I
I
                                    TABLE  OF  CONTENTS

I
                                        VOLUME  XV


I
 _             Control  Strategy  Preparation Manual  for  Participate Matter.   CPDD.  9/77.
•              OAQPS  No.  1.2-049.


I              Requirements  and  Procedures  for Implementing  Section  lll(D).   CPDD.   3/77.
                OAQPS  No.  1.2-072.


I            Control  of Volatile  Organic  Emissions  From  Existing Stationary Sources  -
*              Volume II:   Surface  Coating of  Cans, Coils,  Paper,  Fabrics, Automobiles,
                and Light-Duty  Trucks.   ESED.   5/77.   OAQPS  No.  1.2-073.


              Guidance for the  Future Use  of  NASN.  MDAD.   6/77.  OAQPS No.  1.2-075.


              Regulatory and Technical  Control  Strategies for  Fine  Particles.  SASD.
~              6/77.   OAQPS No. 1.2-076.


              Guideline for Implementation of the  Standardized SIP  Filing System.   CPDD.
|              7/77.   OAQPS No. 1.2-077.




I


I


I


I


1

-------
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1

-------
EPA-450/2-77-023
September 1977
(OAQPS No. 1.2-049)
            CONTROL STRATEGY
         PREPARATION MANUAL
    FOR PARTICIPATE MATTER
                    GUIDELINE SERIES
  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
      Office of Air and Waste Management
    Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
I


•                                        EPA-450/2-77-023

                                       (OAOPS NO. 1.2-049)
                                       *.    »w              P

I


I


I


I     CONTROL STRATEGY PREPARATION


|     MANUAL FOR PARTICIPATE MATTER



I


I


I



                      Standards Implementation Branch
_                    Control Programs Development Division




I


I


I


I

                  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I                    Office of Air and Waste Management
•                  Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
                   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

I
                          September 1977

-------
                  OAQPS GUIDELINE SERIES

The guideline series of reports is being issued by the Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS) to provide information to state and local
air pollution control agencies; for example, to provide guidance on the
acquisition and processing of air quality data and on the planning and
analysis requisite for the  maintenance of air quality.  Reports published in
this series will be available - as supplies permit - from the Library Services
Office (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for  a
nominal fee, from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port
Royal Road, Springfield,  Virginia 22161.
                      Publication No.  EPA-450/2-77-023

                            (OAQPS No. 1.2-049)
                                 11

-------
I
                                  PREFACE

         The Clean A1r Act, as amended through 1977, provides that a State
    Implementation Plan (SIP) which demonstrates attainment and maintenance
    of national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in each air quality
    control region (AQCR) must be developed by each State.   Since the years
    of initial development, a continuous refinement of our knowledge and
    understanding of air quality problems has occurred.   New knowledge has
    led to exploration of sources of pollution, such as  "fugitive dust" from
    construction activity, unpaved roads, etc., and "fugitive emissions" from
    industrial activity, which were not generally considered in the original
    development of SIPs.  Other activities have pointed to the need for more
    comprehensive and long-term planning for maintenance of air quality
    standards in order to accommodate the growth of new  sources of pollution.
    As a result, it is clear that a SIP must be flexible and dynamic if it
    is to perform adequately the function prescribed for it by the Clean
    Air Act.   The control strategies which comprise a SIP must be designed
    accordingly.
         This manual  has been prepared to assist EPA, State and local  agencies
    in the task of developing control strategies for particulate matter (PM).
    The manual includes a general discussion of the technical  aspects  of
    control strategy  development under 40 CFR 51; it does not  detail  the
    specific requirements of SIP development as described in  40 CFR 51
    Subpart D - "Maintenance of National  Ambient Air Quality  Standards
    Summary."

-------
     Many control  strategies  will  be revised  as  a  result  of the  deter-
minations of SIP adequacy performed by  the  Agency  during  1976  and
required by the Clean Air Act amendments  of 1977.  The manual  is
intended to address  the need  for guidance in  the accomplishment
of this task.   The emphasis in the manual is  on  a  brief discussion
of pertinent facts supplemented by references to generally available
technical documents.
     The policies  referred to in this manual  were  developed before the
recent passage of the Clean Air Act amendments of  1977.   Due to  the
large scope of these amendments, it is  difficult to predict how  policies
concerning the control of particulate matter  emissions will change.
Incorporated in this manual are the specific  non-policy changes, such
as changes in the SIP revision submission dates.   As  new  policies
develop under the implementation of these amendments, this manual will
be revised to reflect these changes.
     The manual is separated  into ten sections.  Section  I provides
an overview of the various factors to be  considered in the development
of an approvable control strategy for particulate  matter  (PM).   Section
II sets forth a step-by-step  procedure  that a control strategy developer
should follow in preparing an approvable  control strategy.  Sections
III - VIII provide,  in question-and-answer  format, a  more detailed
explanation of the recommended procedures outlined in Section  II.  Section
IX 1s a glossary of  terms used throughout the manual. Section X is
the bibliography of  memoranda, technical  papers, etc., referred  to in
the manual.
                                    VI

-------
1

ITo facilitate distribution of future updates to this manual and
to maintain a record of those persons using the manual it is requested
that the card below be filled out and mailed to:
1
•Plans Guidelines Section
Control Programs Development Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (MD 15)
• Research Triangle Park, MC 27711.
_ If additional copies are necessary please note
• space.
1
1
1
1
1
Please send future updates of the Control Strategy
_ Manual for Parti cul ate Matter to:
1
NAME :
I ADDRESS:

'
1





in the appropriate





8/77
Preparation







• In addition please send 	 additional copies of the Control Strategy
Preparation Manual for Partlculate Matter.
1
1
iii
1






-------
                           ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     Initial  drafts of this manual  were  prepared  by  Neil  Eflrd  under
the direction of Edward LUlis,  formerly Chief of the  Analysis  and
Reports Section, Standards Implementation Branch.  Comments  were  Incor-
porated and revisions made as  appropriate by Ted  Creekmore  and  Bruce
Polkowsky under the direction  of Joseph  Sableski , Chief of  the  Plans
Guidelines Section, SIB.
                                 IV

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                   Page
Preface	111
List of Figure Titles	ix
List of Table Titles	x
Section I:   Overview of Factors Affecting Attainment of National
             Standards for Particulate Matter (PM)   	  1-1
Section II:  Procedures for the Review and Development of a
             Control Strategy for PM	II-l
Section III: Questions Concerning Sources and Types of Particulate
             Emissions	III-l
  - What 1s the typical composition  of urban PM?	III-l
  - What are the major sources of PM in the nation?	III-5
  - What are the major categories of man-made particulate matter
    emissions (I.e., traditional sources) in the nation?  	  III-6
  - What are "secondary particulates"? 	  III-7
  - What is the difference between fugitive dust and fugitive
    emissions?	III-8
  - What are the most significant man-made fugitive dust sources?  .  111-11
  - What emission factors are available for fugitive dust sources,
    and what work is underway to develop additional factors?   .  .  .  III-ll
  - What silt content should be used in calculating the emissions
    from unpaved roads?	111-13
  - Which existing stationary sources of PM are required to con-
    tinuously monitor opacity?	III-14
  - Which new stationary sources of  PM are required to monitor
    opacity? 	  111-15
Section IV:  Questions Concerning Air Quality Standards and
             Measurement	IV-1
  - What are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for PM?  .  .  IV-1
  - Are the current standards for PM being reviewed?  	  IV-1
                                 vn

-------
                                                                  Page
                                                      3
  - When would the secondary  annual  standard of 60 jjg/m , annual
    geometric, mean be  used as  a  guide to determine attainment of
    the 24 hr. standard of 150  jug/m^ not to be exceeded more than
    once per year?	IV-2

  - Is there any consideration  being given to the promulgation of
    a national standard that  considers particle size or chemical
    composition?  	 IV-3

  - What ambient measurement  techniques are acceptable for moni-
    toring PM?	IV-4

  - What is meant by the term "background concentration" and what
    are the typical values taken  to  represent "background"? .... IV-4

  - What is the impact  of traditional  (stationary) sources on air
    quality?	IV-7

  - What is the impact  of the most significant man-made fugitive
    dust sources on air quality?	IV-9

  - What is the impact  of mobile  sources on air quality?  	 IV-11

  - How much ambient PM data  are  needed to indicate that a SIP
    needs to be revised; or to  serve as the basis of a control
    strategy?	IV-12

  - Historically, what  type of  air quality trends have been observed
    for PM?	IV-12

  - What guidance is available  with  regard to locating and operating
    PM monitors in the  field  to provide representative samples?  .  . IV-14

  - What is EPA policy  on the use of correction factors for adjust-
    ing TSP H1-vol readings to  allow for accumulation of particu-
    late matter during  the static mode?	IV-15

Section V:  Questions Concerning  Data  and Funds Utilization . .  .  . V-l

  - To what extent does growth  information employed in plan develop-
    ment have to be internally  consistent?	V-l

  - How could one utilize 208 Planning funds for developing air
    quality projections and subsequent plan development?  	 V-4
                                 viii

-------
                                                                   Page
Section VI:  Questions Concerning Modeling	VI-1
  - What mathematical diffusion models are recommended for esti-
    mating ambient concentrations of PM?	VI-1
  - What assistance is available for using the models in Volume 12
    and the Guideline Air Quality Models? 	  VI-5
  - What techniques are available for fugitive dust modeling? . .  .  VI-6
  - What techniques are available for fugitive emissions modeling?  VI-9
Section VII:  Questions Concerning Control Technology 	  VII-1
  - What 1s "Reasonably Available Control Technology" for stationary
    sources, and how 1s it determined for an individual  source? .  .  VII-1
  - What guidance is available or is being prepared to assist in
    determining reasonably available control technology  for specific
    sources?	VI1-2
  - How significant are emissions from oil-burning facilities and
    how can emissions from such sources be minimized? 	  VI1-4
  - Must any particular emission measurement test method be pre-
    scribed as the test method for determining compliance with
    adopted State emission limitations for PM? 	  VI1-6
  - What potential control measures have been identified for con-
    struction sources?	VI1-7
  - What control measures are available to minimize fugitive dust
    from unpaved roads?	VI1-8
Section VIII:  Questions Concerning the Control  Strategy, its
               Development, and its Revision	VII1-1
  - What consideration should be given to control automotive parti-
    culate emissions 1n the control strategy?   	VIII-1
  - What potential control measures have been identified for
    reentrained particulates? 	  VIII-3
  - What Intergovernmental coordination and review are generally
    necessary in the development of SIP control  strategies? ....  VIII-4

-------
  - How should secondary particulate  matter be considered  in  a  PM
    control  strategy? 	  VIII-7

  - How should fugitive dust sources  be considered in  the  control
    strategy? 	  VI11-10

  - How should ambient data collected during dust  storms and  other
    unusual  events be considered in  a control  strategy?	VI11-13

  - How does the EPA new source review emission offset policy
    affect SIP revisions? 	  VI11-13

  - How should the impact of stationary source fuel  switches  required
    by ESECA be considered in strategy development?   	  VIII-15

  - What is  the effect of malfunctions or breakdowns of  control
    equipment on ambient air quality  and what  is the present  policy
    in handling such periods in a control strategy?	VIII-16

Section IX:   Glossary	IX-1

Section X:   Bibliography	X-l

-------
 I
 _                               LIST OF FIGURE TITLES
 I        Figure  1:  An  Example Use of Isopleths	11-17
           Figure  2:  Normalized Particle Size Distributions Showing
 •                  Typical Grouping of Major Chemical Components . .  . 111-3
           Figure  3:  Annual Geometric Mean Sulfate and Nitrate Levels
 -                  at  Nonurban NASN Sites - 1974	111-9
           Figure  4:  Composite Annual Geometric Mean TSP Levels at Non-
                     urban NASN Sites from 1970 through 1973	IV-8

 I
 I
 1
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
 I
I
ijjm                                            X I

-------
                                                                                           I
                        LIST OF TABLE TITLES                                               •
                                                             Page
Table 1:  Emission Source Categories ............  II-8                          |
Table 2:  Emission Source Data Required  ..........  1 1-9
Table 3:  Composite Summary of Filter Analysis by Site
          Classification ..................  III-2
Table 4:  Regional Variation Major Chemical Classes Typically
          Occurring as Fine Parti cul ate  ..........  VIII-8
                                 xii

-------
  I
  *                  OVERVIEW OF FACTORS AFFECTING ATTAINMENT  OF  THE
  I
 1
                        NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR PARTICULATE MATTER
  g            The following statements summarize the pertinent  facts  concerning
  f       the nature and extent of the particulate matter problem and  the  tech-
  *       nical information available to assist in the analysis  and development
  fl|       of approvable control strategies  for particulate matter.
                1.   The National  Primary Ambient Air Quality  Standards  for  par-
                                           3                                     3
           ticulate matter (PM)  are 75 jug/m ,  annual geometric mean,  and  260 /jg/m ,
 I
 _       maximum 24-hour concentration, not to be exceeded more than once per year.
 •                                                                       3
 m       The National Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards are 60 ^ig/m , annual
          geometric mean, as a guide to be used in assessing implementation plans
                                                       3
          to achieve the 24-hour standard, and 150 >jg/m  , maximum 24-hour concen-
 |        tratlon, not to be exceeded more than once per year.
 M             2.  The term particulate matter (PM) represents a broad group of
 *        diverse substances.  These substances can be chemically categorized as
 •        primary or secondary particulate matter.  Primary particulate matter
          is any particulate matter that is emitted directly from a source, natural
 I        or manmade, and remains relatively unchanged chemically in the atmosphere.
 ^        Secondary PM 1s formed in the atmosphere from gaseous precursors.  Precur-
*        sors are generally "pollutant gases" (S09, NO  , HC) emitted from many
                                                  £    X
M        of the same sources as the primary PM and also gaseous constituents
          such as ammonia from natural sources, such as decaying vegetation.  PM
I        may also be classified physically by mass fractions as a function of
          particle size.  The "fine" fraction is usually defined as being the mass
I
I

-------
of particulates that have an aerodynamic diameter between 0.01  and 2.0
micrometers.  The coarse particulate fraction roughly encompasses  those
particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.0 to 100 micrometers.
     3.  Existing ambient air quality standards do not differentiate
with regard to chemical  composition or particle size.   Studies  suggest
that both primary and secondary components of PM have serious  health
effects.  EPA is still studying the need for specific air quality  stand-
ards for fine and/or secondary particulates.  Recent evidence  suggests
an approach which places greater emphasis on the control  of selected
categories of particulate matter such as sulfates, organlcs, etc., with
continued reliance on the current PM standard for overall control  of
particulates rather than the development of a fine particulate  standard.
     In a recent court action, NRDC v. Train (9 ERC 1425, 2nd  Cir. 1976),
EPA was directed to develop an air quality standard for lead.   Additional
air quality standards with regard to other fractions may be developed
in the future, depending on research and court action.
     EPA has scheduled review and revision of the Air Quality  Criteria
Document for particulate matter by August 1979.
     4.  The Federal Reference Method for measuring particulate matter in
the ambient air is the high-volume sampler.  The results are expressed
                                                           3
as the mass concentration of suspended particulates in jjg/m .   No  procedures
for determining equivalency of alternate methods have been developed;
hence, the high-volume sampler is the only acceptable method.   In  1974,
2,004 sites reported valid* (all four quarters) PM data to the Storage and
Retrieval of Aerometric Data (SAROAD) system.
*Validity refers to the fact that there are sufficient values to calcu-
 late an annual average.
                                  1-2

-------
               5.   Observed concentrations  of  particulate matter  are sensitive
 •        to the siting of monitors.   Slight changes  in either the horizontal or
I
Q
           vertical placement of the monitor may result 1n significant differences
                                                                           3
           in ambient measurements.  Studies have shown that a 10 to 25 ^ig/m  d1f-
 •        ference in measured annual air quality levels can result from moving a
           monitor only a few hundred feet.  The development of uniform siting
 •        criteria has been considered by the Standing Air Monitoring Work Group.
           The Work Group document, which will be discussed in Section IV, is Air
 I        Monitoring Strategy for State Implementation Plans.  EPA 450/2-77-010,
 g        June 1977.
               6.  Even though ambient concentrations of parti cul ate matter on
 I        a national basis have been reduced by approximately 4% per year between
           1971 and 1975, violations of national standards are still recorded 1n
           many portions of the nation.  In fact, 23% of the stations reporting
 g        valid data to SAROAD in 1974 had concentrations that exceeded the pri-
           mary annual standard.  These sites were located within 111 of the 247
 •        air quality control regions (AQCRs) in the nation.
               7.  While abatement actions scheduled under the original State
 |        Implementation Plans (SIPs) will continue to reduce ambient concentra-
 tm        tlons in a number of areas of the nation, it is now clear that some of
           the original SIPs are not adequate to provide for attainment and main-
 I         tenance of national standards.  In such areas, the SIPs will need to be
           revised to include either more stringent emission limitations or controls
Q         on sources which were not controlled by the original SIPs.  In July,
 -         1976, EPA officially notified 29 States, the District of Columbia and
 "         Puerto Rico that their SIPs needed to be revised for PM.
I
                                           1-3
I

