assumption that
».
25% of the lead remains in the automobile. In the emission tests, an average of
x
21.4% of the lead burned was emitted from 26 cars on the Federal hot cycles,
while the cold cycles emitted 43.9% of the lead burned. With the Federal cycle
x
weighted 65% for the hot cycles and 35% for the cold cycles, the calculated
percentage of burned lead emitted during the fall Federal Cycle is 29.2%.
The 29% for the full Federal cycle and the 25% which remains in the car
accounted for 54% of the lead burned. Ter Haar et al. assume that the remain-
ing 46% is emitted during heavy accelerations and decelerations.
This analysis was tested in a total lead balance study of a car driven
on a mileage accumulation route for 12,000 miles. The exhaust from the car
was measured with a total filter. Ter Haar et a!. accounted for 84.3% of the
lead burned. They believe that the 15% unaccounted for was lost during han-
dling of the exhaust system and the total filter. Although the total lead
exhausted overall was about 55% of the lead burned, it should be noted that it
was only 36% for the first 6000 miles and increased to 73% for the last 6000
miles. Therefore, if the exhaust system is not changed, it is likely that this
car will continue to exhaust 75% or more of the lead burned.
Emissions During City-Type Driving
Several studies have been performed measuring lead emissions under differ-
ent driving conditions. The first comprehensive study of automotive lead emis-
• *
sions was performed by Hirschler and Gilbert. The Hirschler and Gilbert study
measured automotive lead emissions for constant speed dynamometer tests and a
•city-type driving cycle. The city-type driving cycle was a repeated cycle of
idling, accelerating, decelerating and cruising over 110 miles at an average
97
-------
speed of 22 miles per hour. The cruise speeds were 25 and 40 miles per hour.
The city driving cycle data showed that, on the average, the exhaust qas con-
tained from 28.2 to 44.8 percent of the lead burned by the cars. These
numbers were averaged to derive an emission factor of 0.365 (36.5% of burned
lead is exhausted) to estimate the emissions for a city-suburban roadway
configuration.
In comparison, Bradow (1976) measured lead emissions from three 1970-
1974 model year cars on the Federal Test Procedure cycle. For these tests,
the percentage of burned lead exhausted ranged from 10.8 percent to 21.4 per-
cent.
While the Hirschler and Gilbert data for city-suburban driving are from
1953, 1954, and 1957 model year automobiles, it seems reasonable to assume
that lead emissions from these cars are representative of more recent model
year vehicles. Figure 1 shows that the Hirschler and Gilbert data for cruise-
speed drtvlng are within the bounds of the data presented 1n other studies
on the percentage of burned lead exhausted. The fact that the Hirschler and
Gilbert numbers 1n Figure 1 are reasonable is Important since these are the
most complete data that represent city-suburban driving.
Emissions During Cruise-Speed Driving
Hab1b1 (1973) tested a 1966 model year vehicle using the Federal mileage
accumulation schedule (Federal Register, 1968) under steady-State constant-
speed conditions. Exhaust measurements were made at four nominal test
mileages during the mileage accumulation schedule. The steady-state operation
.emissions were measured at 20,45, and 70 miles/hour. The tests ranged from
200 to 400 miles in duration and were run on a fuel containing 3 grams of lead
98
-------
per gallon. The lead emissions from these tests are shown in Figure 1. The
ranges and average emission rates for each of the three cruise speeds are shown
on the graph. »
Ter Haar et_al. studied automotive exhaust particulates by testing 26
cars. Ten were owned by the Ethyl Corporation in commuter service and 16 were
-s
employee-owned. The Ethyl Corporation cars were 1963-1968 models that had been
driven from 20,000 to 62,000 miles. The employee cars were all 1966 models with
17,000 to 92,000 miles of service. The test conditions included cruise at 25,
45, and 60 miles/hour. The 26-car average results for the three speeds are
shown in Figure 1.
Sampson and Springer (1973) and Ganley and Springer (1974) measured auto-
3
motive lead using a 1970 350-in Chevrolet V-8 production engine mounted on a
dynamometer. A simulated exhaust system was connected to the engine. The
majority of the tests were performed at a load equivalent to a full-size 1970
Chevrolet crjising at 55 miles/hour. For each of the two studies, an average
lead emissioi rate is shown in Figure 1.
Dr. Ron Bradow of EPA, ESRL tested four in-use vehicles for lead emissions
in 1976. These four vehicles ranged from 1963-1974 model years and had 37,000-
54,000 accumulated miles. Twenty-nine test runs were performed using the
Sulfate Emissions Test, the Fuel Economy Test, and the Federal Test Procedure
(Federal Register No. 221, 1972). The lead emissions data from the Sulfate
Emissions Test and the Fuel Economy Test are included in Figure 1 because these
tests are representative of cruise-speed driving.
The automotive cruise speed emissions data from journal articles and EPA
testing were used to develop a curve for determining lead emission factors.
This curve is a conservative estimate of future year lead emissions and is
shown on Figure 1.
99
-------
Emissions During Acceleration Periods
V
Data collected by Hirschler and Gilbert and Ter Haar et al. on lead emis-
sions from automobiles show that th£ highest emission rates occur when cars
accelerate from a stop or a low cruise speed (20 mph) to a much higher speed
•»
(60 mph). Therefore, an area where vehicles are accelerating on expressway
access ramps onto heavily traveled expressways has the potential for high con-
centrations of ambient lead. The accurate modeling of such a situation is
limited due to the scarcity of data on acceleration emissions. However, data
from the journal articles by Hirschler and Gilbert and Ter Haar can be used to
estimate an emission factor for accelerations to 60 miles per hour.
Hirschler and Gilbert conducted full-throttle acceleration tests on a
single exhaust 1954 car and a dual exhaust 1953 car. A series of tests were
made on the 1954 model year car after 25,000 miles of deposit accumulation in
the exhaust system. In the first test, a series of three full-throttle accel-
erations from 20 to 60 mph were made, and the lead exhaust was collected and
classified. This was followed by a test in which exhausted lead was collected
from a series of nine similar full-throttle accelerations. The same type of
tests were run on the 1953 model year car. However, the data from the 1953 car
are less complete because the sample from the second test of nine accelerations
was lost. The results of the Hirschler and Gilbert tests are shown below:
% burned lead emitted
Single Exhaust Dual Exhaust
1954 car 1953 car
(12 tests) (3 tests)
Full-throttle acceleration 870 to 1230 1990
20 to 60 mph
100
-------
Ter Haar et al. tested 26 1963-1968 model year cars for acceleration emis-
sions. Ten of these cars were owned by the Ethyl Corporation in commuter service.
These cars ranged from model year 1963-1968 and in accumulated mileage from 20,000-
62,000 miles. The other 16 cars were .employee-owned 1966 model year cars with
V4
17,000-92,000 accumulated miles. The results of the Ter Haar study indicate
that an average of 1119% of the lead burned is exhausted during full throttle
acceleration (0-70 and 30-70 mph).