-------
     8.  To the extent possible, except for the contribution  of  fugitive
dust, 1t 1s recommended that diffusion  modeling 1n  lieu  of  rollback
modeling be used in defining a source/receptor  relationship where  SIP
revisions are needed.   There are several  models which  are suggested  for
use in control strategy development, as discussed in Section  VI.   Fugi-
tive dust problems require modified techniques  not  yet incorporated  in
these models, but suggested approaches  are also discussed in  Section VI.
     9.  In areas where emissions from  stationary sources contribute to
violations of national standards, emission limitations representing  at
least reasonably available control technology (RACT) or  more  stringent
controls if necessary  to demonstrate attainment are to be fully  imple-
mented by December 31, 1982.  These plans are to be adopted and  submitted
by January 1, 1979.
     10.  With respect to individual point sources  with  defined  emission
points, reasonably available control technology (RACT) defines the
lowest emission limit  that a particular source  1s capable of  meeting by
application of control technology that  is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.  RACT may represent a relatively
stringent or even "technology forcing"  requirement  that  goes  beyond
simple "off-the-shelf" technology.  The determination  of RACT may  vary
from source to source  due to specific source configurations,  retrofit
feasibility, operation procedures, raw  materials, and  other characteristics
of an individual source or group of sources.
                                  1-4

-------
I
•             11.   Various efforts have either been completed or are underway
          to  provide guidance on determining RACT for any particular sources.
|        These efforts  are specifically identified in later portions of this
_        document.
*             12.   It has been generally acknowledged that fugitive process
M        emissions  (I.e., industrial emissions which escape to the atmosphere
          through  doors, windows, etc., but not through a primary exhaust system)
P        were  generally not included in the original SIPs.  In some cases, it has
          been  shown that fugitive emissions may be responsible for an annual
•                                          o
•        air quality impact of up to 25 jjg/m .  A study on fugitive process
•        emissions  has  recently been completed.  The study, Techn1ca 1 Gu1deline
          for Industrial Process Fugitive Particulate Emissions, EPA Report No.
§        450/3-77-010 (Prepared by PEDCo, Environmental Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio),
—        concentrates on the development of techniques to control industrial pro-
™        cess  fugitive particulate emissions defined as .  . ."Particulate matter
A        which escapes  from a defined process flow stream due to leakage, materials
          charging/handling, inadequate operational control, lack of reasonably
•        available  control technology, transfer or storage."  The guideline also
          includes techniques for estimating ambient concentrations due to these
•        sources.
•             13.   Numerous investigations to determine the cause of non-attain-
          ment  of  national standards in many areas have concluded that various
f        fugitive dust sources are contributing significant concentrations of
          particulate matter.  Fugitive dust is particulate matter that becomes
•        suspended  due to wind or man's activity or both.   Fugitive dust from
•        unpaved  roads, construction activity, and re-entrainted particles from

I

-------
paved roads have been noted as being the primary  cause of  non-attainment
in certain areas.   A study, Technical Support  Document for Development
of Control Strategies in Areas with Fugitive Dust Problems, conducted  in
Phoenix, AZ, suggests techniques for estimating fugitive dust  emissions,
the control available, and the costs associated with  controlling  such
sources.  The document includes proposed diffusion modeling techniques
for fugitive dust in arid western U.S.  regions which  may be useful  in
the following situations:
     (1)  To assess the relative importance of the fugitive dust  problem.
     (2)  To assess the need for additional stationary source  control  in
the context of the overall problem.
     (3)  Give a preliminary evaluation of the potential impact of
various fugitive dust control measures.  This  evaluation could give a
preliminary assessment of the likelihood of attainment/maintenance and
an initial screening of those fugitive dust control measures which appear
most promising for further evaluation.
     Estimates have been made concerning the air quality  impact of certain
sources of particulate matter.  These include:
     Construction Activity - Typical impact due to construction is on
                             3
     the order of 1 to 3 jjg/m  increase in citywide annual averages.  Pri-
     mary impact is at sites within the immediate vicinity and downwind
     from the construction activity up to distances of one mile.
                                  1-6

-------
I
 I
                                                                             3
 •            Rubber T1re Particles  -  Typical  annual  impacts  of several jjg/m
               have been found with the highest Impact at  Industrial  and com-
 •            merclal sites.   Sites  located near heavy traffic  areas  average
               twice the levels at other sites.
 •            Resuspended Dust -  Annual  average Impact is variable,  but a typical
               level of Important  residential monitors is  estimated at 10 to  15
                   3                  o
               jjg/m  and 15 to 20  jug/m  at  commercial  and  industrial  sites respec-
 •            tively.  The composition of  this  component  is mostly mineral matter
               and secondary PM.
 •            Additional  studies  are underway  to address  the  solution to fugitive
 •       dust problems in other areas  of the U.S.,  and guidance 1s expected to be
          made available by September 1977.
 •            14.   States must consider  the control of fugitive dust  in their SIPs
          where it  is a manmade problem,  especially  in large urban areas.  The date
 (1        for submittal  of plans for  the  control  of  fugitive dust as well as other
 fi        control measures is  January 1979.   These plans must  include  specific
          regulatory actions that  may be  needed  to attain  national standards, and
 •        may include various  interagency agreements,  demonstration grants to
          investigate possible control  solutions  and other actions which may be
 •        needed for an  adequate control  strategy.

 I

I

 I

I

I

-------
 I
 •                  PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT OF A
                         CONTROL STRATEGY FOR PARTI CULATE MATTER
 I
 m       Scope and Objectives
               The development of an air pollution control strategy designed to
 •       attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
          requires an analysis of current and possible future air quality problems.
 •       It is the objective of this section to briefly present the quantitative
 M       and qualitative procedures used in developing an acceptable plan for
          the control of parti culate matter.  The amount of work involved in each
 •       step will vary from area to area depending on available data, magnitude
          of the n on- attainment or maintenance problem, types of emission sources,
 m       etc.  These steps can be summarized as follows:
 •       STEP 1:  Review available air quality data for PM to determine if
                   national standards are not being attained or will  not be
 •                 maintained.
          STEP 2:  Determine the validity of available air quality data.
 I        STEP 3:  Review valid air quality data to determine their representa-
 •                 tiveness and their limitations.
          STEP 4:  Determine if valid air quality data are of such concentrations
 I                 that a further analysis of existing and anticipated emissions
                   data should be conducted.
it        STEP 5:  Determine the boundaries of the geographic area to be considered
 m                 in the analysis.
          STEP 6:  Determine the sources of parti culate matter emissions  within
•
                   the area and calculate the emissions  from each  source.


-------
STEP 7 :  Determine the spatial  distribution  of emission  sources through-
          out the area of analysis  and allocate emissions accordingly.
STEP 8 :  Using a recommended atmospheric diffusion model,  determine
          the baseline source/receptor relationship for the area.
STEP 9 :  Determine the degree of control  that  will occur from  full
          compliance with adopted regulations.
STEP 10:  Determine the expected increase of  emissions due  to growth
          profiles, generally for the  next 20 year period.
STEP 11:  Factor growth into diffusion model  to predict future  air
          quality.
STEP 12:  If additional control  measures  are  needed to provide  for attain-
          ment and maintenance,  determine  the effectiveness of  various
          emission control measures on reducing ambient PM  levels.
STEP 13:  Determine the most expeditious  date of attainment, which must
          be before December 31, 1982.
     Detailed explanations of the foregoing steps  now follow.   More detail
and background on this procedure can be found 1n Air Qualjty Analysis
Workshop, Volume I - Manual. EPA-450/3-75-080a, November  1975.
                                  II-2

-------
  I
           STEP 1 - Review available air quality data for PM to determine 1f
  |        sufficient data are available to provide evidence that the national
  g        standards are not being attained or will not be maintained.   Compari-
           son of measured ambient levels with the NAAQS is the primary means of
  fl        determining whether air quality requirements are being achieved.  Where
           the NAAQS are being exceeded, the reason for the high levels must be
 1        determined and the need for corrective action evaluated.   Valid data
 _        from at least one site with one year of data should be available.  How-
 *        ever, 3 years or more of data are preferable.  Comparison  of data over
 •        a period of years for a specific area can indicate developing air
           quality trends.  In areas exceeding the NAAQS, the trend can be used
 |        as a monitor of progress in attaining the standards.   In areas where
 _        NAAQS are being met but where growth and development are occurring,
 *        upward trends in measured concentrations may dictate a reevaluation  of
 fl        the need for specific maintenance measures in addition to  existing
           stationary source and mobile source programs.
 fl             Data should also be available from areas of expected  maximum con-
 —         centrations ; however, lack of such data should not preclude  the develop-
 *         ment of a control strategy if available data indicate valid  violations
 I         of national standards.  Where data are limited, predictive models are
           available to estimate ambient PM air quality levels.
fl         STEP 2 - If ambient air quality data indicate a potential  attainment or
—         maintenance problem, review the data to determine its validity.
™              (a)  Determine if a satisfactory measurement procedure  was used to
•         collect the data being reviewed.   Insure that each monitoring site uses
I
•
                                            II-3

-------
a high volume sampling device, as  described  in  40  CFR,  Part  50, Appendix
B.  The high-volume method is  the  Federal  Reference Method for total
suspended particulates and is  the  only  acceptable  method.  No procedures
for determining  equivalency of alternative methods have  been developed;
so all other methods are to be considered  unacceptable.
     (b)  Analyze the available air quality  data to assure their validity
and reliability.  Determine if the data were collected  by monitors that
are properly operated, maintained  and calibrated,  and if adequate quality
control procedures were utilized to assure validity of  data.
     Several guidelines have been  developed  to  assist 1n the review and
validation of air quality data:
I.   Guidelines  for the Evaluation of Air  Quality  Data.  OAQPS No. 1.2-015,
     Feb. 1974.
II.  Guidelines  for the Evaluation of A1r  Quality  Trends. OAQPS No. 1.2-014,
     Feb. 1974.
III.  Guidelines  for Air Quality Maintenance  Planning and Analysis,
     Volume 11,  A1r Quality Monitoring  and Data Analysis, OAQPS No. 1.2-030,
     Sept. 1974.
IV.  Designation of Unacceptable Analytical  Methods of  Measurement for
     Criteria Pollutants. OAQPS No.  1.2-018, Sept. 1974.
NOTE:  The purpose of Step 2 1s to insure  that  the data which will be used
as the basis of  a control strategy are  valid, or can reasonably be assumed
to be valid.  If it 1s believed that the data are  questionable and factors
exist that could reasonably challenge the  data  validity, then such data
should not be used as the basis of a control strategy.   If on the other
                                  II-4

-------
I
         hand, all reasonable measures  have  been  followed  1n the collection of
  I
           the data, and unless  the  validation efforts prove the data to be Invalid,
  •        then such data should be  assumed  valid and usable.
           STEP 3 -  Review the valid air quality data to determine their represen-
  •        tatlveness and Its limitations.
  •             (a)   Determine the representativeness (I.e., how well the data
           reflect the air pollutant concentrations caused by emission sources
  •        1n  the area of interest), as suggested by the location of the monitor,
           and whether the measured  concentrations are widespread or restricted to
 •        the local  area.  This will aid in developing regulations which will be
 •        aimed at  the true cause of the violation.  For example, if a monitor is
           Influenced predominantly  by street dust, a new control regulation which
 •        addresses  stationary  sources would be ineffective 1n reducing levels at
           that monitor; only controls aimed at reducing street dust would reduce
 •        these levels.   Thus,  in order to formulate appropriate measures later 1n
 m        the development of the control strategy, it 1s Important to define as
           well  as possible the  sources which influence the monitor.
 •             (b)   Identify unusual conditions which may have influenced the data.
           Events such as  dust storms, forest fires, control equipment malfunctions
 •        or  shutdowns  can temporarily cause abnormally high ambient concentrations.
 •         EPA regulations  (40 CFR Part 51.12(d)) allow states to discount abnormal
           measurements  which occurred during such unusual conditions.  Data col-
 •         lected during unusual  conditions should not be used as the basis for
           increasing the stringency of control regulations.


I
1                                          II-5

-------
STEP 4 - Determine if valid air quality data are  of such  concentrations
that a further analysis of existing and anticipated emissions data should
be conducted.   This analysis should be conducted  if ambient  air quality
levels are equal to or exceed national  standards.   Also,  in  those areas
where growth of new emission sources is expected, the  analysis should
be conducted even if national standards are  being attained on a marginal
basis.
STEP 5 - Determine the boundary of the geographic area to be considered  in
the analysis.   From available data, determine the geographic area where
national standards are violated or are anticipated to  be  violated due to
growth of emission sources.  It is not necessary  to^use an entire AQCR
or county.  The area does not have to be a political entity. Some con-
sideration should be given to political boundaries, however, since the
regulations may be enforced by local governments.  Although  some advantages
accrue to the use of a commonly identified geographical area, as long as
the area is clearly defined, any area is appropriate for  development of
a control strategy.  The area of concern should be "future-oriented," in
that strong consideration should be given to growth of emission sources.
A diffusion model analysis may be useful in  defining the  boundaries of
the study area  (See STEP 8).
STEP 6 •- Determine the sources of particulate matter emissions  1n the area
and calculate the emissions from each source.
     The air pollutant emission inventory forms the basis of making an
assessment of air quality management problems. Because of growth, develop-
ment,  and regulatory programs applied to pollutant producing activities,
                                  II-6

-------
  I
           the emission Inventory can be expected to change  with  time,  hence  it will
  •       generally be necessary to update the  Inventory.
  •            The Inventory should be updated  to the most  recent  time period for
           which adequate data are available.  All portions  of  the  inventory  should
  I       be adjusted to the same year.   Further, the emission inventory  should
           cover the same time period as that  represented by the  air quality  data.
  •       In other words, 1f 1975 air quality data are  to be used  in the  analysis,
  •       then 1975 emission data should be used.
                The emission data which are generally needed are  generally divided
  I        into six major source categories and  various  subdivisions as indicated
           in Table 1.   Point sources are generally any  stationary  sources which
  I        may be specifically defined (or restricted) by an emission limit or
  •        constraint.   An area source 1s a collection of sources whose individual
           emission rates are small  but whose  collective impact may be  large.
  •        Exceptions to the point source definition would be large boilers using
           residual fuel oil and apartment house incinerators such  as those found
 •        1n New York  City.  These  are subject  to "specifically  defined emission
 •        limits," but are best treated as area sources in  the analysis.  Table
           2 lists the  general types of information needed for  each source type.
 •              There are several  special considerations that will  influence  the
           development  of an emission inventory.   These  include:
 •              a.  Intent of Inventory - It is  important to realize that  there are
 •         various purposes for which the emission data  are  needed.  The two  basic
           purposes are (1) to assess where the  ambient  PM problem  originated, and
 I         (2) to determine the emission  reduction Impact of various possible
           control regulations on source  emissions.   Data should  be collected to
 |         satisfy both objectives.

I

-------
               TABLE 1 - EMISSION SOURCE CATEGORIES
Source Category
    Subdivisions
  Source
Description
Industrial Process
Fuel Combustion


Transportation
Electricity Generation

Incineration

Miscellaneous
Chemical manufacture
Food/agriculture
Primary metals
Secondary metals
Mineral products
Petroleum industry
Wood products
Evaporation
Metal fabrication
Leather products
Textiles
Inprocess fuel
Other

Internal combustion
External combustion

Highway Vehicles
  Light duty gasoline autos
  Light duty gasoline trucks
  Motorcycles
  Heavy duty gasoline trucks
  Heavy duty diesel trucks
Off-highw,ay vehicles
Rail locomotives
Vessels
Aircraft
Solvent evaporation
Fires
Fugitive dust
Point
Point, Area


Area
Point

Point, Area

Point, Area
Source:  Air Quality Analysis Workshop Volume I—Manual, oj?. cit., page 41
                                 II-8

-------
  •                       Table 2 -  Emission  Source  Data Required

            Source Type                         Data Desired
 I           Point                   Pollutant  emission  rates
                                      Process  activity -  type of process, process weight
                                        Irate
                                      Control  equipment - type and efficiency
                                      Stack parameters
                                      Geocoded location
 •                                   Compliance information
 •                                   Land areaa
                                      Employment3
 J           Area                    Pollutant  emission  rates
                                      Area geometry
I                                      Area geocoded  location
                                      Area source type and activity  level
 m         aMay be useful  for  certain strategy  considerations.
              Source:   Air  Quality Analysis Workshop Volume l--Manual, op. cit. , page 42.
 |              b.   Level  of Petal 1  - The level  of  detail in the inventory must
 «         be suitable to  the  analysis  to be  performed.  It is not  adequate to
            develop an  inventory of a source category, for example,  with crude
 I         approximation methods if  the analysis will require a detailed considera-
            tion of that source's impact on air  quality.  The most detailed level
 |          should be used  on major sources that  are expected to impact signlfi-
 M          cantly on air quality.  Less detailed procedures may be  used for minor
            sources.  Recent work on  the development of A1r Quality  Maintenance
 tt          Plans  includes  a detailed discussion  of  Inventory updating procedures.
            The reader  is referred to the Air  Quality Analysis Workshop Volume I -
I          Manual,  op.  cit., page 44, and Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance
m          Planning and Analysis, Volume 7, Projecting County Emissions, OAQPS
            No.  1.2-026, January 1975, for a detailed discussion of  inventory up-
•          dating procedure.