Deriving a specific emission factor for acceleration conditions from the
aforementioned studies is a difficult task. Ter Haar's data seem to be more
useful because 26 different cars were tested and more recent model year cars
were used. While Hirschler and Gilbert made multiple runs, only two cars were
tested and these were 1953-1954 model year vehicles. Therefore, the best emis-
sion factor estimate for a full-throttle acceleration from 0-60 mph is that
approximately 10 times the lead burned is exhausted by the car.
Autompti ve Lead Projecti ons
Based on data on automotive lead emissions under city, cruise speed, and
acceleration conditions, calculations of lead emission rates were made for seven
roadway configurations. These seven roadway configurations were chosen to approxi-
mate worst-case traffic volumes for the roadway types considered. However, it is
possible that particular roadways may have higher traffic volumes, and hence
higher emission rates than those modeled here.
Lead emissions from automobiles are projected for future years for seven
roadway configurations based on emissions at different vehicle speeds, the lead
.content of gasoline, and an average /fleet fuel economy. Emission rates are cal-
culated based on equation (1):
[Emission Factor] [Lead Content of Gas (g/gal)] x APT _ Em1-ssion Rate
[Fuel Economy (miles/gal)] (g/veh-mile/day)
101
-------
Using equation (1), emission rate estimates were made for the seven roadway con-
figurations. These results are presented in Table 6. [Note: To calculate the
emission rate in units of grams/meter/second, equation (1) should be corrected
by dividing by 139,017,600.]
x
Fuel Economy
Fuel economy projections are based on the average fuel economy standards
(15 DSC 2002). In this law, fuel economy standards are established for 1978,
1979, 1980 and 1985. Past year average fuel economies are known through 1973
(EPA 1974). Fuel economy values for other years are determined using a straight-
line interpolation. Average fuel economies, based on the fuel economy standards,
are shown in Table 4 for the projection years.
The fuel economy calculation at each roadway configuration is performed
to account for the effect of vehicle speed on fuel economy. The fuel economy
of a car is maximized when it is cruising at 30-40 miles/hour. In addition, the
fuel economy during highway driving is better than under stop-and-go city driving.
Therefore, an accurate estimate of fuel economy on a roadway configuration must
take traffic flow characteristics into account.
Table 1 shows fuel economies for different model year vehicles. These
fuel economies are based on a combined city/highway driving cycle. Combined
fuel economy is a weighted average of the city and highway estimates based on
Federal Highway Administration studies of average U. S. driving patterns. This
value (which assumes 557» city and 45% highway driving) is what the average
driver can expect in overall summer driving on level roads after the car has
been broken in. City fuel economy reflects trips for local errands, driving to
work, and general stop-and-go driving in urban and suburban areas. Highway fuel
economy reflects long-distance driving on non-urban roads and on interstate
highways at a speed averaging approximately 50 miles/hour with no stops.
102
-------
While the values in Table 1 are accurate estimates of nationwide fuel
economy, they are not representative of the fuel economy on specific roadways.
The coefficients in Table 2 can be .used to determine a correction factor to
account for vehicle speed at the study location. The coefficients in this table
N
are normalized to 32.7 miles/hour, the average speed of the combined fuel economy
>
cycle. These numbers were derived from the fuel economy correction factors pre-
sented 1n an EPA Interim report (EPA 1977). These correction factors are
based on the Federal Test Procedure with an average speed of 19.6 miles/hour.
The normalized correction factors were calculated by determining the FTP
correction factor at 32.7 miles/hour for each model year, then dividing the A
coefficients for each model year evaluated at 19.6 miles/hour by the correction
factor for each model year for 32.7 miles/hour. This normalization makes
the Table 2 coefficients compatible with combined cycle fuel economies.
Fuel economy calculations for the projection years were performed following
these steps:
1. Knowing the average vehicle speed for the roadway configuration, the
coefficients from Table 2 and the vehicle speed are used in equation (2) below
to calculate a speed dependent fuel economy correction factor for each model year.
Fuel Economy Correction Factor = A0+A1S+A2S +A3S ^A^S4 (2)
where Ai = correction factors from Table 2
S = vehicle speed (miles/hour)
2. Multiply the fuel economy speed correction factors for each model year
calculated in (1) by the City/Highway Combined Fuel Economy (Table 1) and the
fraction of annual travel by model year (Table 3). The products for each model
year are summed to determine the base year (1974) composite fuel economy. This
calendar year composite fuel economy represents the combined cycle fuel economy
at average speed S.
103
-------
3. The base year composite fuel economy calculated Cn step (2) 1s divided by
/
the base year (1974) average fleet fuel economy from Table 4 to determine the
ratio of the fuel economy at the study location to the nationwide average fleet
fuel economy. This ratio is then used, to estimate the fuel economy at the study
location for future years by multiplying it by the average fleet fuel economy
•-,
in Table 4 for each projection year.
4. The fuel economies calculated in (3) above are representative of
combined city/highway driving. These numbers should be corrected for a study
location with traffic that is primarily free-flow or city-type driving rather
than combined city/highway. To correct for free-flow traffic, multiply each
fuel econom> by 1.2297. The correction factor for city-type driving is 0.866.
(Austin et al.. 1975).
Lead Content of Gas
The average lead content of gas for future years is calculated based on
the promulgated lead phase-down schedule 'CFe de r al Refl.tste r, 1976). The
"pooled average lead content" of gas is based on the percentage of cars using
unleaded gas and the lead content of leaded and unleaded gas. For the calcula-
tions in Table 5, the number of Pre-75 and Post-74 vehicles was determined using
the fraction of annual light-duty vehicle travel by model year schedule
in AP-42, Supplement 5. The "pooled average lead content" is as given
in the lead phase-down regulations and the lead content of unleaded gas is assumed
to be 0.05'grams/gallon. From these numbers, the maximum possible lead content
of leaded gas can be calculated for each calendar year using equation (3):
[% Pre-75 vehicles] [Lead content of leaded gas (g/gal)]
+ [% Post-74 vehicles] [Lead content of unleaded gas (g/gal)] = (3)
[100%] [Pooled average lead content (g/gal)]
104
-------
Assuming that the lead content of leaded gasoline will not exceed 2.0 grams/gallon,
the probable pooled average lead content of gas was calculated. The lead content
of gas calculations are summarized in Table 5.
»
Automotive Lead Particle Size Distributions
The primary work on particle size distributions has been performed by
Hirschler and Gilbert, 1964 and Habibi, 1973. Hirschler and Gilbert show that the
weight percentage of exhausted lead greater than five microns increases as vehicle
speed increases. Their testing was performed on three cars equipped with V-8
engines and manual transmissions. The cars each had 12,500 accumulated miles.
The accuracy of Hirschler and Gilbert's data has been questioned in view of
the collection technique—i.e., total collection and subsequent dispersion and
fractionaticn of the particles. Such operations can lead to agglomeration of
small particles leading to inaccurate size distribution data. Because of possi-
ble inaccuracies in Hirschler and Gilbert's particle size data for different
vehicle speeds, it is inappropriate to use these values in modeling roadway con-
figurations.