                                            II-9
I

-------
     c.  Actual vs. Allowable Emissions - In the development  of  the
emission Inventory, it is important to keep 1n  mind that  the  desired
inventory is one that represents, as closely as possible, the actual
situation.   In this light, the effect of the following  items  must be
considered:
     Variances granted.
     Non-compliance.
     Compliance schedules.
     Improved performance.
     Seasonal operation.
     The Incorporation of stack test data into  the  inventory  whenever
possible will ensure  that these considerations  are  included.   For sources
not yet in  operation  or for the projected inventories,  the first approxi-
mation of assuming that sources will just meet  the  emission regulations
will be adequate; however, where information is available to  the contrary,
it should be Included.
     d.  Applicability of strategies - In developing the  emission inven-
tory, it is necessary to foresee what type of information might  be needed
to evaluate alternative control strategies.  If, for example, it is felt
that a strategy based on emission density (I.e., emissions per unit area)
will receive consideration, then it is necessary to know  what land area
is currently owned by the sources in the inventory.  If a strategy will be
directed toward a certain type of process activity, it  will be necessary
to know which sources use that process.
     Comprehensive guidelines are available on  procedures for calculating
emissions from various sources.  The reader 1s  referred to Guide for Com-
piling a Comprehensive Emission Inventory. EPA/APTD 1135, March  1973.
Also,  EPA Document AP-42 with Supplements 1-6,  April 1976, contains emis-
sion factors for estimating emissions from numerous sources.
                                11-10

-------
 *              Modeling of fugitive PM sources  requires  considerably  more  detail
 •         1n the emissions Inventory data with  respect to  the  physical  characteris-
            tics of partlculates.   In this regard,  merely  because  an  emission  inven-
 |         tory is modified to account for fugitive  dust  and  fugitive  emissions,
 £         1t will in all likelihood not be amenable for  use  in existing  diffusion
 *         models.  This is because the model  to be  used  must be  modified to  pro-
 fl         perly consider fugitive PM, e.g., particle size  and  density distributions
            must be suitable for such considerations  as tilt of  the plume, gravlta-
 |         tional settling, surface deposition,  wet  removal and re-entra1nment  of
 £         settled PM by wind.   Current model  improvement projects are underway to
 ™         provide techniques  to  handle these  problems, and guidance should be
 •         available by the Fall  of 1977.
            STEP 7 - Determine  the spatial  distribution of emission sources  through-
 |         out the area of analysis and allocate emissions  accordingly.
 £               To this point, the focus of the  emission  inventory portion  of the
 ™          analysis has been to generate the emission pattern generally  for the entire
 •          area under study such  as a county.  Prior experience with air  quality
            management has shown that countywide  spatial resolution of  emissions is
 |          usually too coarse  for parti culate  matter.  The  effects of  individual
 g          sources are generally  localized in  impact and  an adequate analysis and
 ™          control strategy development relies on  a  spatial resolution of emissions.
ft          The identification  of  the level  of  spatial  resolution  is  a  function  of
            several variables:
|               Available data.
                 Anticipated problem areas.
—               Anticipated problem sources.
I               Applicability  to  modeling.
•               Applicability  to  strategies.
                 Resources available.


-------
The principle constraint on spatial  resolution is  the  available  data.
If the information is on too coarse  a geographical  scale,  then an
effort is required to improve the data base.   The  spatial  resolution
should be fine enough to distinguish special  problem areas and special
problem sources.   As an illustration, it  is not possible to treat a major
metropolitan city in its entirety.   The spatial  resolution should be
able to distinguish the Central  Business  District  (CBD) from  industrial
parks and from residential  neighborhoods.   Further, the applicability of
control strategies is an important consideration and is one of the prime
reasons for using a sub-county resolution.  In some cases, control stra-
tegies may not be appropriate for application to an entire county and
the analysis should be sensitive to  these considerations.
     In order to provide for the needed spatial  distribution  of  emission
sources, it 1s necessary to establish a master grid system for the area of
analysis.  There are a variety of rectilinear coordinate systems that can
be used in developing a master grid.  It  1s desirable, however,  to use
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)  coordinates, which are universally
available on U.S. Geological Survey  maps.   The UTM coordinates offer the
widest generality and applicability.  The only translation problem occurs
when an analysis area lies  between two UTM zones where the abscissas are
not continuous.  This is treated by  means of  careful bookkeeping.
     The master grids chosen should, in general, be square with  variations
in size depending on the resolution  of the subcounty areas.  The smallest
                                 11-12

-------
 I
            grid square  chosen  should  be 1  km x 1  km.  Smaller grids should be
 •         considered only  if  the  necessary data  are available.  A "micro-inventory"
 •         around monitoring sites may be  needed  to establish source receptor rela-
            tionships, such  as  in the  case  of the  larger size fugitive dust particles,
 I         The  largest  grid square chosen  should  be 8 km x 8 km.  Larger grids would
            cancel  some  of the  subcounty resolution already achieved.  The use of
 •         dispersion models dictates certain limits on the size and number of grids
 •         and  hence  on the spatial resolution.   Although the models can theoreti-
            cally treat  any  size grid, the  accuracy suffers if the grids are too
 I         large and  computation expense increases if they are too small.
                 Once  the master grid  has been established, the calculated emissions
 •         can  be  allocated throughout the area.  There are basically three proce-
 •         dures for  determining spatial allocations of emission-producting activity;
                 Locate  the  activity directly from available data,
 •               Develop a distribution function of activity using an allocation
                   parameter (e.g., population), and
 •               A  combination  of the  above procedures.
 •          Volume  13  of the AQMA series (Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-
            County  Areas) outlines the recommended procedures for these methods as
 •          applicable to each  of the source categories.   The sources that can be
            spatially  located directly are, existing and new:
 I               Industrial  point sources.
                 Commercial/Institutional point sources.
I                 Steam-electric power plants.
                 Limited access highways.

 I
•                                          11-13

I

-------
     If the source activity cannot  be  located  directly, a distribution
function can be used to allocate emissions.  A simple model would start
with the knowledge of the activity  on  a  countywide basis and then distri-
bute this activity to each subcounty area based on that area's proportion
of some county wide parameter,  such as population or employment.  The
types of distribution functions that can be  developed include:  population,
dwelling units, dwelling units  by fuel use,  employment, land use, and area.
More detailed guidance on the subject  of allocating emissions to subcounty
areas is available in the AQMA  guidelines:
     (a)  Volume 2. Plan Preparation.  OAQPS  No. 1.2-021, July 1974.
     (b)  Volume 7, Projecting  County  Emissions, OAQPS No. 1.2-026, Jan.
          1975.
     (c)  Volume 13, Allocating Projected Emissions to Subcounty Areas,
          OAQPS No. 1.2-032, Nov. 1974.
     Until July 1, 1979, allocation of future  emissions for major new
point sources may be discounted where  EPA's  emission offset policy is
applicable.  This policy does not prohibit major new or expanded sources
1n areas that exceed NAAQSs, provided  that the new effect of the new emis-
sions together with reductions  from existing facilities beyond that required
by the SIP does not exacerbate  current primary standard violations, but
instead contributes to reasonable progress in  attaining such standards.
Due to the Clean Air Act amendments of 1977, SIPs must be submitted by
January 1, 1979, to demonstrate attainment by  1982, and there will be a
change in the usage of the offset policy after July 1, 1979.  The offset
policy may be incorporated into the SIP  1n nonattainment  areas  as part of
                                11-14

-------
I
^        the process to demonstrate attainment and allow for new  growth  by  reducing
™        emissions from existing sources.   See page VIII-13 for a  discussion  of
•        EPA's emission offset policy.
          NOTE:  The procedures outlined in STEP 6 should not be viewed as necessarily
J        separate and distinct from the development of the baseline  inventory des-
—        cribed in STEP 7.   In many instances these techniques  can be used  in parallel
•        rather than in series with the previous methods.
•        STEP 8 - Using recommended atmospheric diffusion  model,  determine  the
          baseline source/receptor relationship for the area.
g             An atmospheric diffusion  model  is used to convert the  air  pollutant
          emission data into ambient air pollutant concentration estimates.  The
•        model is an analytical tool  that  helps the air quality analyst  determine
•        the effectiveness  of his control  strategies.
               In the task of developing a  control  strategy, the choice and  use
|        of a model is a key step.   Some means of relating air  quality,  meteorology,
—        and emissions to appropriate control regulations  must  be  used,  and this
"        necessitates the development of a "source/receptor"  relationship which is
•        as accurate as possible.  Caution must be used, because  atmospheric  simu-
          lation models are  useful only  if  the user understands  their applications
|        and limitations.  The services of air pollution meteorologists  and engi-
          neers are especially important in the application of the  more sophis-
          ticated models and in locales  with complex meteorology or topography.
               The choice of which model to use is  a function  of many considerations
          including pollutant, averaging time, data requirements, model output,
          ease of use, availability, reliability, and applicability to air quality
                                            11-15

-------
analysis.  A description of the models  most  frequently  used  by  EPA 1s
presented 1n Guidelines  for Air Quality Maintenance  Planning and  Analysis,
Volume 12:  Applying Atmospheric Simulation Models  to A1r  Quality  Main-
tenance Areas, OAQPS No. 1.2-031.  Sept.  1974;  an  updated  listing  1s  pre-
sented In the Guideline  on Air Quality  Models  and Associated Data Bases,
February 1977 (Draft).
     Techniques for fugitive dust  modeling are currently  under  study by
EPA.  A discussion of this issue 1s  included on page VI-6.
     A useful form of output for those  models  that can  compute  concentra-
tions at any point is the isopleth or line of  constant  concentration.  If
the computations are made at a large enough  number of receptor  points, then
the Isopleths are easily drawn by  interpolating between adjacent  points.
The use of Isopleths is  an extremely valuable  tool in visualizing the
general air quality situation and identifying  "hot spots" (See  Figure  1).
     In determining the  Impact of various sources on air  quality  at  a
given location, it is worthwhile to  develop  a  list of the contributions
of each source to the calculated concentration at a given receptor.  Since
all of the recommended models made use of the  principle of superposition
in that the concentration is calculated as the sum of the emissions  dis-
persed from each individual source,  it is conceptually straightforward
to develop such a list.   The AQDM model has  a  routine incorporated into  it
that prepares such a list with no additional burden on the user.   This
Information is extremely useful in control  strategy development and analysis,
STEP 9 - Determine the degree of control that  will occur  from full com-
pliance with adopted regulations.
     Consider the impact on PM emissions (both Increases  and decreases)
that may result from (a) source compliance with adopted particulate
                                  11-16

-------
                                                  50
Figure 1.    An Example  Use  of Isopleths.
                               11-17

-------
matter control regulations, or the regulations  adopted primarily to
minimize emissions of another pollutant but which may have an  effect
on particulate matter emissions or concentrations, and (b) fuel  switches
that may Increase or decrease particulate matter emissions.   For the
analysis, it 1s important to tabulate such changes in emissions  according
to the dates on which they are scheduled to occur.  For fugitive dust
sources, Improvements such as city plans for paving roads  will  reduce
emissions.
     In some cases, air quality problems are caused by non-compliance
with existing regulations.  Therefore, prior to the consideration of
developing new control programs, it 1s necessary to review the enforce-
ment of existing programs.  It should be a first priority  in  the air
quality analysis to determine if enforcement of existing regulations
could achieve the air quality goals.   Only after it is determined that
full compliance with current regulations is Inadequate to  attain and
maintain the NAAQS should effort be expended on developing new control
programs.  Atmospheric diffusion modeling can be a valuable tool in
this determination.
STEP 10 - Determine the expected increase of emissions due to growth
profiles, generally over the next 20-year period.
     Growth is an inherent part of the air pollution analysis, and consi-
deration of growth is thus indispensable in the development of a control
strategy.  The variables that can be projected Include the following:
                                 11-18

-------
 I
 •             Industrial process  activity,
                Fuel  consumption,
                Transportation  activity,
I                Electricity  demand,
                Solid waste  generation, and
                Miscellaneous emission-producing activity.
 •              In  addition, the temporal and spatial distribution of these variables
           (e.g. , when new plants will come on line and where they will be located)
 I         is  important to the  air quality analysis.  In most situations, projections
 •         of  these parameters  are not available or are available only on a cruder
           scale than needed for an adequate air quality analysis, especially in
 •         attainment/maintenance problem areas.  Reliance must then be placed on
           surrogate  variables  such as population, employment, land-use, earnings,
 •         and others that are  projected with reasonable accuracy and precision and
 m         that can then be transformed Into growth factors for the desired variables.
                The information needed to develop growth factors originates from
 fl         Federal  agencies, State and local governments, and private business
           interests.  Fairly specific information can be obtained from State and
 I         local planning agencies and this is generally the recommended source for
 m         such data.  If the data are unavailable from local agencies, various
           Federally  funded planning programs should provide the growth projections.
 •         These include:   Planning under (1) Section 701 of the Housing and
           Urban Development Act of 1974, (2) the Coastal Zone Management Act of
 |         1972, (3)  the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1962 (as amended) and the
 •         Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 (as amended), and (4) Section 208
           of  the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.   Also
 I         OBERS projections of economic activity in the U.S., prepared for the U.S.
           Water Resources Council provides projections on the basis of Standard
|         Metropolitan Statistical Areas.
I
11-19

-------
     Various guidelines  have  been  prepared with  regard to obtaining and
projecting growth in  emissions  and allocating such  growth.  These tech-
niques are too detailed  to summarize  here.  The  reader is referred to
various Air Quality Maintenance Guidelines on the subject:
     (a)  Volume 2, Plan Preparation. OAQPS No.  1.2-021, July 1974.
     (b)  Volume 7, Projecting  County Emissions. OAQPS No. 1.2-026, Jan.
          1975.
     (c)  Volume 13.  Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-county AQMA,
          OAQPS  No. 1.2-032,  Nov.  1974.
     (d)  Appendices  A and B. Volume  13. OAQPS No.  1.2-032, March 1975.
     (e)  Volume 13b, Accounting for  New _Source  Performance Standards
          in Projecting  and Allocating Emissions -  Hypothetical Example,
          OAQPS No. 1.2-032,  Jan.  1975.
                                  11-20

-------
          STEP 11 - Factor growth into the diffusion model to predict future air
 I       quality.  This will allow predictions of the effect of anticipated growth
          in an area on air quality during specified future periods, and aid in
 I       selection of control strategies to attain/maintain air quality stand-
 •       ards throughout the periods.  The model will indicate the reasons for
          future problems in meeting the standards such as:  point sources, area
 I       sources, land use, or growth.
          STEP 12 - If additional controls are needed to provide for attainment
          	
          and maintenance, determine the effectiveness of various emission control
 m       measures on reducing ambient PM levels.
               When the results of the diffusion modeling analysis indicate that
 •       control measures above and beyond the existing regulations are needed
          to attain and maintain the NAAQS, then an additional  analysis  will  be
 •       needed to examine the effectiveness of various types  of control  measures.
 •       Traditional air pollution control  programs have relied on technological
          controls on stationary sources to generally achieve desired air quality
 •       levels.   Technological controls are the controls that require  emission
          reductions from specific source categories through the addition  of flue-
 •        gas cleaning devices, changes in process method or equipment,  or fuel
 •        substitution.   In some cases, in order to attain and  maintain  NAAQS,
          it may be necessary to require additional non-traditional considerations
 •        such as  land use and transportation planning measures.   In choosing
          strategies for evaluation, both options should be considered through
 I        the use of diffusion modeling where possible; however,  since land use
          control measures are in general  significantly more  difficult  to  implement

flj        consideration in strategy choice.
and enforce,  the use of technological  controls  should be  given  first
I
                                  11-21

-------
     Specifically, if current regulations  do not  require  existing
stationary sources to install reasonably available  control  technology,
then such controls should be required where  they  are  needed to  provide
for attainment and maintenance of national standards.   Use  of this
strategy should be considered in light of  the potential hardships that
might be created by land use or transportation controls.
     Use of the modeling results from STEP 11  provides  information  on the
magnitude and geographical extent of the control  measures needed.   In
general, more than one option should be considered  for  each problem situ-
ation.  This will give the control agency  a  perspective on  the  range of
possibilities that could be employed to attain and  maintain the NAAQS.
It also gives the agency a contingency plan  in the  event  that a particular
option is found to be unacceptable at some later  point.   It should  be
recognized that control strategies need not  be applied  uniformly across
the study area.  Certain sub-areas may require stricter controls on dif-
ferent types of sources.
     The coordinated effort between air pollution control,  regional
planning, transportation planning, and other groups is  an underlying
assumption for the entire air quality analysis system.  The agency  taking
the lead role in the analysis must consult with other groups as necesary.
The choice of strategies for evaluation is one of the most  crucial  points
at which this consultation takes place. Some strategies  may be eliminated
on the basis of social, economic, or institutional  constraints  without the
                                  11-22

-------
 I
           necessity of a detailed evaluation of these considerations.   Agencies
 |        participating 1n the air quality analysis should have the experience to
 •        know which options are unacceptable for the study area.
           STEP 13 - The State must determine the most expeditious  date for attaln-
 I        ment, which must be before December 31, 1982.
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
-                                           II-23