Habibi's data on particle size distributions seems to be the best available.
Habibi measured lead emissions from a 1966 model vehicle equipped with a 327-CID
engine operating on gasoline containing three grams of lead per gallon. The
vehicle was driven on a programmed chassis dynamometer using the Federal mileage
accumulation schedule (Federal Register. 1968). The Tead^partTcTe s~fze "
distribution data is presented as a function of accumulated mileage in Figure 2.
This seems to be the most accurate available data on lead particle size distri-
bution emitted from an automobile under city-type driving. While Figure 2 shows
how particle size varies as a function of accumulated mileage, it should also be
noted that the particle size distribution varies with the mode of vehicle opera-
tion. The percentage of large particles increases with the severity of operation.
105
-------
Summary
Table 6 summarizes the emission rates for seven roadway configurations.
\
As shown in the table, automotive l(ead emission rates at a specific location
are dependent^ vehicle speed, the lead content of gasoline, fuel economy,
and traffic volume. The relationship of these variables is summarized in
equation (1).
[Emission Factor] [Lead Content of Gas (g/gal)] x ADT
= Emission Rate (1)
Fuel Economy (miles/gal) (g/veh mile)
While total lead balances show that 70-80 percent of the lead burned in
gasoline is emitted into the atmosphere, this number is not an accurate esti-
mate of automotive emissions from a particular roadway. Estimates have been
made for lead emission rates during city-type driving, cruise-speed driving,
and acceleration periods so that specific roadways can be analyzed. Knowing
the average speed, volume and flow characteristics of the traffic on a roadway,
an estimate of the automotive lead emission rate can be made using the techniques
described in this paper.
106
-------
REFERENCES
1. Act of December 22, 1975, 89 Stat. 902; 15 USC 2002.
•i
2. Austin, T.C., R.B. Michael, a/id G.R. Service, Passenger Car Fuel Economy
Trends Through 1976, Automobile Engineering Meeting, Detroit, Michigan,
October 13-17, 1975.
N
3. Bradow, R.L. Memorandum on "Lead Emission Factors", IJ. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, June 22, 1976.
4- Federal Register, "Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicle Engines",
Vol. 33 , No. 2, Part II, Department of Health, Education and Welfare,
January, 1968.
5- Federal Register, "Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New
Motor Vehicle Engines", Vol. 37, No. 221, Part II, Environmental
Protection Agency, November 15, 1972.
6. Federal Register, "Control of Lead Additives in Gasoline", Vol. 41, No. 189,
Environmental Protection Agency, September 28, 1976.
7. Ganley, J.T. and George S. Springer. Physical and Chemical Characteristics
of Particulates in Spark Ignition Engine Exhaust, Environmental Science
and Technology, Volume 8, Number 4, April, 1974.
8. Habibi, K. Characterization of Particulate Lead in Vehicle Exhaust—
Experimental Techniques, Environmental Science and Technology, Volume 4,
Numbsr 3, March, 1970.
9. Habibi, K. Characterization of Particulate Matter in Vehicle Exhaust,
Environmental Science and Technology, Volume 7, Number 3, March, 1973.
10. Hirschler, D.A., L.G. Gilbert, F.W. Lamb, and L.M, Niebylski. Particulate
Lead Compounds in Automobile Exhaust Gas, Industr. Eng. Chem. 49, 1957.
11. Hirschler, D.A. and L.F. Gilbert. Nature of Lead in Automobile Exhaust Gas,
Archives of Environmental Health, Volume 8, February, 1964.
12. Huntzicker, J.J., S.K. Friedlander, and C.I. Davidson. Material Balance
for Automobile-Emitted Lead in Los Angeles Basin, Environmental Science
and Technology, Volume 9, Number 5, May, 1975.
13. Ter Haar, G.L., D.L. Lenane, J.N. Hu, and M. Brandt. Composition, Size and
Control of Automotive Exhaust Particulates, Journal of the Air Pollution
Control Association, Volume 22, Number 1, January, 1972.
14. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, A Report on Automotive Fuel Economy,
Washington, D.C., February, 1974.
15. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP-42), Second Edition, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
February, 1976.
107
-------
16. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Factors Affecting Automotive Fuel
. Economy, Office of A1r and Waste Management, Washington, D.C., May, 1976.
17. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mobile Source Emission Factors-
Interim Document, Office of Transportation and Land Use Policy, Washington,
D.C., June 1977.
108
-------
Table 1
>
\
City/Highway Combined Fuel Economy
(miles/gallon)
Model Year Fuel Economy
1974 15.15
1973 14.89
1972 15.20
1971 15.24
1970 15.42
1969 15.47
1968 15.60
1967 16.15
109
-------
CM
CO
s-
o
re
u_
o
O
e
r>-
CM
oo
«^-
cn
in
r^.
\ r^
uu
in
CO
«*
UD
CO
CM
1
in
i
UJ
in
|HW
O
^"
in
CO
oo
i
UJ
s
en
CO
r—
CM
CM
1
UJ
UD
in
en
•a-
CM
r^
oo
i
UJ
CM
OO
O
CO
«J-
CM i—
oo
UU
<£>
CO
CM
CT>
O
CM
in
UJ
00
en
co
co
i
UJ
UD
CM
I
I
UJ
en
r>.
co
CO
CM
UJ
oo
O
en
CM
i
UJ
en
CO
VD
cn
CO
CM
I
in
CM
ro
r-.
in
co
CM
i
UJ
CM
CO
OO
O
co
f-.
I
UJ
oo
(•s^
00
en
in
,_!
i
p%
cn
^-~
**£
a.
UJ
*••*
4J
C
CM
UJ
en
in
in
UD
cn
in
= +
i""
CM
1
UJ
cn
CM
1
UJ
cn
in
oo
i
UJ
CM
OO
O
CO
«J-
CO
UJ
CM
0
O
OO
1
UJ
in
m
CM
UD
r-
CM
UJ
in
in
CM
i
UJ
00
oo
en
cn
CM
cu
i
i
£
o
' *
f> -O
<: cu
+ cu
CM O.
OO U1
tM
o >
c
o
o
(U
o.
CO
UD
cn
en
UD
cn
o
cn
cn
CM
cn
o
o
•sj- £1
co
en
-I- °
1 3
Z- UJ
CU
a:
QJ
-------
Table 3
V
Fraction of Annual Ught-Duty Vehicle
s Travel by Model Year
Age Fraction of
Years Annual Travel
Ref: AP-42, Supplement 5
1 .112
2 .143
3 .130
4 .121
5 .108
6 .094
7 .079
8 .213
111
-------
Table 4
A
\
Average Fleet Fuel Economy
x (miles/gallon)
•\
Calendar Year Fuel Economy
1974 12.4
1977 13.3
1978 14.0
1979 14.8
1980 15.7
1981 16.8
1983 19.1
1985 . 21.7
1990 26.2
1995 27.4
Ref: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,
A Report on Automotive Fuel Economy, Washington, D.C., February, 1974.
Ref:2 15 USC 2002
112
-------
cu
ro
a»
c
o
t/)
M-
O
o
o
•o
(O
(U
cu > c— »
r— CU^
c cn
-a o •**.
O "O «T5
O
I— t (t CO
00 S-
S *2?
Q
LU
Q Sf
< S- co
LU 1 CU
z? ,
CO O "O co
LU • _I J-
a X cn
§ *
l>s CU
1 I—
a. ^
t_
(O
a
*
•K
LU
*^
*
f
Or^^fOCOLOLDLf)
CM>— i— ^r-OOOO
1^. ^ O CO LO LO LO
r— i— r- 0 0 0 O
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
oooooooo
OCMLOLOlD'd-COr^
O'—uncoO'— oco
i— CM CO LO U3 l>> r>
cp cn cn vo to CM 10 CD
r— vo cn r^ cn cn 10
cn CO LO LO r— in r—
oooinLO«d-vocMCo
oogtj-r— cn.cncni^
o oo r** vo ^ co CM CM
^* in to f*^ oo cn o r—
r^*- r**» r% r^» r^ f^» co co
cn cn cn cn o** cn c^ cn
<3- m cn LO co
CO CM •— r— i—
o o o o o
in LO LO LO in
O O O O O
in LO in in in
0 0 0 0 O
O f^ CT) 00 r—
LO cn CM ^j- i£>
co co cn CTI CT>
0 0 0 0 O
rvl fVI CSJ CVJ
LO CM
o ^*-
ro t
o co i— CM cn
LO O f^ LO CO
f— 1—
CM CO ^f LO co
CO CO CO 00 CO
cn cn cn cn cn
r— CT) CO LO
r- O O O
o o o o
LO in LO in
0 O O O
in LO in in
o o o o
CM cn co o
r^» f*«* co o
cn cn cr> o
o o o o
CO t— Is* O
CM CM r-
i~>. co cn o
CO CO CO CJ1
cn cn cn cn
X
a
LU
X
O
I
LU
II
00
c
3
II
CD
C
*
*
CO
c
o
3
cn
cu
a.
LU
JD
TJ
-------
cu
ro
cu
•J-J
cO *"""**
a: u
0)
O 1
V) -v.
«/J C7>
'{=""""
UJ
~
•— -o
fO J=
O CU
J>
en^"'
rO U
JL. »r*
Q; M-
5* -t-T
(/) ^t fO
C 4-
O 1—
ro , — ,
cnCI' E " —
•r- o ro
«*- r- CO)
CQ » *" «r-
ro §- "cujs
T3 U.
CD r*"™
cu c"
>
rc
•i
ro
O
n **o r^.
i i > i
O O O
i — r — i —
XX > X
^j-cooo
cnocnoooininevfoocM
»~~ cn 10 f-^OinCM«tf-
CM CM CM CM CM CM CO CO ^J" ^f
in in m in
oooommLncM.— oo
CMr- OOOOOOOO
•si-r^ooenor— comoin
^xp»»r^r^.cocooooocncn
cn en cn en cn en oS cn en cn
-C
Q.
E
O t-
m vo o
in 4-J
OJ II 0
u ra
o "a u-
eC CU
0) C *3"
TJ ex o in
CU CO -r- •
i 1 £™ ^^
ro -f ro • i/i
J- E f— CD -r- II
3 -r- i > e
D: _j «* < uj
10 r^
1 1
o o
f— f—
X X
O CO
r— «3-
o
o
0K
in
CM CM
in v£>
O 0
CM •—
«* r-.
cn en
"no
•r*
4J
C
CU 01
•a c
•r- ro
O 1
&. CM
00
1
O
X
o cn vo co co r^* ^"
r~- i — o cn «* <* CM
CO CM CM r— 00 ^ i—
-
i — r— CM in co in o
r-. oo cn o co <£> CM
in in in
oo m in in CM f— o
o o o o o o o
co en o r- co in o
r^. P>» oo oo oo oo cn
cn cn cn er» cn cn cn
.c
a.
E
0 i-
CO O
•p
II U
ro
•a Li-
eu
cu c CM
a. o CM
t/5 -r-
m
• in
CD -I- It
> £
<: ui
00
,_
in
CO
CO
in
o
o
in
en
cn
CM
114
-------
4J
C
o
c
o
re
S_
3
cn
C
c
o
CJ
re
«
re
$_
o
w-
Ol
4->
re
r^
C
O
• ^
in
> re"
re .c
a «»-
«t re
s-
I—
^>'-"^
O *""
C 01
O ^
U./k
I/I
LU a>
^5
u.
*^— s.
,«.
(tj
Ol
C OS
(Us
4->
C (U
o c
Of T-
*r*~
-o 'o
re
0) re
_1 CJ
o
s_
rt
re
-1
n!
o
LO VJD r^»
i i ' i
O O O
I— • f— r—
X X » X
OSCOLDCO'— COOOOJ\OCO
OJ tO r— CO LO O LO ^i" Ol f^
COr— r— COLOtOOJc— CO' CO
s
•^
o
o
o
**
00
r-"
r-
3S ^J" LO OS ^ CO r— LO i — f—
^OJCO'tl-VOOOOJLO'sfVO
LO LO LO LO
OOCOLOLOLOOJr-OO
OJr— OOOOOOOO
'^fOvOOOSOr— COLOOLO
p**- r^« r*^ r^N co co co co os os
oiosoiososoio'tososos
JZ
a.
E
CO i-
^ o
u a
3: T3 i!iu
CX 0) LO
X (U C O
uj a. o «*
OL) — •
c c to
re re -to
jQ r— O) ••- II
S_ 1 > £
=3 CO < UJ
UD r^ co
i i i
o o o
r*— |— r—
XX X
coi^os«*Loocoi — oos
OJOS<3-COCOCO«3-COO|v.
•d" r— r— CO 00 f"v CO ^"* LO re
<1) "O U.
qj , re -in
4J r— O) •!- II
•r- 1 > E
O ^ *C UJ
CO
115
-------
-£•
c
o
o ,
•*— ^
vo
•r—
<4_
C
o
>>
*o
5
(O
o
i_
o
lt«
to
(U
•P
(O
cc
c
o
•r-
to
to
•r-
o*
•p
fO **••*
o; o
o>
C to
0 •
•r- £
tO O»
.g
LU
^^ cO
f™* ^3
t? ^*
O O)
^>
— -
en
(O O
i- •!-
•
ft
"C
rtj
0
Q£
IO
1
O
r—*
X
co
CO
CM
O
0
o
f
00
o
p*.
c
c
o
CM
^
(V,
01
•
>*l
3j
O.
X
UJ
c
(O
^.