-------
 I

 I
 •                         QUESTIONS CONCERNING SOURCES AND
 |                          TYPES OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS

 I        QUESTION - What is the typical composition of urban PM?  In other
 —        words, if one were to analyze the material on a high-volume filter,
 ™        what would one find?
 •        ANSWER - Recently a number of hi-volume filters collected in 14
           different cities were analyzed by optical microscopy.   These samples
 gj        were collected at areas of various land use categories within the
 _        cities to determine the "typical" composition characteristics of
 •        urban PM.  The results are shown in Table 3.  As can be seen, minerals
 •        and combustion products are the major categories with  approximately
           65% and 25% of the total PM being comprised of these components
 H         respectively.  It should be noted that in undeveloped  or rural areas,
 _         the mineral portion of PM is significantly high (i.e., approximately
 •         90%).
 •              The particle size and chemical composition of PM  are important.
           Optical microscopy does not "see" particles less than  1-2 micrometers
 •         in diameter.  Thus, a chemical analysis and accompanying particle
           sizing would provide the most revealing information about the compos i-
 •         tion of PM.  Figure 2 illustrates both the general chemical makeup
 •         and particle size distribution of PM in the air.  The  plot is constructed
           so that the area under any section of a curve is proportional to the
I         concentration in that size range.  It is clear that very fine particles

I
                                            III-l
•

-------
Table  3.  ' COMPOSITE SUMMARY OF FILTER ANALYSES BY  SITE CLASSIFICATION3
Site classification
No. of filters
No. of sites
Average concentration,
ug/tn3


Components
Minerals
Quartz
Calclte
Feldspars
Hematite
Mica
Othcrb
Combustion Products
Soot:
Oil
Coal
Ktsc. aootb
Classy fly ash •
Incinerator fly ash
Burned wood
Burned paper
Magnetite
Carbon black
Otherb
BloloRlcal Material
Pollen
Spores
Paper
Starch
Misc. plant tissue
Leaf trichomcr
Miscellaneous
Iron cr steel
Rubber
Otherb
Commercial
114
29

120
Quantity,
percent
Average
(63)
28
20
6
9
<1
<1
(26)

8
4
7
4
3
<1

6
7
7
3
<1

1

<1
( 2)
1
<1
<1
<1
1
<1
( 6)
1
5
<1
Range
9-96
2-70
0-93
0-45
1-50
0-6
.0-46
1-89

0-40
0-40
0-88
0-76
0-45
2-10
\
0-15

0-12
0-33
0-25

0-2
0-10
0-7
0-6
0-45
0-25
0-45
0-15
Undeveloped
11
5

86
Quantity,
percent
Average
(90)
32
40
3
15
<1

( 8)

5
2
'
" 1
<1
<1
1 <1



( 1)
<1
<1
<1
<1
1

CD
" <1
1

Range
79-99
15-60
10-60

-------

                                   a:
                                   iU
                                   cc
                                   •a.
                                   a.
   "a
'A1ISN3Q AiHIQVOOUd
                                             Q)

                                                    B1.
                                                      iu rn
                                                      *£
                                                      w
                                                        QJ
                                                      0)
                                             0) '(fl    (U
                                             9 q    p
                                             p -H    SH
                 III-3

-------
make up most of the total suspended particulate 1n terms of numbers  of
particles and surface area.   The mass (inferred from volume)  shows a
bimodal distribution.
     The distinct minimum at about 2 pm between the two modes provides
a convenient size classification for atmospheric particles.   The size
range between 0.1 and 1.0 pm is called the "accumulation"  mode and
typically makes up about one third of the total suspended particulate
mass.  Fine particulate mass "accumulates" in the 0.1  to 1 jum range
by coagulation of smaller particles or by condensation of gases on
existing particles.  It is thought that most of the mass in the
accumulation model is formed by physical and chemical  processes which
convert gases into particles, including trace element  fumes from high
temperature sources and the transformation products of sulfur oxides,
nitrogen oxides, and organic compounds.  The large particle fraction
of the bimodal distribution is termed the "coarse" mode.  Coarse
mode particles are generally formed by mechanical processes such as
grinding or rubbing, for example, industrial processes, soil, street
dust, and rubber tire wear.   Chemical composition in this  range is
dominated by compounds of soil and mineral derived elements such as
silicon, iron, and aluminum.  There appears to be very little exchange
of mass between the fine and coarse particle ranges in the atmosphere
because the far greater number and surface area associated with the
accumulation mode dominate the condensation and coagulation growth
processes.  Thus, the fine and coarse particle modes generally have
distinctly different origins and chemical compositions.
                                 III-4

-------
1
1

1
1

1



1

1

1
1

1



1
••
1
1
1
1
1


REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - National Assessment of the Urban

Parti cul ate Problem,

Prepared for EPA by GCA Corporation, Bedford,
Massachusetts, EPA 450/3-76-024, July 1976.
QUESTION - What are
ANSWER - A few years
the major sources of partlculate matter in the nation?
ago, the answer to this question would have been a
tabulation of the emissions that had been Inventoried for major source
categories , such as

solid waste disposal
(a) fuel combustion, (b) Industrial processes, (c)

, and (d) transportation sources, etc. Today, how-
ever, as these sources are being controlled and ambient levels of PM
remain high, investigators are finding that other sources of PM also have
a significant impact
general categories:
Source-category
Man-made fugitive
on ambient PM levels. These include the following

Example
dust Dust from paved and unpaved roads
Fugitive process emissions Industrial emissions that are not

Mobile sources

Natural sources
emitted through a stack
Rubber tire particles, vehicle exhaust

Pollen, sea salt, dust storms.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - National Assessment of the Urban

Parti cul ate Probl em,






op. cit.




III-5

-------
QUESTION - What are the major categories  of man-made  participate matter
emissions (I.e., traditional  sources)  in  the nation?
ANSWER - On a national  basis, the major source  categories of man-made
particulate matter include the following:
                                       Tons/yr          Percent
Industrial process                     9,265,430          50
Fuel combustion                        7,460,856          40
Solid Waste Disposal                       884,910           5
Transportation                            773,643           4
 (tailpipe and rubber tire particles)
Miscellaneous                             182,909        	1_
      Total                            18,556,748         100
NOTE:  It 1s believed that in general  only a limited  portion of the
fugitive process emissions (I.e., those which escape  through windows,
doors, and the like,  but not  through a stack) have been estimated.
Man-made fugitive dust  sources or secondary particulates are not In-
cluded 1n the above table.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  - 1972 National Emissions Report.
EPA 450/2-74-012, June  1974,  p.  1.
                                III-6

-------
 I
            QUESTION  -  What  are  "secondary participates"?
 I          ANSWER  -  Secondary particulates  are the products of chemical  reactions
 _          occurring 1n  the atmosphere.  They can be formed directly  from the gas
 *          phase or  as a result of  reactions between gases and already existing
 I          particles.  The  major  factors which affect the formation of secondary
            particulates  are sunlight, temperature, pre-existing oxidant, meteorolo-
 |          gical conditions, and  the presence of gases such as sulfur dioxide,
 _          ammonia,  nitric  oxide, water vapor, and hydrocarbons, which enter the
 *          atmosphere  from  both natural and manmade sources.  Secondary  parti cu-
 A          lates range in size  from molecular clusters with diameters on the
            order of  0.005 micrometers to particles with diameters as  large as
 |          several micrometers.   Field studies of urban aerosols have shown that
 _          most of the mass  of secondary particulates 1s usually found in the particle
 *          size range  0.1 to 1.0  micrometers.  The concentration of particles in
 I          this size range  can vary directly with Intensity of sunlight  and concentra-
            tion of ozone.   Nationwide, about one third of total suspended particulates
 |          can be  classified as secondary particulates.
 _              The  principal factors governing distribution by size  are the
 •          respective  rates  of particulate formation and the rates of removal.  The
 •          smallest  particles (0.1 ym), which are created constantly  during the daylight
            hours,  coagulate  into  larger particulates (0.1 to 1 pi).   The overall life
 J          cycle of  secondary particulates is difficult to determine; estimates range
 _          from several  days to several weeks.  In the end, the particles are either


I

I

I

-------
removed from the atmosphere by precipitation  or dry deposition.
During this period, however, they may be transported vast  distances
from the source of the gaseous precursors.
     Found in both urban and rural  areas, secondary particulates
are in general composed of three chemical classes  or categories -
sulfates, organics, and nitrates.  Annual geometric levels of  sulfate
and nitrate levels at certain non-urban  sites for  1974 are given  in
Figure 3.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     0)  National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem, op.  cit.
     (2)  Total Suspended Particulates:   Review and Analysis,  pre-
pared for EPA by R. Murray Welk, Radian  Corporation, EPA 600/2-76-092,
April 1976.
QUESTION - More frequently, two sources, fugitive  dust and fugitive
emissions, are being identified as  significant sources of  PM.  How
are the two terms defined, and what are  the differences between
"fugitive dust" and "fugitive emissions"?
ANSWER - There are no universally accepted definitions to  characterize
and differentiate between the two separate "fugitive" categories.   In
fact, some include all fugitive sources  in a  single definition.   Fugi-
tive dust emissions are generally related to natural or man-associated
dusts (particulate only) that become airborne due  to the forces of
wind, man's activity, or both.  Fugitive dust emissions may  include
                                 III-8

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I








UJ
t-
<
u»
_l
3
crt
6





















_
K>
E
•**
• ^
4.
Al
Ul
r-
<
cc
t-
z
1
D





-7
/
/
X










JJ
rt
to
r-4

(1)
rH
0)
4J
rt
l-i
1 1

•H
c _^^
•rf0
C .E
05 CT.
(U 3
u> ^ j
ij
rt
(it -*.
MH vj
r— * r***
3 0>
to 1-4
c I
«
a) w
B 

§>
*tl
•w
(X
fl
•
-«-»
•r»
u
a.
o
n
E
OJ
JD
O
i-
a.
cu
4-J
T3

3
U

^j
k-
fO
a.
c
^n
i\j
^

r^
QJ
_C
•4-)

&l
  I
                                bO
                                     01
                                     u
                                     i.
                                     3
                                     O
                                     CO
III-9

-------
windblown parti oil ate matter from unpaved dirt roads, tilled farm
lands, exposed surface areas at construction sites and the like.
Natural dusts that become airborne during dust storms are also in-
cluded as fugitive dusts.  It has been found that fugitive dusts
from tilled farm lands, unpaved roads, and construction sites, as
well as windblown natural particulate emissions from arid lands
(desert) during dust storms and other meteorological  conditions cause
ambient concentrations above national particulate matter standards,
particularly in the West and Southwest.
     Fugitive emissions, on the other hand, include both gaseous  and
particulate emissions that result from industry-related operations and
which escape to the atmosphere through windows, doors, vents, etc.,
but not through a primary exhaust system, such as a stack, flue,  or
control system.  Fugitive emissions may result from metallurgical
furnace operations, materials handling, transfer and storage operations,
and other industrial processes where emissions escape to the atmosphere.
Fugitive emissions are generated during various industrial, manufac-
turing, and/or materials crushing, grinding, transfer or storage
operations.  In other cases, fugitive emissions are more directly
emitted to the atmosphere from those industrial processes that operate
out-of-doors, such as coke ovens, rock-crushing operations at quarries,
and sand-blasting operations.  Fugitive emissions also result from
poor maintenance of process equipment and from environmentally care-
less process operations.  For example, fugitive emissions can result
from leakage from oven doors at coke ovens because such doors cannot
be properly sealed due to excessive warpage.
                                 111-10

-------
 I
 I
I
I
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
                (1)   Lillis,  E.J.,  and Young, D. ,  "EPA Looks at  'Fugitive
 (|        Emissions',"  Journal of  Air Pollution Control Association, 25: 1015-
 «        1018,  October 1975.
 *             (2)   National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem, op. cit.
 fl        QUESTION  - What  are the  most significant man-made fugitive dust sources?
           ANSWER -  Included  in this category are  reentrainment  of road dust,
 I        fugitive  dust  emissions  from construction and demolition operations,
 _        dust  from unpaved  areas  and dust generated by other urban activities
 •        such  as unpaved  parking  lots and bare unvegetated lots.  In a number of
 •        cases, particulates from these sources  have prevented urban areas from
           attaining ambient  standards and, unless controlled, they will continue
 M        to do  so.  Given the current downward trend in emissions from
           traditional sources, particulate matter from fugitive dust sources will
 ™        proportionally pose a greater problem for attainment  and maintenance of
 •        the ambient standards.
           REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - National Assessment of the Urban
 p        Particulate Problem, op_. cit.
 •         QUESTION  - What emission factors are available for fugitive dust sources
 •         and what  work  is underway to develop additional factors?
•         ANSWER -  Section 11.2 of Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors
           (AP-42),  February  1976, contains emission factors for" heavy construction
I         operations sites,  aggregate storage piles, agricultural tilling, and
           unpaved dirt and gravel roads.   The emission factors  for unpaved roads
I
are being refined by current studies for which the field work is  now
beginning.
                                  III-ll

-------
     Additionally, unpaved roads are another fugitive dust source for
which emission factors are being developed.   The field testing for these
emission factors has been completed, and the factors  should be finalized
within several months and published within AP-42.   Dust from paved roads,
sometimes called "re-entrained" particles, is a major portion of the  PM
load in many areas.
     Other attempts  have been made to determine emission factors from
various fugitive dust sources.  A 1974 report provides estimates for
partlculate matter emissions from cattle feedlots,  tailings piles, and
windblown dust from farm lands.  For farm lands, the  USDA wind erosion
equation was used to estimate emissions.  Individual  calculations for
each major crop were performed since ground cover conditions, and hence
soil erosion potential, vary from crop to crop.
     The caution stated earlier in Section II should  be reiterated here.
Emission data on PM sources require considerable detail, especially
concerning particle  size and density information,  before use in diffusion
models.  PM sources  cannot be arbitrarily input to conventional models.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1)  Investigation of Fugitive Dust Sources,  Volume I  - Sources,
Emissions, and Control. EPA 450/3-74-036(a), June 1974.
     (2)  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Second Edition,
with Supplements 1-5, February, 1976; EPA Publication AP-42.
     (3)  Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources,
EPA 450/3-74-037, June 1974.
                                  111-12

-------
           QUESTION  -  What  silt  content should be  considered 1n calculating the
 _         emissions from unpaved  roads?
           ANSWER -  The most  comprehensive  studies show that roadway dust emissions
 •         are  directly proportional to the silt content of the loose soil on the
           road surface and to vehicle speed.  "S1lt content," defined as the per-
 |         centage (by weight) of  soil particles less than 75jjn 1n diameter, 1s an
 _         essential part of  the development of accurate emission factors for
 ™         unpaved roads.
 •              As published  1n  Compilation of A1r Pollutant Emission Factors
           (AP-42, Part A), the  quantity of fugitive dust emissions from an unpaved
f         road, per vehicle-mile  of travel, may be estimated  (within +_ 20 percent)
 —         using the following empirical expression:

                                           .81 s\ S  V 365-v
                                         -fo.
                                         "\
I         where:   E = Emission factor,  pounds  per vehicle-mile
                    s = S1lt content of road surface material,  percent
I                  S = Average vehicle speed, miles per  hour
•                  w = Mean annual  number of days  with 0.01 1n.  (0.254 mm)
                        or more -of rainfall
I         The equation 1s valid for vehicle speeds in the  range  of  30-50 m1/hr
           (48-80 km/hr).
|              On the average, dust emissions from unpaved roads, as given  by
.         equation 1, have the following particle  size characteristics:
                Particle size                 Weight percent
•                 < 30 jjm                           60
                   > 30 jm                           40
I
I
                                            111-13

-------
The silt content of gravel  roads  averages  about  12  percent,  and  the
dirt road may be approximated by  the silt  content of the  parent  soil
in the area.   However, a recent study 1n the Phoenix, Arizona, area
demonstrated that the silt  content of soil  on a  roadway may  vary as
much as 20 to 60 percent from the average  silt content of the sur-
rounding soil.  It is, therefore  recommended that field test data
of the silt content of the  roadway be used in conjunction with the
above AP-42 emission factor formula.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1)  Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission  Factors  (AP-42). op.cit.
     (2)  An Implementation Plan  for Suspended Particulate Matter in
the Phoenix Area, TRW Inc., Draft Report,  Nov. 1976.
     (3)  Appendix F and Problem  3-3 in Air Quality Analysis Workshop
Volume I - Manual, op. cit.
QUESTION - Which existing stationary sources of  PM  are required  to  con-
tinuously monitor opacity?
ANSWER - On October 6, 1975, EPA  promulgated regulations  (40 FR  46240)
requiring States to revise  their  SIPs to include requirements for the
continuous monitoring of emissions from certain  categories of existing
stationary sources affected by emission limitation  of an  approved SIP.
Appendix P of 40 CFR 51 lists the following source  categories as being
covered by the regulation for monitoring of opacity:
     1.  Coal-fired, and some oil-fired steam generators  in  excess of
250 million BTU/hr heat input, with certain exceptions for age and use
of each boiler.
                                  111-14

-------
 I
                 2.   Fluid  bed  catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators  (at
 I          petroleum refineries) of greater than 20,000 barrels per day fresh
 M          feed  capacity.
                 Revisions  to SIPs to require continuous emission monitoring were
 8          scheduled to be submitted by the States to Regional Offices by October
            6,  1976.   The State regulations may allow 18 months after EPA approval
 |          of  the State submitted SIP revisions for sources to procure, install,
 .          and begin operating the monitoring instruments.  Quarterly reports of
            (1) emissions in excess of SIP emission limitations, and (2) the moni-
 I          toring system downtime must be submitted by the sources to the States.
            REFERENCES AND  ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - "Emission Monitoring of
 §          Stationary Sources,"  (40 FR1 46240), Oct. 6, 1975.
 _          QUESTION  - Which new stationary sources of particulate matter are
 ~          required  to monitor opacity?
 •          ANSWER -  On October 6, 1975, EPA promulgated regulations (40 FR 46250)
            under 40  CFR, Part 60, New Source Performance Standards, which require
 |          continuous monitoring of particulate emissions from certain new sources,
 _          which are specified by category.  The primary source categories are
            fossil fuel-fired steam generators and fluid bed catalytic cracking
 •          unit catalyst regenerators.  The regulation requires that all new fluid
            bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators apply continuous moni-
 jj          toring for opacity and that all new fossil fuel-fired steam generators
 _          of  greater than 250 million BTU per hour heat input (except those where
 *          only gaseous fuel is burned)  apply continuous monitoring for opacity.
I

I
                                            111-15

-------
     In addition, two other source categories  are regulated  by  continuous
monitoring under New Source Performance Standards.   The September  23,
1975, Federal Register contains regulations  (40 CFR 60.272)  for electric
arc furnaces 1n the steel  industry.   The regulations require continuous
monitoring of the opacity  of emissions  discharged Into the atmosphere
from the control device(s) of "any furnace that produces molten steel
and heats the charge materials with  electric arcs from carbon electrodes."
     The Federal Register  contains regulations  which require continuous
monitoring of the opacity  of emissions  discharged into the atmosphere  from
the control device(s) of ferroalloy  production  facilities, including
"electric submerged arc furnaces which  produce  silicon metal, ferrosilicon,
calcium silicon, silicomanganese zirconium,  ferrochrome silicon, silvery
iron, high-carbon ferrochrome, charge chrome standard ferromanganese,
silicomanganese, ferromanganese silicon, or  calcium carbide" and the  "dust
handling equipment" associated with  these facilities.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL  INFORMATION -
     (1)  "Emission Monitoring Requirements  and Revisions to Performance
Testing Methods", (40 FR 46250), Part 60, Oct.  6, 1975.
     (2)  (40 FR 43850), Sept. 23, 1975 (40  CFR 60.273).
     (3)  (41 FR 18502), May 4, 1976 (40 CFR 60.264).
                                  111-16

-------
 I
 I
I
I
QUESTIONS CONCERNING AIR QUALITY
    STANDARDS AND MEASUREMENT
           QUESTION - What are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
           for parti cul ate matter?
                                                  3
           ANSWER - The primary NAAQSs are 75 jjg/m  (annual geometric mean)  and
                   2
           1260 jjg/m  (maximum 24-hour average concentration not to be exceeded
                                                                      o
           more than once per year).  The secondary NAAQSs are 60 pg/m  (annual
 I         geometric mean) and 150 ^g/m  (maximum 24-hour concentration, not to
           be exceeded more than once per year).  Although referred to as a
 ™         standard, the 60 ug/m  annual geometric mean is "a guide" (i.e., not
 •         a standard).  It may be used in developing and assessing implementation
           plans to achieve the secondary 24-hour standard.
|         REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
                (1)  40 CFR Part 50.7', National Primary and Secondary Standards
•         for Particulate Matter, promulgated April 30, 1971.
•              (2)  Air Quality Criteria for Parti cul ate Matter, AP-49, January
           1969.
•         QUESTION - Are the current standards for particulate matter being reviewed?
           ANSWER - Yes.  Plans were made at a joint ORD/OAQPS meeting on August 6,
I         1976, to revise and reissue the air quality criteria documents.   The ori-
*         ginal criteria document for parti cul ate matter was issued in 1969 and
           has remained unchanged.  Revision of all criteria documents has  been
•         recommended by the National  A1r Quality Criteria Advisory Committee of
           the Science Advisory Board.
                                           IV-1

-------
     In addition, the Clean A1r Act as  amended in  1977 requires  that
"not later than January 1, 1980 and at  five-year intervals  thereafter  a
review of the national primary and secondary ambient  air quality standards
shall be completed..."  Furthermore, revision of the  documents allows  the
Agency to publish the latest technical  information supporting the National
Ambient A1r Quality Standards and the national  regulatory program.
     The criteria document for particulate matter  is  scheduled for  revision
by August 1979.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     Steigerwald, B.J., and Barth, D.,  Memorandum  to  Roger  Strelow  and
Wilson Talley, "Revision of Air Quality Criteria Documents," August 26,  1976.
                                                             o
QUESTION - When would the secondary annual standard of 60 jjg/m  , annual
geometric mean, be used as a guide to determine if a  control strategy
                                                            3
will result in attainment of the 24-hour standard  of  150 jjg/m  not  to  be
exceeded more than once per year?
ANSWER - To determine the average concentration for a period of  24-
hours, three options are available.  The preferred option 1s to  use a
model to estimate concentrations hour-by-hour for  the period under  consi-
deration and average the values of all  the hours calculated.  This  option
is discussed in detail in the Guideline on Air Quality Models and Associated
Data Bases. (EPA, Monitoring and Data Analysis Division, Draft May  1977).
                                                                        >
If this is not possible, the second option is to convert a  concentration
for one averaging time (annual) to a concentration for a shorter time  by
empirical techniques for urban multi-source areas  or  by empirical techniques
and data on the peak-to-mean ratio for  point sources.
                                  IV-2

-------
I
               The  second  option may not be possible 1f certain statistical infor-
                                        o
          standards  by  using the 60 pg/m annual guide as a planning tool rather
                                                        3
          than  the secondary 24-hour standard of 150 >jg/m .
          matlon such as the standard geometric deviation  (sgd)  of  partlculate
I        concentrations is not available.   Also,  such  sgd information  as  is  avail-
          able may be unreliable because of variability.   Finally,  the  option of
m        using the secondary annual  guide  would apply  where  diffusion  modeling
•        cannot be performed because of lack of Input  parameters.   For this  case,
          it would be necessary to use a proportional model such as rollback.  In the
•        last two situations, it 1s  reasonable under the  regulations in Part 51 to
          develop a control strategy  which  demonstrates attainment  of the  secondary


          QUESTION - Is any consideration being given to the  promulgation  of  a
•        national standard that considers  particle  size or chemical composition?
          ANSWER - Yes.  When the current PM standards  were promulgated in  1971,
•        1t was generally recognized that  other national  standards for specific
•        fractions or components of  PM might be necessary.   Studies have  indicated
          that fine and secondary components of PM have serious  health  effects
I        associated with them.  EPA  1s still studying  the need  for specific  air
          quality standards for these components.  Recent  evidence  suggests an
•        approach which places greater emphasis on  the control  of  selected cate-
m        gories of partlculate matter such as sulfates, nitrates,  etc., with con-
          tinued reliance on the current PM standard for overall  control of parti-
•        culates rather than developing a  fine partlculate standard.

I

I

I                                          IV-3

-------
     In a recent court action, NRDC v.  Train (9 ERC 1425,  2nd C1r.  1976),
EPA was directed to develop an air quality standard for lead.   Additional
air quality standards with regard to other fractions may be developed
1n the future, depending on research and/or court action.
     It 1s worthwhile to note that it is not anticipated that the  current
PM standard will be rescinded or replaced 1n the next several  years.   It
may be supplemented but 1t will  not be withdrawn.   Attainment of current
PM standards should be the goal  everywhere.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1)  Stelgerwald, B.J., Memorandum to Rober Strelow,  "Fine Partlculate
Control Strategy," July 2, 1975.
     (2)  Padgett, J. , and Bachman, J., "Regulatory and Technical  Control
Strategies for Fine Particles,"  given at June 1976 APCA Meeting, Portland,
Oregon, APCA Paper No.  76-30.07.
QUESTION - What ambient measurement techniques  are acceptable for  moni-
toring PM?
ANSWER - The hl-volume method is the Federal Reference Method (FRM)  for
total suspended particulates.  Since the air quality standard is defined
by the method, the hi-volume sampler is the only acceptable method.  No
procedures for determining equivalency of alternative methods have been
developed, so all other methods  are to be considered unacceptable  for
determining attainment or status with respect to NAAQS.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     40 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Reference Method for the  Determination
of Suspended Particulates in the Atmosphere (High Volume Method).
QUESTION - What 1s meant by the term "background concentration" and what
are typical values taken to represent "background"?
ANSWER - Background concentrations are defined' 1n 40 CFR 51.13 as  follows:

                                 IV-4

-------
I
                     For purposes  of developing  a  control  strategy, back-
I                ground concentration  shall  be  taken  into  consideration with
                respect to particulate matter.   As used in this subpart,
                'background concentration'  1s  that portion of the measured
I                ambient levels  of particulate  matter that cannot be reduced
                by controlling  emissions  from  manmade sources;  'background
                concentration'  shall  be determined by reference to measured
                ambient levels  of particulate  matter in nonurban areas.
•i         Unfortunately, this  definition reflects to some extent the prevalent
m         variation 1n usage of  the  word "background," and hence contradictory
           usage of the term continues.   Under the first  part of the last sentence,
•         1n which background  is defined as the  uncontrollable portion of PM,
           EPA regulations provide for rollback  calculations to ascertain the
•         degree of emission control necessary  for  the attainment of the air
m         quality standards.   The rollback formula:
                                                  ambient - standard
M                          reduction required  = ambient - background
           tacitly assumes that the background level is a lower limit below which
tt         the ambient concentration  cannot be reduced.   On the other hand, in
           air quality modeling efforts,  the background is frequently defined as
|         the difference between the measured concentrations and the calculated
g         concentrations which includes  Into  background  any source not Included
*         in the Inventory used.   In still other circumstances, an agency may
•         choose to regard as  "background" any  PM coming across the boundary into
           their jurisdiction,  regardless of whether that jurisdiction extends
|         appropriately into nonurban areas.
^              Contradiction in  the  usage  of  the term background also arises from
*         the latter part of the above citation referring to the actual measure-
•         ment of background.  Following that concept, the background levels most

I
                                           IV-5

-------
often used 1n air quality reflect measurements  of the  ambient  air
quality 1n some remote rural  area; this  may possibly be within the
county, AQCR, or state, depending upon the  jurisdiction of the planning
agency; or may be very far away.   Where  possible, these measurements
are made upwind of the prevailing flow of air so  as not to sample the
particulate contribution of the area.  However, what these remote
monitors are actually measuring is not necessarily an  uncontrollable or
nonmanmade level of PM.  Rather,  these measurements simply reflect the
particulate concentrations coming into the  urban  area, including not
only the natural, uncontrollable  particulates but also man's contribution
to the nonurban particulate levels; these latter  include emissions 1n
rural areas, particles transported from  distant urban  areas, and secon-
dary particulates.  They can  be broken down as  follows:
     1.  Natural particulate  -  PM contributed solely by natural pro-
cesses and thus uncontrollable; Includes a  global contribution, which
includes both primary and secondary particulates, and  a continental
contribution, primarily from wind erosion of soil.
     2.  Transported particulate  - PM levels that arise due to emissions
from man's activities in "upwind" urban  and industrial areas;  include
both primary and secondary particulates  transported from one area to
another.
     3.  Local particulate -  PM measured at nonurban monitors  that 1s
contributed by emissions in rural areas  and affected by the placement of
the monitor.
                                 IV-6

-------
I
                 Thus, the term  "background concentration" can have a variety of
p          meanings.  The control strategy developer and/or reviewer should be
            aware of the possible variations and act accordingly.
'
•
I
                 Figure 4 provides a national view of PM levels at certain non- urban
            sites  for 1970 through 1973.
            REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
                National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem, op. cit.
           QUESTION - What 1s the Impact of traditional  (stationary) sources on
"         air quality?
           ANSWER - Cities with heavy industrial activity have been found to have
                                                          o
           citywlde PM levels averaging from 10 to 60 |ig/m  above the levels of
M         cities with little or no industry; sites particularly close to heavy
                                                               o
m         industrial activity typically averaged up to 25 jjg/m  higher than other
*         industrial sites.  Further, it can be shown that as source emissions
•         are controlled, ambient PM levels show corresponding decreases.  For
           example, in Buffalo, New York, the effectiveness of the stationary
g         source control program can be seen 1n the Improvement that has occured
           in ambient air quality levels.  Average annual air quality levels at
I                                                                              3
•         eight sites located throughout the Buffalo area in 1969 were 130 )ig/m ,
                                                     3            3
fl         with Individual sites ranging from 80 jjg/m  to 229 pig/m .  In 1974,
           after control efforts were well underway (but not complete), the area-
J         wide average for the same sites was 82 yg/m  with an individual site
                             3            3
           range from 58 yg/m  to 121 jjg/m .  (Annual Reports, 1973 and 1974, Air


I

I
                                            IV-7

-------
                                          eC  03
                                           ra "O
                                           C  S-

                                           °£
                                          4-> T3
                                           ro  O)
                                          •ZL CQ
                                                     2
                                                     to
                                                      c
                                                      03
                                                      c
                                                      o
                                                      0)

                                                      0)
                                                      co  S
                                                      H ^
                                                          60
                                                       C  3.
O)
xi oi
0 «*
i_
D. .
a.
O)
+-> ••

-C 1
*j n
^ o
o m
*3-
i ^
c: «c
H) O.
E LU
i«
i/l «
QJ
l/l «/)
O O>
•H r-^
1-1
u x;
o j:
u
l-(
n o
3 I-.
C ON
C r-l
rt
0) O
•U U
T-l U-l
(0
o w
a. cj
e jj
0 •*
O 01


«st-
0
u
3
sc
• u.


                                           O)
                                           0

                                           ZJ
                                           o
IV-8

-------
I

•         Pollution Control Division, Department of Health, Erie  County,  New
•         York.)  These data Indicate the significant Impact of stationary  source
           emissions on air quality and the necessity of minimizing  stationary
•         source emissions as an important part of any PM control strategy.
           REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
•              (1)  National Assessment of the  Urban Particulate  Problem, op.  cit.
*         QUESTION - What 1s the impact of the  most significant man-made  fugitive
           dust sources on air quality?
I         ANSWER - The air quality impact of fugitive dust sources  varies,  depending
           upon the specific fugitive dust source.  Estimates have been  made for
•         some fugitive dust categories.   These include:
•              Reentrained dust - In an urban area, particulate matter  accumulates
           on the various city surfaces due to various mechanisms, including atmos-
•         pheric fallout.   Especially heavy loads on streets can  result from dirt
           and mud carryout from unpaved parking lots and roads, spillage  from


I

I

I

I

I

I
.                                          IV-9

-------
trucks, and sand and salt applied for snow control.   This material  can
then become entrained and at least temporarily suspended in the ambient
air due to (a) wind erosion, or (b) man's activities disturbing the
surface.  The annual average Impact on residential  monitors 1s  estimated
                3                  3
at 10 to 15 jjg/m  and 15 to 20 jjg/m  at commercial  and industrial sites,
respectively, but varies widely with traffic and monitor placement.
The composition of this component is mostly mineral  matter.
     Construction activity - Several sites, often center city commercial
sites, are hindered in meeting national standards by dust entrained from
construction sites of various types, including urban renewal, small
building construction, and highway and subway construction.   Particu-
late matter emissions are generated by a wide variety of operations  over
the duration of the construction, including land clearing, blasting,
ground excavation, and on-s1te traffic, as well  as  the construction  of
                                                             •3
the facility Itself.  Annual average impacts of 10  to 20 pg/m  are
common only if the construction is close to the  monitoring site.  Cities
with typical levels of construction were found to have citywide annual
average Impacts on the order of 1  to 3 ^g/m .   Construction will gener-
ally elevate concentrations downwind from the site  for distances of up
to 1/2 to 1 mile; the amount of increase 1s related to the level of
activity, type of activity, distance from the activity, and control
measures employed.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     National Assessment _of the Urban Particulate Problem, op.  cit.
                                 IV-10

-------
I
I
            QUESTION-  (What is the Impact of mobile sources on air quality?
•          ANSWER  - Partlculate emissions from mobile sources have generally
m          been  only  lightly considered in past control strategies.  Recent
            studies have indicated that particulate emissions from such sources,
•          specifically rubber tire particles and automotive exhaust can be
            significant.  For example:
•               Rubber Tire Particles - This source varies with neighborhoods.
                                                    3
I            Typical annual average impacts are 3 jug/m  at residential sites and
                 3
            5 jig/m  at commercial and industrial sites.  Sites located particularly
•          near  heavy traffic averaged twice the levels at other sites.
                 Automotive Exhaust - This source also varies somewhat with neighbor-
            hoods, with typical annual average concentrations of 3 jjg/m  1n reslden-
                               3
mm          tial  and 4 to 5 yg/m  in commercial and industrial areas.  This estimate
            1s  for the primary particulate only and is generally about 15 to 25
I          percent lead.  The value could be higher if measured close to heavy
            traffic.
I          REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
•               0)  National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem, op.cit.
                 (2)  Lillis, E.J. , and Dunbar, D.R., "Impact of Automobile Particle
•          Exhaust Emissions on Air Quality", OAQPS, EPA, November 13, 1975,
            unpublished paper.
I