=5
to t*» LO 10 r*»
i ' iii i
o o o o o
*—*• r^* r*" r"*" 1^*
X > X X X X
CT* cTi 01 c^ co cji c3 yD *^ r^« *^ c^ oo cr> r~* cr\ o^
C5 CM 00 ^O CO 00 CO f*** IO *^ CO CM CO 00 r^» ^*" C^J
r— C0*3g«5t-«3"r— r— CMfM r~U>LOCOCMCMr— VO
X
o
0
o
ff>
CO
CM
^•vocr^cor^coocMCM or>»coo>r^.io^l"LO
^-* CM CO tO f^s CO I-O CM ^" O O r- r— • CM CO LO Is-*.
IO IT) LO LO LO LO
OOOLOLOlOCMr— OO OOCOLOLOLOCMr—
•— OOOOOOOO CMi— OOOOOO
^.oooio^— COLOOLO ^a"is^oocyiOr^coLo
p*^ r^* r^ co co co oo 01 ui r**« r^«* r^« r*^» oo co oo co
o^ o*^ c?i c^ CT^ os cj^ o^ cr^ 01 os o^ CTI CT^ o^ c^ en
-C
ex
E
Q,
00 t- 1— 5-
CO O U. O
-f*> _^>
II U II U
(0 -P (0
•O Li- 0) T3 U.
0) CU CO to
0) C O t- •!-• oo o; oo •!- •
c to cm
fO • in >> *^ • t/>
r- Cn -1- II -P r— CD -r- II
i > E 'f- i > E
LO *!C ' "I C_> ^f CT)
CTl O>
LO
vo
116
-------
O
o
VO
C
O
0
>>
•I
(0
o
C£
i.
0
to
O)
>
• ^-
(U
CT^
(U
CT
(O
L.
!
C
o
U
UJ
r-
a
4J
c
•S
C
O
o
-o
TC
OJ
^*- ^
U
cu
1
E
en
TJ
^s^
JC
CU
«— ^
U
•r—
<4»
t^>
(O
L.
h-
*~»
iO
CD
•**»»,
t/1
at
f""*
-S.
,__.
r—
01
*s^
en
cu
c
'o
I/I
5
o
s.
(O
0)
>^
fTj
2
TJ
10
,§
^j-
i
O
f""
X
o
CO
oo
o
o
oo
**
«^
CM
II
0.
i =
n
C.'.
c>
C)
C)
o
0
CM
f^.
en
a.
£
(O
an
c
0
+3
fO
0)
cu
o
U
•^
in
o
r™-
X
co in vo
r^ oo 01
i— r- r*.
V
O
o
o
**
o
00
II
•
>»J
5
nr*
*5t" VO O^
i— CM 00
CM CM CM
h-« CO CTi
O i— r—
o oo m
f— O O
r^. CO en
tr> CT> en
j=
a. s-
€ o
•«->
O U
VO
10 CU f
i— 0) -r-
i a. E
•— oo u)
V
>
O l— r- CO
in o o vo
r^** i*^ co ^*
CO •— 00 O
in rs. o m
CM CM OO CO
r^ vo «* in
CM oo in ^
m in
in in CM r—
0000
O r— CO m
00 00 00 CO
Ol CF\ O\ O^
.c
Q.
&
O
vo
n
•o
o cu
o' >> a.
p— 10 CO 00
2 C
.C «3
n en r— co
•r- 1 >
3= CO <
VO
0
f.
X
Vs
in
,3.
CM
CM
CM
CM
in
o
o
o
o*>
CTi
t-
O
*J
o
IO
U.
o
•c~
V}
(/)
•I—
c
uD
o
00
•<-
CM
5
r—
CM
CM
in
o
0
in
en
en
in
*
II
^~x
^^
I
*>w*
a.
to
rv
117
-------
s
90
80-
70r
60*-
50f
Figure 1
Percentage of Burned Lead Exhausted
vs. Vehicle Cruise Speed
Y H1rsch1er and Gilbert, 1957
DHablbl, 1970
OTer Haar, 1972
^ Sampson and Springer, 1973
Ganley and Springer, 1974
®Bradow, 1976
118
-------
9.
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3 - -
2. --
" 1. -
*o 'o
•r- .O
fe .7
o.
.6
.5.
.3--
.2--
10
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
90
Lead Particle Size Distribution
Emitted From Vi Automobile Under
CUy-Type Driving, 1968
1 Figure 2
Particle Size y vs. % Less Than
Stated Particle Size by
Accumulated Mileage (Thousands
of miles)
Ref: Habibi, Kamran. "Characterization
of Participate Matter 1n Vehicle
Exhaust." March 1973.
A « 28,000 Accumulated Miles
B • 21,000 Accumulated Miles
C 3 16,000 Accumulated Miles
D » 5,000 Accumulated Miles
% Less Than Stated Particle Size
119
-------
APPENDIX C
DEPOSITION OF PARTICLES AND GASES*
*Exerpted from Slade, David H. (ed). Meteorology and Atomic Energy
1968. Prepared by A1r Resources Laboratories, Research Laboratories,
Environmental Science Services Administration, U.S. Department of
Cotmierce, for the Division of Reactor Development and Technology,
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. July, 1968.
Pp. 202-208.
120
-------
202
METEOROLOGY AND ATOMIC ENERGY— 1968
§5-3
P
Pa
V, a,
a>
Atmospheric dynamic viscosity
(ML-1!"1), Eq. 5.36
Particle density (ML"3), Eq, 5.35
Atmospheric density (ML~3), Eq. 5.35
Standard deviation of the distribution
of material in a plume in the y and
z directions (L), Eq. 5.44
Average concentration (ML~3), Eq.
5.33
Amount of aerosol removed per unit
time per unit area (ML~2T~1), Eq.
5.39
5-3 DEPOSITION OF PARTICLES
AND GASES (Isaac Van der Hoven)
List of Symbols
Symbols used frequently in Sec. 5-3 on the de-
position of particles and gases are listed here.
(The dimensions mass, length, time, and tem-
perature are abbreviated as M, L, T,andD, re-
spectively. The equation number indicates the
first appearance of the symbol.)
CD Drag coefficient (dimenslonless),Eq,
5.35
Cy, C, Button's virtual diffusion coefficients
(L"'5), Eq. 5.38
g Gravitational acceleration (LT~2), Eq.
5.35
h Height of source above ground (L).
Eq. 5.38
n Button's parameter associated with
stability (dimensionless), Eq, 5.38
Q', Q$ Initial source strength (MT~'), Eq.
5.38
Q'x Depleted source strength at a dis-
tance, x, from the source (MT"1),
Eq. 5.42
•r Particle radius (L), Eq. 5.35
u Average value of the wind component
in the direction of the mean hori -
zontal vector wind (LT"1), Eq. 5.38
v,i Deposition velocity (LT"1), Eq. 5.41
VR Fall velocity (LT~'), Eq. 5.35
A Mean free path of air molecules (L),
Eq. 5.37
5-3.1 Gravitational Settling
The earth's gravitational field plays an im-
portant role in the deposition of particulate
matter on the earth's surface. The rate of
descent of the particle depends upon a balance
between the aerodynamic drag force and the
gravitational force exerted by the earth. For a
Hmooth spherical particle, neglecting the effect
of slip flow, this balance may be expressed as
Q
P. v£ CD = r gp
(5.35)
where the notation is as given in the list of
symbols. Equation 5.35 cannot be solved directly
for the fall velocity because the drag coefficient
is an empirical function of the Reynolds number,
Re, and therefore also of velocity. McDonald
(1960) has conveniently plotted this empirical
relation for Re =^ 1.0 from which values of fall
velocity vs. particle size can be computed. For
the Reynolds number range between 10~4 and 10,
the relation CD - 24/Re may be used, and. since
Re - 2pavsr/X Eq. 5.35 reduces to the familiar
Stokes equation
1 ..2 _ „
(5.36)
The effect of the slip flow upon the fall ve-
locity is a function of the ratio of the mean free
path of the air molecules to the particle size. It
can be expressed by multiplying the fall velocity
by a slip correction factor (Davis, 1945)
1
1.26 i 0.4 exp
(5.37)
where * is primarily a function of altitude.
121
-------
85-3.1
PROCESSES AFFECTING FFPLUENT CONCENTRATIONS
203
The effect of shape upon fall velocities is, on
the average, to reduce the velocity by about r
from that of a smooth sphere. Smooth ellipsoidal
particles theoretically will vary in fall veloci-
ties by factors ranging from 0.5 to 1.04.
At fall velocities less than about 1 cm/sec,
the effect of sedimentation is negligible, and
vertical movement of the particle is largely
controlled by the larger vertical turbulent and
mean air motions. Figure 5.4 (after Hage, 1964)
shows the fall velocity of smooth spheres with a
density of 5 g/cm11 as a function of the altitude
and particle diameter, with inertia terms and
slip flow corrections taken into account where
significant. It can be seen that the predominant
Ou e Ou JOu <0u SOu ZOOM "OOu 800a
Z3-
20-
10''
10' I0!
fALL VELOCITY (cm/Me)
10"
Fig. 5,4—Fall velocity of smooth spheres with a
density of 5 g/cm3 as a. function of altitude and parti-
cle diameter (microns). (From Hage, 1964.)
factor affecting fall velocity is the particle size.
Similar fall-velocity computations foraparticle
with a density of 2.5 g/cm3 are given by
McDonald (1960aJ.
In the range where the sedimentation rate is
significant, the vertical transport of an initially
airborne particle (fall velocity greater than
about 1 cm/sec) depends upon horizontal as well
as vertical transport and diffusion. For fall ve-
locities ranging from about 1 to 100 cm/sec, the
diffusion of a cloud of particles under homoge-
neous horizontal transport (no wind shear with
height) can be described by assuming that the
particles are diffused according to a statistical
diffusion model, such as that of Button (1953),
and at the same time that they will settle with
appropriate fall velocities. For the case of an
elevated plume, the effect is essentially that of
the downward tilt of the plume center line, which
can be expressed by replacing the constant
height of the plume center line in the Sutton
equation by a variable expression such that
x (x,y,0) =
. exD xn-2 Y
x^ exp ~x c2
(5.38)
With the assumption that the particles are re-
moved (deposited) when they rearh the ground -
air interface, the deposition pattern can be de-
scribed by the expression
(x,y,0)
(5.39)
where w is the amount removed per unit time
per unit area and \ is the volumetric concen-
tration pattern of the air at the surface.
Van der Hoven (1963) used this tilted plume
model to describe the observed deposition pat-
tern of radioactive effluents and included a
cloud depletion factor (Csanady, 1955) of
1 ~
1
(l-n/2)(h0u/xvR-l)"f 2
(5.40)
where n is one of Button's diffusion parameters.
In practice the tilted plume model is only appli-
cable in a well-mixed atmospheric layer, such
as is typical of daytime adiabatic conditions
within the lowest thousand meters.
The effect of horizontal wind-direction shear
in the vertical becomes important as a diffusion
mechanism if there is an initial distribution of
particle sizes with height. With an initial cloud
dimension of about 1000 m and particle fall ve-
locities greater than 1 m/sec, the effect of
turbulent diffusion on the ground deposition
pattern can be neglected. The problem then be-
comes that of calculating particle trajectories
using the appropriate fall velocity of each parti-
cle and the resultant wind vector of the atmo-
spheric layer through which the particle falls.
This technique as described by Kellogg, Rapp,
and Greenfield (1957) has been applied primarily
to the particle cloud resulting from surface
nuclear-device detonations to calculate the fall-
out pattern for the first few hours after detona-
tion.
122
-------
204
METEOROLOGY AND ATOMIC ENERGY •- 1968
85-3.2
5-3.2 Dry Deposition
,>-:<.2.f I)<-i>onition Velocity. The observed fart
that the deposition rate of small particles onto
the ground can be greater than can be explained
by the appropriate gravitational fall velocity has
focused attention on nongravitational and non-
precipitation mechanisms, such as surface im-
paction, electrostatic attraction, adsorption, and
chemical interaction. In analyzing the deposition
of spores, Gregory (1945) concluded that the
deposition rate was proportional to the immedi-
ate ground-level air concentration. Chamberlain
(1953) defined the ratio of the deposition rate to
the immediate ground-level air concentration as
the deposition velocity, which, analogous to Eq.
5.39, can be stated as
u ' v,iX (x,y,0)
(5.41)
The interesting feature of such a formulation is
that by using it as an experimental tool to com-
pute v(x,y) is the surface deposition at (x,y)
and Q'x is the residual source at x meters down-
wind. The depletion of the source per unit dis-
tance is given by
(5.45)
which can be rearranged as
r^=.(?yz- p-
Jo Qi W U Jn *.
If Q' - Qo at x = 0, then
_dx
exp
vd
dx
a* exp
and therefore
QJ I rx
QreXP a."
I »/o z
exp
(5.46)
(5.47)
(5.48)
Since a, is not generally available as an
analytical function of x in the generalized
Gaussian form, the integral expression in Eq.
5,48 was evaluated numerically using the ex-
perimentally derived values of CT*(X) given by
Hilsmeier and Gifford (1962). Figure 5.5 shows
the depletion fraction, (Q'/Qj), as a function of
distance from the source, diffusion category (in
terms of Pasquill types or the corresponding
values of cm as given in Chap, 4, Sec. 4-4.4),
height of release, a deposition velocity of 1 cm/
sec, and a mean wind speed of 1 m/sec. To ob-
tain depletion fractions for other deposition
velocities and wind speeds, we may use the ex-
pression
123
-------
85-3.2
PROCESSES AFtECTING Kf H.UENT CONCENTRATIONS
205
nnrr
^
U!
0.
>•
*•- -
J
J
5
a
ul
- *'-.
'- -
- E
QOO
_ in-
-
-
-
;
-
1 IJ
^
4
g
?
o ~
— >*
e
"o
(HI •
J
-- |D
C5UI ..
co a
- a. t-
- E ~
:"^
7
-
-
;
I 1
u
v
2
n
N
0
b
O if o m ~
0 - 0
b"|>
o £ w
.*§ C
o
£•
"S w
Ps
&£f§
T3 4> C
< s
D
—H
O,
3
O T3
E'M S
o n "°
"o-£
° J> b£>
• "" a;
6£
*O 1*
'III
W rl n)
124
-------
2 Of!
MKTMOHOLOGY AND A'lOMIC KNEKUY
S5-3.2
M .