I

I

I
-                                          iv-n

-------
QUESTION - How much ambient PM data are needed to Indicate  that  a SIP
needs to be revised, or to serve as the basis of a control  strategy?
ANSWER - There 1s no absolute answer to this question.   Measured air
quality data are considered the best evidence to Indicate that a SIP is
inadequate to provide for attainment of national  standards  and to serve
as the indication of the degree of control  needed to  provide  for attain-
ment and maintenance of standards.  However, lack of  such data do not
preclude determination of SIP adequacy or control strategy  development.
For PM, various simulation models exist which provide a mathematical
technique for estimating air quality concentrations 1n  most areas.  While
ambient PM concentrations should be available 1n  most areas where national
standards may potentially be violated, models can be  used to  supplement
existing measured data or replace measured data when  1t is  not available.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     Air Quality Analysis Workshop Volume I  - Manual. Prepared for EPA
by Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, EPA  450/3-75-080a,
Nov. 1975, Ch. 7.
QUESTION - Historically, what type of air quality trends have been  observed
for PM?
ANSWER - On a national basis, general improvement has been  observed in
annual PM levels since 1970.
                                IV-12

-------
I
—         The trends have been observed from a data base of approximately 1800
"         monitoring sites which are located throughout the county and have
•         sufficient historical data for use in determining trends.
               The general improvement 1n PM ambient air quality is continuing.
J|         Recent trends since 1971 indicate a general improvement of 4 percent
_         per year.  There have been some geographical differences with Northeast
™         and Great Lakes areas improving at even higher rates.  Levels in some
•         of the Western states have been fairly stable, probably due to fugitive
           (wind blown) dust and to some extent due to secondary particulates
£         caused by photochemical reactions in areas such as Los Angeles.
m             This progress with respect to PM means that nationally 33 percent
•         fewer people were exposed in 1974 to annual mean levels 1n excess of
V         the primary standard than were exposed in 1970.  Further improvements
           in PM air quality levels are anticipated, but the present rate of
J|         progress may not be sustained since fewer traditional sources remain to
           be controlled and since fugitive dust, re-entrained urban particulates,
•         and secondary parti culates are more difficult to control.
•             Even though Improvements have been made, a significant PM ambient
           problem still remains.   The most recent data (1975) show that approximately 50
I         percent of the state and local monitoring stations have annual averages
           in excess of the secondary annual PM air quality standard.
1

I

I

I                                          IV-13

I

-------
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  -
     (1)  National A1r Quality and Emission Trends  Report,  1975,
EPA 450/1-76-002, Nov. 1976.
     (2)  Monitoring and A1r  Quality Trends Report. 1974, EPA 450/1-
76-001, Feb.  1976.
QUESTION - What guidance is available  with regard to locating and
operating PM monitors in the  field to  provide  representative samples?
ANSWER - The proper siting of monitoring  instruments and the proper
design of a monitoring network is  crucial to collecting representative
samples.  The subjects are addressed in detail  in Guidance  for Air
Quality Monitoring Network Design  and  Instrument Siting (Revised).
OAQPS No. 1.2-012, Sept. 1975.  This document  is comprehensive in
nature and describes various  monitoring objectives, based on the
intended uses for the air quality  data.   The document contains guidance
for placement of the hi-vol monitor between 2  and 15 meters above ground
level, with at least 2 meters horizontal  clearance  from supporting
structures or other restrictions to air flow.
     It is recognized that these guidelines have generally  allowed flexi-
bility to State and local agencies in  locating ambient PM monitors.  Thus,
monitoring networks across the nation  are generally termed  "non-uniform."
     More specific guidance on siting  of  monitors and design of monitoring
networks has been developed.   The  Agency's Standing Air Monitoring Work
Group has drafted Air Monitoring Strategy for  State Implementation Plans,
EPA Report No. 450/2-77-010,  June  1977.   The purpose of this guidance  1s
to provide more uniform and accurate monitoring patterns to assure that
basic data needs of air pollution  control programs  are met  and  to ensure
                                 IV-14

-------
 I
 I        uniformity  1n  the  data collected throughout the nation.  The results
 B        of this  report suggest an Increase 1n the monitors Included 1n the
 *        Quality  Assurance  Monitor Program from the present level of 6 percent
 •        to approximately 15 percent.  It also calls for revision to 40 CFR
          51  to  reflect  the  diminished need for large quantities of data which
 £        will not be needed in the control programs for ambient air quality
 —        maintenance.   These and other recommended revisions will be incorporated
 "        in a revised version of the Siting Guideline OAQPS No. 1.2-012, now
 •        in preparation.
          QUESTION -  What 1s EPA policy on the use of correction factors for
 |        adjusting TSP  h1-vol readings to allow for accumulation of particulate
 ^        matter during  the  static mode?
 •        ANSWER - EPA has examined this Issue and does not feel that use of a
 •        correction  factor  is appropriate at this time because:
              (a)  Studies  conducted to date may not be reliable.  All  the
 g        studies  were conducted over a short-time period (three months or less)
 _        and none had any discussion or documentation of quality assurance pro-
 *        cedures  used.
1|            (b)  The  Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory Research
          Triangle Park  (EMSL-RTP) has embarked on a one year particulate sampling
J        characterization study.  This study will take a comprehensive look at
fc        parameters  affecting hi-vol measurements.
*            Once the  EMSL-RTP study 1s completed, this issue will be re-
tt        examined.   In  the  interim, if a control agency feels that the static
I
I                                         IV-15

-------
mode contribution 1s significant they should be  encouraged  to  service
the h1-vo! as soon as possible before and after  the  sampling day.   EPA
recognizes that additional  travel  will  be necessary.   However, only
those sites which are essential for particulate  matter attainment/main-
tenance decisions would need to be serviced immediately before and  after
the sampling day.  If the hi-vols  were  located with  continuous monitors,
dally trips (or visits more frequent than once every  six days) to the
site may already be agency practice and thus  little  additional travel
would be necessary.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     Barber, Walter C., Memorandum to Directors, Air  and Hazardous
Material Divisions, Regions I-X, "Correction Factor  for Static Mode
Contribution to TSP Air Quality,"  May 17, 1977.
                                 IV-16

-------
I
I
                                           V
                               QUESTIONS CONCERNING DATA
I                               AND FUND UTILIZATION
•        QUESTION  - To what extent does growth Information employed 1n plan
          development have to be Internally consistent?
ff        ANSWER -  Growth Information employed 1n plan development where 40 CFR 51
          Subpart D applies  (A1r Quality Maintenance Regulations) must be in
|        accordance with applicable AQM guidelines unless alternative techniques
•        are  approved by the Administrator.  Emissions must normally be projected
          for  the following categories:
I               Industrial process activity.
               Fuel consumption.
               Transportation activity.
t               Electricity demand.
               Solid waste generation.
               Miscellaneous emission-producing activity.
I        These may be converted to emissions using emission factors.  In addition,
          the  temporal and spatial distribution of these variables (e.g., when new
•        plants will come on line and where they will be located) is important
flj        to the air quality analysis.  In most situations, projections of these
          parameters are not available or are available only on a cruder scale
I        than  needed for an adequate air quality analysis, especially in attain-
          ment/malntenance problem areas.  Reliance must then be placed on surrogate
"        variables such as population, employment, land use, earnings, and others
•        that  are  projected with reasonable accuracy and precision and that can
          then  be transformed into growth factors for the desired variables.  These
I        surrogate variables are used to develop predicted growth patterns for
          the  future.
I
                                           V-l

-------
     One of the problems that the lead agency  has  1n  developing  growth
factors is the reconciliation of the various planning outputs.   In  order to
use information from the various groups,  it will be necessary to insure
that they are based on compatible assumptions  and  data bases.  The  need
for a coordinated effort on the part of the involved  organizations  is
reemphasized by this need for a unified projection plan upon which  to base
the analysis.  The question of how many alternative growth  patterns
should be evaluated as part of the air quality analysis 1s  answered by
the available resources.
     However, 1t is difficult to get consistent projections because of
different time frames and data bases used by the various  planning groups.
Transportation planning groups base their projections on  various trans-
portation scenarios (e.g., highway development emphasis,  transit emphasis,
etc.).  Comprehensive planning groups may use  land-use development
scenarios as the driving mechanism.   These differences can  result in wide
discrepancies in the projection of regional development.
     Long-range planning has been carried out  for  many years in  a number
of areas.  The information required for the air quality analysis should
build on the experience and background of the  planning groups that  have
been involved 1n these activities.  There are  four federally-funded plan-
ning programs that should be able to provide some  framework for  the
projections.  They are:
     HUD 701 planning,
     FHWA 3-C planning,
     EPA 208 planning,
     CZM planning.
The OBERS growth projections are also federally funded, and a  good
source of overall growth data.
                                   V-2

-------
 I
 •        There  are, of course, numerous local and regional studies that can be used
 —        to supplement this information.  A detailed discussion of planning pro-
 ^        grains  listed above can be found in Air Quality Analysis Workshop Volume I -
 •        Manual ,   op. cit. , page 63.
                The  agency should evaluate all these projections, choose the most
 •        accurate  and reliable, and use these variables as a basis for all pro-
           jections.  Also,  growth information employed in development of SIP
 "        revisions involving control strategies should be consistent with that
 •        employed  in the development of a Water Quality Management (WQM) program
           under  Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
 •         This kind of consistency is usually not a problem if one reliable source
           of growth information is used.
 1        REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
 •              (1)  Guidelines for A1r Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis,
           Vol. 3: Control Strategies. EPA 450/4-74-003, July 1974, (OAQPS No.  1.2-022).
                     Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and  Analysis.
           Vol.  7; Projecting County Emissions  (Second Edition),  EPA 450/4-74-008,
1         January 1975 (OAQPS No.  1.2-026).
                (3)  Air Quality Analysis  Workshop  Volume  I -  Manual, op. cit. ,  Chapter  4.
•

I
I
I
I
I

-------
QUESTION - How could one  utilize  208 planning  funds  for developing air
quality projections  and subsequent  plan  development?
ANSWER - The use of  208 funds  can be used  to project  air quality  result-
ing from the implementation  of Water Quality Management (WQM) programs.
Some specific activities  which can  be funded by  208  program funds include:
(1) developing common data bases  for WQM and Air Quality Management
(AQM) programs, (2)  development of  comnon  public participation programs,
(3) development of control strategies or measures  that will achieve the
objective of both AQM and WQM  plans, and (4) development of statutes,
regulations, or administrative procedures  relating air, water and land
use.  More information on specific  uses, and EPA policy relating  to the
interrelationship of AQM  and WQM programs, can be found in the memo;
"Relationship Between Air Quality Planning and the State and Areawide
Water Quality Management  Program."   This 1s available in the OAQPS Guide-
line Series, OAQPS No. 3.0-022, November 15, 1976.
                                  V-4

-------
 I
 I
                                            VI
                               QUESTIONS CONCERNING MODELING
I
I
I
           QUESTION - What mathematical  diffusion models  are recommended for
           estimating ambient PM concentrations?
           ANSWER - Various technical  guidance has been prepared on available
I         models, one of which is Volume 12 of EPA's  Guidelines for Air Quality
           Maintenance Planning and Analysis:  Applying Atmospheric Simulation
I         Models to Air Quality Maintenance Areas.   (EPA 450/4-74-013,  September
m         1974, OAQPS 1.2-031).  Although the title specifically identifies
           "maintenance" areas rather than "attainment" areas,  this document can
•         be useful in selecting dispersion models  for other strategy situations
           except fugitive PM problems.   The document  contains  a good summary
J|         of the availability, advantages and disadvantages of individual  simu-
m         lation models.
                The Guideline on Air Quality Models  and Associated Data  Bases
fl         (Draft) was circulated by OAQPS to all Regional  Offices for comment
           in February 1977.   Late that  month EPA held a  Specialist Conference  on
8         the guideline and a report is in preparation.   Following several  public
f         comment workshops  and at least one comprehensive conference,  the final
           version of the guideline is expected to be  Issued in early 1978.  The
•         guideline will  update the Volume 12 information.
                A brief discussion of the more important  models listed in Volume
(         12 and the guideline above follows.
I
I
                                             VI-1

-------
     Models Available for Particulate Matter  (Annual  Average)  - The
A1r Quality Display Model (AQDM)  of the CUmatologlcal  Dispersion Model
(COM) 1s used to evaluate control strategies  for both point  sources
and multi-source complexes.   However, the  Single Source (CRSTER) Model
1s perferred for analysis of point sources when  they  are  analyzed
separately.  With the approval  of the Regional Administrator,  other
models may be used 1n the following circumstances:
     (1)  If a more accurate or more detailed model 1s  available for
simulation, especially 1f the region has major meteorological  or
topographic complexities, that model may be used.
     (2)  If the meteorological or topographic complexities  of the
region are such that the use of any available air quality model 1s
precluded, then the model used for strategy evaluation  may be  limited
to a Rollback Model.
     Models Available for Particulate Matter (24-Hour Averages). -
Point source models which consider critical dispersion  conditions
characterized by looping, fumigation, high-wind  coning, limited mixing,
etc., are used to evaluate control strategies for Individual point
sources.  Point source models other than those referenced shall be  used
only with approval of the Regional Administrator.
     RAM is recommended for use in evaluating control strategies for
multi-source complexes.  If the resources  required  to operate  RAM  are
not available, then AQDM or COM may be used.  AQDM  or COM must be  used
                                 VI-2

-------
 I
            with procedures  for the statistical  conversion of averaging times as
 |         discussed by Larsen to  convert  annual  average concentration estimates
 m         to 24-hour average  concentrations; other similar statistical techniques
          .  for making this  conversion may  also  be  used.  Only with the approval of
 V         the Regional  Administrator may  other models be used in the following
            circumstances:
 |              (1)   If a more detailed or more suitable model is available,
 M         especially in a  Region  which has major  meteorological or topographic
            complexities, that  model may be used.
 •              (2)   If the meteorological or topographic complexities of the
            Region  are such  that the use of any  available air quality model is
 Q         precluded, then  the model used  for control strategy evaluation may be
 g         limited to a Rollback Model.
 *              (3)   If a more accurate or more detailed model, e.g., the Valley
 H         Model,  is  available for simulation in a Region with major meteorological
            or topographic complexities and the  Regional Administrator judges 1t
 J         appropriate,  the model  may be used.
 •          REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
 "               (1)   40  CFR Part 51, Appendix A, Air Quality Estimation.
 I               (2)   A1r Quality Analysis  Workshop. Vol. I - Manual. Chapter 6,
            "Model  Procedures,"  EPA 450/3-75-80a.
 Q               (3)   Strelow,  R. ,  Memorandum to various RO Division Directors,
 g          Regions I-X,  "Use of Dispersion Model Estimates to Identify Potential
 ™          A1r Quality Standard Violations," November 1, 1976.
I

I
-                                          VI-3

-------
     (4)  Environmental  Protection  Agency.   "User's Network for Applied
Modeling of A1r Pollution (UNAMAP)."   (Computer Programs on Tape for
Point Source Models, HIWAY,  CHmatologlcal  Dispersion Model and APRAC-1A)
(NTIS PB 229771), National Technical  Information Service, Springfield,
Virginia, 1974.
     (5)  Carpenter, S.B., et al. "Principle Plume Dispersion Models:
TVA Power Plants."  J. A1r Poll.  Control Assn.. Vol. 22, No. 8, pp.
491-495, 1971.
     (6)  Environmental  Protection  Agency.   "Reviewing New Stationary
Sources."  Guidelines for A1r Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis,
Volume 10; OAQPS No. 1.2-029, (NTIS PB 237535/AS), Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Research Triangle Park,  North  Carolina, September 1974.
     (7)  Novak, J.H. and D.B.  Turner.   "An Efficient Gaussian-Plume
Multiple-Source A1r Quality  Algorithm." J.  A1r Poll. Control Assn.,
Vol. 26, No, 6, pp. 570-575, 1976.
     (8)  Turner, D.B. and J.H.  Novak, Memorandum to EPA Dispersion
Model Users, "Provisional Availability of RAM," August 11, 1976.
     (9)  Pooler, F. "Potential  Dispersion  of Plumes from Large Power
Plants."  PHS Publication No. 99-AP-16. (NTIS PB 168790).  Superintendent
of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1965.
     (10)  Smith, M.E.,  Ed.   "Recommended Guide for the Prediction of the
Dispersion of Airborne Effluents."  The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, New York, N.Y.,  1968.
                                 VI-4