VQo'A "
Qo'
(5.40
'(I/I
where the subscript 1 refers to values found in
Fig. 5.5 and the subscript 2 refers to the de-
sired values. Thus, for example, to find the de-
pletion fraction at a distance of 104 m for a
source 50 in high, a uj of 1 m/sec, a vi)0 of 0.1
cm/sec, and a type F diffusion category, first
find, in Fig. 5.5, the value of (Q'/^i for h -
50 m, x 10" in, u 1 in/sec, and vd 1 cm/
ser: (Q'/Qn), 0.50. Now substitute this value
in Eq. 5,49,
(0.50)OJ - 0.93
The Chamberlain and the generalized Gauss-
ian depletion models assume that the shape of
the concentration profile in the vertical is un-
altered by deposition. In an approach suggested
by Calder (1961), K theory diffusion equations
(see Chap. 3, Sec. 3-2.1,2) were used to de-
scribe the effect of deposition on a plume. In
models of this type, the reduction of concentra-
tion caused by removing material from the
cloud is not distributed evenly through the depth
of the cloud but depends upon the profile of ver-
tical mixing. Therefore the shape of the vertical
profile of concentration will change as the com-
putation proceeds. Smith (1962a) schematically
illustrates the effect for a case where h 0.
VK 0, v(| •> 0, and the exchange coefficient is
constant with height. The net result is a more
rapid depletion of thr bottom portion of the
plume; so downwind from the source the height
of the maximum concentration is above the sur-
face and increases in tho downwind direction.
Definitive field measurements to evaluate the
statistical depletion model and the K-theory de-
pletion model are not yet available. Computa-
tions show that the statistical models (Eqs. 5.42
and 5.48) give higher depletion factors than the
K-theory models under stable conditions.
.>-.'(,i..'l /)r/>i>.«ifiini Ui'fMHmiiriif*. AlUOHg tllO ill) -
portant measurements of the deposition of ra-
dioactive vapors and aerosols are the pioneer-
ing efforts of Chamberlain (1960) at Harwell.
Ho was concerned with the fission products
formed in reactors or by nuclear detonations.
The isotope n'l was one of the more important
fission products studied. Although liberated as a
vapor, 131I is thought also to be adsorbed on
condensation nuclei which are too small to have
an appreciable gravitational settling velocity
but which, nevertheless, deposit on surfaces un-
der electrostatic, chemical, and other physical
* J 4 t
forces. Chamberlain s I-vapor-release ex-
periments were conducted both in the wind
tunnel and in the free atmosphere and included
simultaneous air concentration and deposition
measurements on natural and simulated leaves
and grass and on filter paper.
Recently, a series called Controlled Environ-
mental Kadioiodine Tests (Hawley, Sill, Voelz,
and Islitzer, 1964) was conducted at the National
Reactor Testing Station in Idaho to trace the
radioiodme through the air —vegetation-cow-
milk-human chain. The field results of both the
Harwell and Idaho tests are summarized in
Table 5.9a, which gives the existing meteorolog-
ical conditions and the computed (fromEq. 5.41)
deposition velocities for various collection sur-
faces. Similar results on the deposition of I31I
were obtained by Convair (1959, 1960) from the
Fission-products Field Release Test I held in
Idaho (NETS) and Test II held in Utah (Dugway).
Results are summarized in Table 5.9b. Cham-
berlain (1959) further computed an I3tl deposi-
tion velocity averaging 0.4 cm/sec on grass for
the Windscale accident; Islitzer (1962) com-
puted 0.2 cm/sec on sagebrush for the SL-1 ac-
cident, which occurred in the winter.
From these results one would conclude that
the dry-deposition velocity of 13I1 ranges over
an order of magnitude and is dependent, to a
large extent, upon the characteristics of the
vegetation and ground surface. It is not clear if
or how wind speed, thermal stability, or atmo-
spheric turbulence affects the velocities. It is
also possible that downwind distance has an ef-
fect because of a physical change in the iodine,
for example, from a vapor to an aerosol. At
present, without really having any information
on the physical processes involved in the dry
deposition of 131I upon natural surfaces, a value
of 2.0 cm/sec for grass or water surfaces ap-
pears appropriate as .in average maximum, and
somewhat smaller values ranging down to 0.5
cm/sec, for soil and snow surfaces.
The Convair (1959, 1960) studies essentially
involved the release and downwind measure-
ment of various radioactive isotopes from
irradiated metallic reactor fuel elements, in-
cluding isotopes of iodine, cesium, ruthenium,
125
-------
PKOCKSSI-.S AM-KCTlNi; II I'LUKNT CONCKNTKAT1ONS
207
SCMMAHV UK '''I 1)1
( ),\ KIKl.O i:\Pi KIMKVI KKHU1 TS*
Deposition s elciL'lts ,
cm/sec
(liasfc.
Soil
Snow
('a rbon
Clovr.'r leases
I'aper leases
Killoi paper
Sticks paper
V\ mil speed, in/ see
1- riclion Vcloi ny ,
cm/see
lfoiii;hiies.s len^Hi,
I'lll
Downwind dislaiieo. m
< n ass eos er, u/i"''
Stability
'Chamberlain, 1000
-,:
llai ui ' •. -is Idaho tests
1 2 •; i 0 o 7 1 11 Snosv
1 !J 2.0 ) .« .'( 7 1 .7 l.f 1.1 0.0 1 0
O.fs 0.4
0.2
o.ii 0.7 n.y
11! Ii !> 0 5 0 If
2 (1 1 ."> 1 .0 I) (i
O.d 0 7 0.!) t) d (1. 1)
0.2 O.I ll.li
0.2 1 H 0.2 11 1 .)> 2.1! 1! !) 7.1 '.I.!! (i.O
|h ISO Ih l!.s 10 jo 20 (il (i!) 00
'.' s ] .,', 1 .;> "| "| ;, o | 11 ;j | ] ..-, j.|
10 20 2d I'D 20 inn loo '(on ;;7., .)|n
.)(Ki 20'i 200 1 ,'H 120 lild 12» l.jll 21(3 Snosv coser
Lapse Neiilr.il lapse lapse Neulial lapse Neutral Lapse Lapse Stable
, and llawley. Sill, Voel/, and Islit/.er, 1!)(U
ible i ,V\IH i:tll K1I-.LU HJOLKASL TKSIS*
I-. K H 1 2 ;i A 5 8 10 11
l)e|iusil Inn velneil y.
ell) /sei
(11ass
Soil
Sllc'ky paper
U'aliT
Wind speed, in/see
1.2t
I . I
d 7
ll I
5.0
1 1
2.7
llounwind dislunee, ni 1 .lidll l.li'Ml 1,1.011 H2.IIOII 1 ,0(Ki 1,00(1 1 ,0111) l.oou 1,11110 1,000 Id,00(1
Stability Lapse Lapse Stable Stal.le Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable
•Convair, litJ'J, IDiiO.
1 Downwind distance of 2(KKi m.
distanco ol 1000 in or less.
zirconium, cerium, niobium, und tellurium lK K1KLI) HKLKASK TKST
Dl'./'OSLI ION VKLOCITIKS
Soil
s elocil ies, cm/see
l>: ,is~ Sticks paper
1 ' s s !>.!> (.))' o ii I ( |.;i 02(21) 02(117)
""Hu 2..'i (<.)} 0.4 (1G) O.b (20) 0.4 (9b)
"'/.r, Hr'Nb 5.7 ((i) 2.U (6) 1.4 (10)
H1Ce 0.7
1?7TC, I2lf'lc 0.7(8)
'Number in parentheses indicates the number of
determinations.
126
-------
20H MKTKOKOLOGY AND ATOMIC ENERGY - 1968 85-4.1
Another technique used in calculating de-
position velocities is material-balance mea-
surements such as performed by Islitzer aim
Dumbauld (1963) in their fluorescent-particle
studies. The technique involves the determina-
tion of the mass flux of material through a ver-
tical plane perpendicular to the mean wind
direction. The downwind decrease of this flux is
attributed to a material loss through deposition.
Using uranin particles with a median diameter
of 1 n and a fall velocity of less than 10~2 cm/
sec, Islity.er and Dumbauld computed deposition
velocities of 0.2, 2.4, and 7.1 cm/sec for in-
version, neutral, and lapse conditions, respec-
tively, for the arid terrain in Idaho. From data
presented by Simpson (1901), these authors also
computed a value of 0.5 cm ''sec for four stable
cases with zinc sulfide submicron particles
over similar terrain at Hanford, Wash. These
and other deposition data are quoted in a sum-
mary article by Gifford and Pack (1962).
Two conclusions seem apparent from the
available field data on the deposition of vapors
and submicron particles, i.e., that chemically
active materials such as I31l deposit more
readily than inactive materials such as 137Cs or
nonradioactive fluorescent particles and that
vegetation surfaces such as grasses and bushes
provide removal rates that are greater than
bare surfaces. At present, however, what effects
atmospheric transport and diffusion parameters
have upon deposition or what effect more com-
plex surfaces, such as buildings and forests,
have upon deposition rates is not clear.
127
-------
APPENDIX D
CALCULATION OF CRITICAL AMBIENT LEAD CONCENTRATION
BELOW WHICH THE NAAQS WILL BE ATTAINED BY 1982
DUE TO MOBILE SOURCES IN URBANIZED AREAS
128
-------
APPENDIX D
CALCULATION OF CRITICAL AMBIENT LEAD CONCENTRATION
BELOW WHICH THE NAAQS WILL BE ATTAINED BY 1982
DUE TO MOBILE SOURCES IN URBANIZED AREAS
ASSUMPTIONS
1. A NAAQS for lead of 1.5 ug/m , maximum 30-day mean to be
attained by 1982.
2. No change in urbanized areas of traffic (VMT), average vehicle
speeds, or stationary source emissions between 1976 and 1982.
3. No change in the level of control on stationary sources in
urbanized areas between 1976 and 1982.
4. No reduction in lead emissions between 1976 and 1982 from
vehicles other than automobiles.
5. Automobile lead emissions contributed 90 percent of total lead
emissions in urbanized areas in 1976.
6. A background lead concentration originating from outside the
urbanized area of 0.1 ug/m , 30-day mean, in 1982.
7. Air quality concentrations vary proportionally with emissions;
also, assumptions normally associated with proportional modeling apply.
CALCULATION
The proportional model relating air quality concentrations to reductions
needed to attain a standard is given by the following equation:
129
-------
R - AR S
K ~ B " _
K~TB
Where: R = the proportional reduction in emissions needed (non-
dimensional decimal);
AB= the air quality concentration in the base year (ug/m );
3
S = the level of the air quality standard (ug/m );
B = the level of the background concentration (jjg/m ).
Equation (1) can be expressed in terms of the critical air quality concen-
tration in the base year as follows:
A - S - B R (1A)
AB " 1 - R
The emission reduction obtained in an urbanized area from 1976 to 1982 can
be expressed as follows:
R = E76 " E82
Where: E7g = lead emissions in the area in 1976;
Eg2 = lead emissions in the area in 1982.
Lead emissions can be separated into two classes, automobile (E.) and
non-automobile (Ew). where:
and
E76 = EA,76 + EN, 76 (3)
E82 = EA,82 + EN,76*'
From assumption No. 5,
EA,76 = °'9E76
or
E76 = 1J1 EA, 76. (5)
*Since non-automobile source emissions are assumed to remain constant.
130
-------
Therefore,
EN,76 " 0>1 E76
- 0.1(1.11 EA>76)
EN,76 = 0>11 EA,76
The ratio of automobile emissions in 1982 and 1976 is the same as the
ratio of the automobile emission rates for the two years, or,
EA,82 * ^82_
EA,76 e76 ' (7)
where & = emission rate for 1982 (g/vehicle-mile/day);
e76 = emission rate for 1976 (g/vehicle-mile/day).
The emission rate from automobile sources is calculated by the
following equation:
"n.s
where: e = emission rate for calendar year n and speed s
n,s
(g/vehicle mile/day);
as = percentage of lead burned that is exhausted
(nondimensional; expressed as a decimal);
Pb = probable pooled average lead content of gasoline in
year n (g/gal);
T = average daily traffic (vehicles/day);
f = average fleet fuel economy for calendar year n
(mile/gal/vehicle).
The terms a and T are assumed to remain constant from 1976 to 1982.
Using values of Pbn and f from the draft lead guideline, (interpolating
where necessary), for 1976, Pbn = 1.4 g/gal and fn = 13.0 miles/gal; for
1982, Pbn « 0.34 g/gal and fna!7.9 miles/gal.
131
-------
Substituting these Into equation (8), we obtain
e-
'76,s
= (1.4 g/gal) a T
13.0 mi/gal
= 0.108 (a$T) g/mile
and
e _ (0.34 g/gal) a T
82>s - 17.9m
= 0.019 (a$T) g/mile.
Substituting these results Into equation (7), we obtain
EA>82= 0.019 (aj) g/mile
= 0.108 (aT) g/m1le
= 0.176,
or
EA,82 = °'176 EA,76.
Substituting this expression and equation (6) into equation (4) yields
E82 ' <°-176 EA,76> + <°-" EA,76>'
' °'286 EA,76 '
Substituting this result and equation (5) into equation (2) yields
R = E76 " E82
-n EA.76> - <°-
= 0.74.
Substituting this into equation (1A) yields the critical air quality
concentration:
A7fi " 1 .5 ug/m3 - 0.1 yg/m3 (0.74)
76 - r^
= 5.5 pg/m3.
132
------- |