-------
I
•             (11)  Turner, D.B.   "Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates."
          PHS Publication No. 999-AP-26 (NTIS PB 919482), Office of Technical
I        Information and Publications, Environmental  Protection Agency,  Research
          Triangle Park, N.C., 1970 (Rev.)
•             (12)  Larsen, R.I.   "A Mathematical  Model  for Relating A1r Quality
•        Measurements to Air Quality Standards."  Office of Air Programs Publica-
          tion No. AP-89 (NTIS PB  205277), Office of Technical  Information and
•        Publications, Environmental Protection Agency,  Research Triangle Park,
          N.C., November 1971.
•        QUESTION - What EPA assistance is available  for using the models in
•        Volume 12 and the Guideline A1r Quality Models?
          ANSWER - The National  Technical Information  Service (NTIS), U.S.  Depart-
I        ment of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,  Virginia  22161
          (telephone 703-557-4650) stocks the following user's  guides.
•             Model                     Access Number
•             AQDM                      PB 189-194
               COM                       PB 227-346-AS
|             PT (UNAMAP)  Models         PB 229-771
          Copies can be obtained directly from NTIS.   A computer card deck for  the
•        AQDM program is available from EPA Office of Administration,  Technical
•        Information Center, Research Triangle Park,  N.C.   27711  (MD 35).   More
          specific assistance is available through  EPA Regional  Offices.
I

I

I

I                                          VI-5

-------
Q.UEST_I01j - What techniques are available for fugitive dust modeling?
ANSWER.- The models currently available do not adequately consider
typical fugitive dust sources or the number of mechanisms involved
with fugitive dust.  Typical Gaussian-type dispersion models do not
properly consider the physical characteristics or the emissions of un~
paved roads, storage piles, resuspended street dust or other fugitiva
dust sources.  Nor do they consider gravitational settling or dry and
wet deposition of particulate matter, since all  pollutants are treated
as though they were unreective gases.  Gravitational settling and dry
deposition become increasingly important as the diameter of the particles
exceeds about 10 urn and become critically important when the particle
diameter exceeds 20 urn.  Data from a number of studies indicate that
typical fugitive dust sources are difficult to precisely identify and
quantify.  However, available data indicate that such emissions have a
large proportion of mass in the range of 20-70+ pm.  Therefore, appli-
cation of conventional Gaussian plume models may be inadequate for air
quality evaluation where fugitive dust is a significant problem.
     Thus, there is an immediate need for an analytical technique by
wrr,ch States may quantitatively identify fugitive dust sources, assess
their significance, and begin evaluating potential control measures.  At
tne same time, the shortcomings of existing Gaussian dispersion models
riuSt be recognized.  Ideally, one could adaot or modify the Gaussian
models such as AQDM or COM to explicitly consider fugitive dust sources
and the mechanisms of gravitational settling and deposition  (both dry
and wet).  Since these mechanisms are primarily a function of particle
diameter and density, this would also require development of a  detailed
                                  VI-6

-------
 I
 m         Inventory which properly characterizes sources and stratifies  emissions
           by particle size.  By utilizing this "particle-sized"  Inventory with  the
 •         modified model, one could derive source-receptor relationships to  be
           used in evaluating alternative measures for control  of fugitive dust  and
 8         1n planning SIP revisions.
 m              As an interim approach, the technique developed by TRW  based  upon
           their work in Phoenix which is applicable to arid western  locations 1s
 I         available.  This technique used a modified CUmatologlcal  Dispersion
           Model (COM) to model  fugitive dust emissions.   Essentially,  COM is a
 •         regional model which  accepts the emissions Inventory in the  form of
 m         grldded input.  Long  term concentrations are obtained  by inputting the
           point frequency distribution functions of the surface  winds.   Turbulence
 I         1s parameterized 1n terms of the standard Pasquill-Glfford Scheme.
           Recognition of the diurnal variation in mixing layer height  is made by
 •         an algorithm which assigns a separate height for each  stability class.
 m         Also, the variation in the horizontal wind with height 1s  modeled  according
           to the wind power law.  Pollutant removal, by whatever means such  as
 I         coagulation, sedimentation, Brownian diffusion, is handled only in a
           gross way through an  exponential decay term.
 I              COM 1s useful for particles of a size governed  primarily  by dis-
 M         persion forces, but not useful for the larger particles where  gravitational
           settling becomes the  dominant force.   Because of the deposition problems
 •         associated with fugitive dust, 1t was necessary to treat emissions from
           local sources 1n the  air quality modeling effort differently from those
I
I
I
VI-7

-------
area wide sources with smaller particle sizes  which COM could repre-
sent accurately.  To facilitate this modified  modeling approach,  the
emissions model was altered so that it would prepare a gridded inventory
for each of four particle size ranges.  The particle size ranges  were
selected based on approximate cutoff points in dispersive behavior.  The
four size ranges are as follows:  0-10 microns; 11-20 microns; 21-70
microns; and greater than 70 microns.  Although the inventory techniques
are rudimentary, they do provide a first-approximation of the level and
significance of various sources of fugitive dust.   Thus, the TRW  tech-
nique combines use of COM (modified to account for deposition of  11-20
;jm particles) with a parameterization of the air quality impact of
particles larger than 20 pm using measured PM  data and several key
assumptions.  The nature of these assumptions  imposes severe limitations
on the use of this technique as a predictive model.  However, the TRW
technique for western U.S. locations if properly applied can be useful
to:
     (1)  Assess the relative importance of the fugitive dust problem.
     (2)  Assess the need for additional stationary source control in
the context of the overall problem.
     (3)  Give a preliminary evaluation of the potential impact of
various fugitive dust control measures.  This  evaluation could give a
preliminary assessment of the likelihood of attainment/maintenance and
an initial screening of those fugitive dust control measures which
appear most promising for further evaluation.
                                  VI-8

-------
I
•             Work is also progressing to refine techniques  which will  be appli-
          cable to those locations where the TRW technique may not be expected to
J        yield adequate results, i.e., areas where traditional  emissions  are
          responsible for major air quality Impact.  Source receptor relationships
™        incorporating findings from a GCA study of urban particulate problems
•        have been Investigated and additional  guidance is available in that
          report (Volume III of reference 1 below).
|        REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  -
               (1)  An Implementation Plan for Suspended Particulate Matter in
•        the Phoenix Area. Volumes I-IV, (EPA-450/3-77-021a-d), Prepared  for
•        EPA by TRW, Redondo Beach, California, August 1977.
               (2)  Guidelines for Development of Control  Strategies in  Areas  With
I        Fugitive Dust Problems. OAQPS Guideline Series,  OAQPS  No.  1.2-071,
          Draft, April, 1977.
•        QUESTION - What techniques are available for fugitive  emissions  modeling?
•        ANSWER- Similar drawbacks to these just discussed for  fugitive dust  apply
          to modeling of industrial process fugitive particulate emissions techniques
I        with respect to gravitational settling, dry deposition and wet removal
          of PM.   Dispersion modeling, although  usually less  expensive than field
•        measurements, has associated with 1t the problems of (1) Inadequate
•        handling of physical interferences, (2) lack of  complete data  needed for

I

I

I
I                                          VI-9

-------
the model, and (3) lack of expertise  1n  applying  the model,  all  of which
can lead to poor estimates.  These  general  problems of modeling  are
compounded when dealing with fugitive emissions in a similar way to  fugitive
dust since: (1) the emissions are not well  defined  (by location  or rate),
and (2) where emissions are close to  ground level , they may  be effected
by gravity and may disperse in a  non-Gaussian  plume.
     An existing dispersion model is  presently being modified to consider
all fugitive emissions in an industrial  complex and should be available
by late fall 1977.  A review of present  techniques to  assess the impacts
of fugitive emissions can be found  in Technical Guidance  for Control  of
Industrial Process Fugitive Particulate  Emissions (EPA 450/3-77-010),
March 1977.  This document reviews  state-of-the-art emissions measuring
techniques and methods for determining empirical  source-receptor relation-
ships based on upwind-downwind monitoring programs.  Simplified  dis-
persion modeling techniques are presented for  preliminary assessment
of air quality impact in the short  term.   These techniques will  not
completely account for the complicating  factors mentioned before
such as multiple sources or non-Gaussian dispersion, but  win help with
estimates until the modified model  is completed.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     Technical Guidance for Control of Industrial Process Fugitive
Particulate Emissions. EPA 450/3-77-010, March 1977.
                                 VI-10

-------
I
I
I
                                           VII
                         QUESTIONS CONCERNING CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
           QUESTION - What is "Reasonably Available Control  Technology" (RACT)
           for stationary sources, and how is it determined for an individual
           source?
 •         ANSWER - As part of the original SIP development  in 1971  and 1972, the
           concept of RACT was expressed as a series of examples of emission
 I         limitations attainable by various source classes  and was  published in
           Appendix B of 40 CFR 51.  This original concept is obsolete, for
 •         several reasons.  First, it is now realized that  the many individual
 •         physical specifications of plants cannot be covered by a  rigid "one-
           number" approach.   Controls that may be achievable for a  source in
 |         one area may not be achievable for a similar source in another area
 —         because of variations in the process, the lack of space to retrofit
 •         the controls, the  availability of complying fuels, or the like.   In
 •         other instances, if an attempt is made to apply the same  emission
           limit to all sources regardless of the specific situation, one may in-
 •         hibit the application of better controls that may be quite achievable
           for a specific source at a specific location.   Further, it is  the air
 ^         quality that determines the degree of control  necessary in order to
 •         attain the NAAQS.   Thus, similar sources may be treated differently
           in different areas because the reductions in air  quality  necessary to
 I         meet the NAAQS will vary, depending on the severity of the air quality
           problem.  In some  instances, the SIP may not require controls  that


I
I                                          VII-1

-------
                                                                                          I
are at the limit of achievable technology.   Under the requirements  of                      •
the Clean Air Act Amendments  of 1977,  controls  must  be applied  at the
level  which will result in attainment  before 1983.   For these reasons,                     I
a flexible procedure for determining the RACT for various  areas  is
appropriate,                                                                              •
     With respect to individual point  sources with defined emission                       A
points (i.e., those amenable  to the application of control equipment)
reasonably available control  technology (RACT)  defines the lowest emis-                    •
sion limit that a particular  source is capable  of meeting  by the appli-
cation of control technology  that is reasonably available  considering                      •
technological and economic feasibility.  RACT may represent a relatively                   •
stringent, or even "technology-forcing," requirement that  goes  beyond
simple "off-the-shelf" technology.  The determination of RACT will  vary                    I
from source to source due to  source configuration, retrofit feasiblity,
operation procedures, raw materials, and other  characteristics  of an                       •
individual source or group of sources.                                                    •
QUESTION - What guidance is available  or is  being prepared to assist in
determining reasonable available control technology  for specific sources?                  I
ANSWER - Various efforts have either been completed  or are underway to
document reasonably available control  technology for existing sources.                     •
     1.  Technical support documents  are available for those sources                       •
for which new source performance standards  have been promulgated.   Work
                                                                                          I

                                                                                          I

                                                                                          I
                                  VII-2                                                   •

-------
 I
 •         1s  continuing on the standards support and environmental Impact state-
           ment documents  (SSEIS) for many other sources.  These SSEIS documents
 |         contain the results of technical Investigations and the recommended NSPS.
 —         They serve as valuable reference documents 1n defining RACT for existing
 *         sources.  It should be noted that similar technical support documents
 •         have been prepared for those sources affected by national emission stan-
           dards for hazardous pollutants.  To date such standards have been pro-
 |         mulgated for asbestos, beryllium, and mercury and vinyl chloride.  The
 m         technical support documents associated with these hazardous pollutant
 •         standards are also a source of Information to assist 1n defining RACT.
 A             2.  A contract effort has been recently completed which defines
           available control technology for particulate matter from oil-burning
 |         boilers and furnaces.  Control measures and procedures for reducing par-
 —         ticulate emissions from oil-burning Indirect heating plants are described
 •         for residential, commercial, industrial, and power plant sources.  (Refer-
 •         ence 1.)
               3.  A contract has been completed that describes available control
 |         technology for approximately 40 particulate matter source categories.  The
 _         source categories are assessed according to (a) typical plant size and
 •
 •         associated emissions, (b) applicable control equipment efficiency, and
 •         (c) potential for compliance with new source performance standards and
           the most and least restrictive SIP regulatory limitations.   The document
 J         presents data typical of current emissions and control techniques.  It
 _         is envisioned that this document will be useful for agencies faced with
 •         revising a SIP by identifying source categories where controls may be

I

I                                          VII-3

-------
tightened.  Once these categories have been Identified then  other
references should be employed to determine exactly how much  additional
control can be gained.  (Reference 2.)
     4.  A contract effort has been undertaken to summarize  all  the
available information concerning fugitive emissions and provide  a
guideline on Its control  for use by the states in the development of
necessary revisions to the particulate matter control strategy.   (Refer-
ence 3.)
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1)  Control of Particulate Matter from Oil  Burners and Boilers.
EPA 450/3-76-005, April 1976.
     (2)  Controlled and Uncontrolled Emission Rates and Applicable
Limitations for 80 Processes, Prepared for EPA by the Research Corpora-
tion of New England (TRC), Contract No. 68-02-1382, Sept.  1976.
     (3)  Technical Guidance for Control of Industrial Process Fugitive
Particulate Emissions. EPA 450/3-77-010, March 1977.
QUESTION - How significant are emissions from oil-burning facilities,
and how can emissions from such sources be minimized?
                                  VII-4

-------
I
«        ANSWER - In a recent study of partlculate pollution 1n five cities  1n
"        which more than one-third of the dwelling units used fuel  oil, it was
•        found that ambient partlculate levels on an annual  basis resulting  from
          fuel oil combustion ranged from 8-13% of the mass on the hi-vol  filter.
I        The study further concluded that in midwestern cities, where coal 1s
_        used significantly, even very major oil-fired combustion units,  such  as
•        utility boilers, have in some cases been Ignored as sources because
•        they are cleaner than equivalent coal-fired units.
               There is a significant range in the stringency of emission  regula-
•        tlons applied to combustion sources 1n general, and one of the areas
—        where there is room for further reductions in emissions 1s residential
•        space heaters.  Virtually all of these sources burn oil and are  controlled
•        only by visible emissions enforcement, if at all.   The degree of which
          these sources contribute to the PM problem 1s not yet clearly defined.
|             Several control measures were evaluated for residential, com-
_        mercial, Industrial and utility size oil burners during a  recent study,
•        Control of Partlculate Matter from Oil Burners and  Boilers (EPA  450/3-76-005,
•        April, 1976).  The study contains an extensive review of the literature
          and presents possible partlculate control measures  for the residential,
jj        commercial, Industrial and utility categories.  As  an example, possible
_        control measures for utility size boilers and furnaces Include such
•        general approaches as improved burner servicing, equipment design
•        changes, and fuel  additives.  Tables presenting similar Information
I
          for residential, commercial, and industrial  oil  fired  burners  and
          boilers are Included in the report.
                                            VII-5

-------
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  -
     (1)   National  Assessment of the Urban  Particulate  Problem, op. cit.
     (2)   Control  of Particulate Matter  from  011  Burners  and Boilers,
Prepared for EPA by the Acurex Corporation, Mountain  View, California
94040, EPA 450/3-76-005, April 1976.
     (3)   Pace, T.G. , "Impact of Energy  Conversion  Processes on Participate
Matter Air Quality," presented at 1976 Energy and Environment  Conference,
Cincinnati , Ohio.
QUESTION  - Must any particular emission  measurement test  method be
prescribed as the test method for determining compliance  with  State
adopted emission limitations  for particulate  matter?
ANSWER -  No.  Under the State Implementation  Plan process, States have
the flexibility to determine  the emission test method they will use to
determine source compliance with adopted emission limitations.  States,
however, must define the specific test method which they  will  use to
determine source compliance with adopted emission limitations.  This  is
necessary for two reasons.   First, it  is necessary  so that the anticipated
emission reduction that will  result from source compliance with the emis-
sion limitation can be determined to assess whether the control strategy
is adequate to provide for attainment  of national standards.   Secondly,
it is necessary to identify the specific test method  because  differences
between test methods may allow more particulate matter  emissions  to be
captured by one method versus another method.  If the test method were
not prescribed, then a conflict could exist as to whether test data using
one method which showed compliance with  the standard as more  valid than
test data using a second test method which indicated noncompliance with
the emission  limitation.   In  cases where States do  not  specifically
                                   VII-6

-------
 I
 B       Identify a test method 1n  their State  Implementation  Plan,  EPA will  use
          EPA emission test methods  to determine emissions  and  source compliance,
 I       where necessary.   40 CFR 52.12(c)  provides that  "For  purposes of  Federal
 Q       enforcement, emissions from sources  subject to provisions of a plan
 ™       which did not specify a test procedure.  .  .will  be tested by means of
 •       the procedures and methods prescribed  1n the  appendix to Part 60  of  this
          title, and emissions from  sources  subject  to  approved provisions  of  a
 I       plan wherein a test procedure was  specified will  be tested  by the
 g       specified procedure."
 ™       QUESTION - What potential  control  measures have  been  identified for  con-
 •       structlon sources?
          ANSWER - The control  of dust from  construction activities is often
 |       approached through the use of "nuisance" or reasonable-precaution regu-
 g       latlons.  Control  measures that can  be applied include watering and
 ™       chemical soil  stabilization.  Watering produces  an average  control
 •       efficiency of approximately 30%, and a 50% control' efficiency is  feasible
          with watering  twice a day  at the rate  of 0.5  gallons  per square yard.
 I       Chemical stabilization can produce a reduction of approximately 80%  to
 _        85% in emissions.   Several  commercial  chemicals  have  demonstrated strong
 ™        binding or crusting properties  which are effective as long  as the area
 •        is  not exposed to traffic.

I

I

I
                                          VII-7

-------
     Another control measured to minimize emissions from construction
activities is one of minimizing the exposure time that cleared earth
may be exposed before construction activities begin.   In some areas,
there is a frequent practice of clearing vast plots of land many
months before construction activities actually begin.   Regulations
which limit the exposure time can reduce fugitive dust emission in
such cases.
     Another control option includes reducing the amount of material
from a construction site that may get on streets 1n the vicinity of
the project where it can become resuspended.   To minimize this problem,
various control mechanisms are available.  One way is  to require all
vehicles leaving the construction site to be cleaned in such a way
that they will  not carry out loose soil and deposit it on the streets.
A second option is to require the operator of the construction site
to frequently clean the streets in the vicinity of the project,
perhaps daily.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1) Investigation of Fugitive Dus.t. Volume I - Sources,
Emissions, and Control. EPA 450/3-74-036a, June 1974.
     (2)  An Implementation Plan for Suspended Particulate Matter in
the Phoenix Area (TRW. Inc.) Interim Report, Emissions Inventory,
May 1976.
QUESTION - What control measures are available to minimize fugitive
dust from unpaved roads?
                                  VII-8

-------
I
          ANSWER - Five control measures have been Identified:   paving,  surface
|        treatment with penetration chemicals, application of  soil  stabilization
«        chemicals, watering, and traffic controls.   Paving 1s the  most expen-
          sive and effective measure, however, a benefit of paving  is  the elinrina-
•        tion of routine maintenance costs for blading and regrading  unpaved
          roads.
|             Initial surface chemical  treatment for dust suppression is relatively
g        Inexpensive, but no treatment  material has  been found which  remains
™        effective for more than two months under normal traffic conditions.
•             Penetration chemicals, worked into the roadbed to a depth of  two
          to six inches, are a good interim control measure, because they create
|        a base for paving.  The cost of this measure approaches the  cost of
_        paving.
               Watering is not feasible  because of the high frequency  of treatment.
fl        In special cases, such as at construction sites, it may be appropriate.
               Some comparisons of costs among various methods  have  been performed
I        which address various options  among paving  and chemical stabilizing
_        measures including various combinations of  traffic control measures, as
™        shown in the table below:
 I
CONTROL TECHNIQUES FOR UNPAVED ROADS
                                                   Control           Cost
 •        Control Method                        Efficiency  (%)        ($)
          Paving 3" bituminous surface               85         20,000  - 26,000/mile
I          Paving, single chipseal  on prepared
            roadbed                                  50          8,500  - 14,000/mile/yr
          Soil stabilization chemicals worked
 .          into the roadbed                         50          5,000  - 12,000/mile/yr
          Source:  Investigation of Fugitive Dust.  Volume  I  - Sources, Emissions.
                   and Control, op.cItT,  pages  4-29.
 I                                 ~
                                           VII-9
 I

-------
     Traffic controls have a negligible cost and can  be effective.
Controls on vehicle routing are more effective than  speed controls,
because emissions increase at a rate more rapid than  increases  in
vehicle speed and vary in proportion to the number of vehicles  on
the road.  Dust emissions increase exponentially with vehicle speed
up to 30 mph.  The table illustrates the dust emission rate  at  dif-
ferent speeds for a vehicle traveling over a typical  dirt road  in
the Phoenix, Arizona, area.  Restriction of traffic  from unpaved roads
is not feasible since almost all roads provide some  necessary access.
          DUST EMISSION RATE AT DIFFERENT VEHICLE SPEEDS
     Speed of               Emission ratea         Degree  of Emissl
     Vehicle (mph)         (lb/vehicle mi.)           Reduction  (%)
35
30
25
20
22
19
13
8.5
14
41
62

aBased on exponential increase (to the power)  in emissions  from 0 to
 30 mph, and linear increase above 30 mph.   the base line emission rate
 (35 mph) was calculated, assuming the typical  dirt road silt content
 of 24%.  (Emission factor in Supp.  5, Compilation of Air Pollution
 Emission Factors. AP-42, p. 11.2.2).
     For new roads, an effective control approach would be  to require
that all new roads be paved within an urban area.  This would tend to
minimize future growth of various fugitive dust sources.
                                 VII-10

-------
I
          REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
               (1)  Investigation, of Fugitive Dust. Sources. Emissions,  and
I       Control. Volume I. EPA 450/3-74-036a, June 1974.
               (2)  An Implementation Plan for Suspended Participate  Matter
I       1n the Phoenix Area, Draft Report, November 1976.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-                                       vii-n

-------
  I
  I                                       VIII
                       QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE CONTROL STRATEGY,
  •                         ITS DEVELOPMENT, AND ITS REVISION

  I
          QUESTION - What consideration should be given to the control of automotive
  I       emissions in the control strategy?
          ANSWER - Automotive emissions of PM can contribute approximately 3 to 5
  •       jjg/m  per cubic meter to ambient PM levels.   Emission testing studies have
 •       shown that lead compounds comprise approximately one fourth of automotive
          exhaust particulates.  Thus, one would expect that if lead levels in gaso-
 •       line were reduced or non-leaded gasoline were used, a corresponding 20 to
          30% reduction in PM should take place.
 •            However, Page D-29 of Supplement Number 5 of AP-42 indicates that
 •       particulate emissions from automobile exhaust for leaded fuel are estimated
          at 0.34 grams/mile while estimates of unleaded fuel are estimated at 0.05
 I       grams/mile.  This represents an 85% reduction 1n particulate emissions due
          to the removal of lead from gasoline for light duty vehicles.  These data
 •        appear contrary to the above information which indicates that lead comprises
 •        approximately one sixth of total exhaust particulate emissions from the
          automobiles.   Other additives, such as bromine compounds, are Introduced
 I        into leaded gasoline to scavenge lead oxides which deposit on an engine's
          pistons and cylinder walls.  When lead 1s removed as an additive, therefore,
 •        not only are lead related particles removed, but these other compounds
 •        that also contribute to the particulate emissions are also eliminated.

I

I                                          VIII-1

-------
Some Independent test results have Indicated that significant reductions
in exhaust particles mass emissions were observed under all test conditions
when tetraethyl lead and lead scavengers were removed from gasoline.   A
reduction of 77%* with non-leaded fuel was observed under stabilized  operat-
ing conditions, although a range of 40% to 93% reduction was observed under
various test conditions.  Therefore, the 85% reduction in particulate
emissions from the use of non-leaded fuels seems  to be substantiated.
     Consequently, when EPA regulations controlling the lead content  in
gasoline are implemented, a significant reduction in automotive  emissions
should result.   These regulations will reduce the average lead 1n gasoline
from the current level of approximately 2.0 grams per gallon to  0.5 grams
per gallon by 1979.  Further reductions of lead in gasoline should result
as automobiles  equipped with catalytic devices replace non-catalytic  auto-
mobiles in use.  Automobiles equipped with catalytic converters  cannot
use gasoline with high lead contents (in excess of 0.05 grams per gallon)
since the lead  would contaminate the catalytic device.   Consequently,  as
more new cars equipped with catalysts replace non-catalyst equipped cars,
automotive particulate emissions should be further reduced.   These antici-
pated reductions in particulate emissions should  be considered in SIP
plan development.
     EPA's suggested procedure for determining lead emissions from mobile
sources will appear in the forthcoming publication, Supplementary Guidelines
for Lead Implementation Plans, scheduled for publication around  March  1978.
* 200 test cycles were run in sequence.   After the 30th  test  cycle,  emission
  reductions of PM stabilized at approximately 77 percent.
                                  VIII-2

-------
  I
           REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
  |            (1)  L1llis, E.  and Dunbar, D. , "Impact of Automotive Particle  Exhaust
  _       Emissions on A1r Quality,"  SIB,  CPDD, OAQPS, November 13,  1975,  unpublished
  ™       paper.
  I            (2)  Supplement  5 for Compilation of A1r Pollutant  Emission Factors
           (Second Edition) (AP-42) OAQPS,  April 1975.
  |            (3)  "Fuels and  Fuel Additives  - Control of Lead Additives  in Gaso-
  _       line,"  (41 FR 12675)  Sept.  23, 1976.
  •       QUESTION - What potential control measures have been  Identified  for  re-
  •        entrained parti culates?
           ANSWER  - Three control options which have been suggested include:
  I             (a)  Regulations which reduce the amount of material  which  gets  onto
  _        streets ,
  ™             (b)  Increased and/or improved  street cleaning procedures,  and
  •             (c)  Reduction in vehicle miles  travelled within  areas  affected  by
           such problems.
 I             While it is reasonable to regulate and  prohibit material  from getting
 _         onto streets, these measures are probably ineffective  by themselves 1n
 •         resolving the problem.   This is  because they are generally temporary  mea-
 •         sures ,  such that control  actions need to be  implemented  frequently.   Further-
           more, from an enforcement point  of view they are generally resource- intensive
 I         and difficult to enforce.   Street cleaning 1s another  option frequently
           suggested; however, data are available which indicate  that more  particles
 •         may be  available for  resuspension after street cleaning  than before when
 •         the most common operated brush type  sweeper  is used to clean streets.  VMT
I
           reduction  1s  theoretically  available  for  appli cation ; however,  1t is  an
           extreme  measure  to  implement without  first investigating the effectiveness
VIII-3

-------
                                                                                          I
of the other approaches.   Also, no data are  available  that  show that  reduc-                •
tlons 1n VMT will reduce  PM levels.   One study has  suggested  that the total
air quality impact from resuspension may result from only a relatively                     I
small VMT, such that proportional  reductions  in VMT may  not improve air
quality accordingly.  At  the present time,  an EPA study  is  under way  in                    I
Kansas City to investigate various factors with regard to control of                       •
resuspended material has  been completed.  This study,  Control  of Re-
entrained Dust from Paved Streets, July 1977, is available  through the                     I
EPA Library, Research Triangle Park, NC  27711.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -                                                   |
     (1)  Dunbar, D. , "Resuspension  of Particulate  Matter," Standards                     •
Implementation Branch, Control Programs Development Division,  OAQPS,
March 15, 1976, unpublished paper.                                                        I
     (2)  National Assessment of the Urban  Particulate Problem, op. cit.
QUESTION - What intergovernmental  coordination and  review are  generally                    |
necessary in the development of SIP  control  strategies?                                    •
ANSWER - The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 require  that  strategies
that contain transportation controls, air quality maintenance  plans,                       I
or requirements for preconstruction  review  of new sources,  or  strategies
pertaining to non-attainment requirements or prevention  of  significant                     |
deterioration must be reviewed under a process of consultation.  This                     •
process of consultation must include local  governments,  designated
organizations of elected local government officials and  any Federal                        •
land manager with authority over land to which the State plan applies.
Regulations governing the development of State plans of  consultation                       |

                                                                                          I

                                  VIH-4                                                  I

-------
I
          win  be  promulgated by the Administrator by February 7, 1978.   This
           new  process of consultation will become effective for reviews conducted
•         after  August  7, 1978.
               Presently, Intergovernmental cooperation under 40 CFR 51.21
I         requires provisions for cooperation in interstate regions, and provision
_         for  cooperation among the various state and local agencies whose function
•         affects, or 1s affected by the SIP revision.
•             Where the revision is developed under 40 CFR 51, Subpart D, several
           specific provisions for Intergovernmental cooperation are required.   These
I         provisions appear under Section 51.58 - AQMA plan:  Intergovernmental
•         Cooperation.  They are summarized as follows:
™             (1)  Agency which is developing the SIP revision must be specified
•         by the State.
               (2)  The developing agency must ensure the continuous involvement
|         of other agencies whose function will be affected by the SIP revisions
_         such as:
•             a.  State A1r Pollution Control Associations, Departments of Trans-
•                 portation, etc., local Air Pollution Control Districts.
               b.  Elected officials.
|             c.  Agencies responsible for areawide waste treatment management
_                 planning under Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution
'                 Control Act Amendments of 1972.
•             d.  Other planning arms of the Federal government established in
                   the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of
J                 Transportation, Office of Management and Budget, etc.

I
                                            VIII-5
•

-------
     (3)  The developing agency must coordinate with other planning
bodies substantially affected by the SIP revision to develop a procedure
for using common data bases, similar policy advisory bodies, public
comment policy, etc.
     (4)  Where SIP revisions are being prepared for adjoining areas,
such revisions must be coordinated.
     (5)  Office of Management and Budget A-95 review must be performed.
     (6)  The SIP revision must describe how the before mentioned coor-
dination was and/or will be carried out.
     (7)  Public Participation must be provided for the development of
the SIP revision.
     Coordination with the agencies  responsible for areawide waste treat-
ment management planning under Section 208 of the Federal  Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 is very Important because EPA will not
approve water quality management and air quality maintenance plans which
are in conflict.
     Although the above provisions are mandatory only for 40 CFR 51, Sub-
part D actions (Air Quality Maintenance Regulations), they represent an
excellent guide to follow for all SIP control strategy revisions.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     (1)  Maintenance of National Ambient A1r Quality Standards - Summary
(41 FR 18382), May 3, 1976.
     (2)  Briedenbach, W. and Strelow, R., Memorandum to All Regional
Administrators, "Relationship Between Air Quality Planning and the State
and Areawide Water Quality Management Program; Eligible Uses of Section
208 Funds for A1r Quality Analyses," November 15, 1976.
                                  VIII-6

-------
I
           QUESTION  -  How  should  secondary  particulate matter be considered in a
           PM control  strategy?
I         ANSWER -  Secondary  particulates  can  contribute up to 50 percent of the
           PM in  an  area.   Knowledge  of the relationship between the precursors of
I         secondary particulates-  sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and organic com-
•         pounds is limited.  We do  know that  they are almost always fine, and
           the chemical  composition of such fine particulates varies considerably
•         from one  geographic area to another.  Table 4 illustrates this variation.
           It can be seen  that the  water soluble sulfates are the principal fine
I         particulate component in the eastern United States, with organics and
mm         nitrates  relatively more important in western areas.
               A comprehensive study of PM problems  in Los Angeles, California
•         concluded that  "To  achieve the primary ambient air quality standards
           for particulate matter,  effort must  be continued to control SOV, NOV, and
                                                                        IX    A
           reactive  hydrocarbon emissions from  all sources..."  Areas which have
mm         attainment/maintenance problems  for  PM should be aware that under cer-
           tain environmental  conditions, emissions of gases such as SCL, NCL, and
I

I

I

I

I

I
•                                          VIII-7

-------
     TABLE 4-    Regional  Variation Major Chemical Classes Typically
                Occurring as  Fine Parti oil ate (Annual Arithmetic
                Average  Based on 1966-1968 NASN Data)
Regi on
East0
Mideastd
South
Mi dwest6
Mountain
Southwest
West Coast
so= a
(«g?m3)
18.9
14.6
10.0
5.9
3.4
4.4
9.4
BSOb3
7.8
7.3
7.8
5.3
4.7
5.5
8.9
N03 3
2.1
2.9
2.5
7.8
1.3
2.1
3.8
Pb 3
1.2
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.9
TotaJ
30
26
21
14
10
13
24
Measured NH^ partitioned to SOj, NO^


 Benzene soluble organics,  about 1/2 to 2/3 of total organics


cProvidence, R.I.  to Washington, D.C.


 Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois /*
                                 *

Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri
Source:  A.P.  Alshuller,  Principal Species in Atmospheric Fine
         Particulate Matter,  in  Minutes of Meeting of U.S. EPA
         Agency Air Pollution Chemical and Physics Committee,
         Alexandria, Virginia, April  17-18,  1970.  p. 15.
                                 VIII-8

-------
I
•         reactive hydrocarbons  can  result  1n the  formation of sulfates, nitrates,
           and organic aerosols.  Two approaches to the  control of secondary par-
•         tlculates are  (1)  control  of emissions of gaseous precursors to fine
           particulates which account for the majority of fine particulate mass,
•         and (2)  Control  of the mechanisms which  promote transformation of
•         gases  to particles.  Gaseous substances  are converted to secondary par-
           ti culates by a number  of uncompletely understood mechanisms which
I         involve  atmospheric variables such as levels  of other pollutants, humi-
           dity,  sunlight intensity,  and temperature.  Control of certain pollutants
•         may slow these reactions and reduce the  amount of gases which form par-
•         ticulates.  For  example, aerosol  formation appears to be accelerated by
           photochemical  activity.  Hence, reductions in photochemical oxldant
•         levels would indirectly influence secondary particulate levels by reducing
           the amount  of  gases  which  are transformed into aerosols.  Since reactive
I         HC  emission reduction  is the principal method of oxldant control, organic
•         aerosols would be  both indirectly and directly affected by oxldant reduc-
           tion programs.   Although some benefit can be expected from controlling
I         pollutants  which influence aerosol formation mechanisms, many other
           important variables, such  as humidity, cannot be controlled.  Thus, con-
•         trol of  mechanisms which form particles  in the atmosphere 1s likely to
•         be  a supplement  to  control of direct precursor gases, rather than a com-
           plete  strategy.  Additional understanding of  aerosol formation mechanisms
I         is  needed.

I

I

I                                          VIII-9

-------
     Whenever possible in these non-attainment areas, the air quality
samples should be chemically analyzed  for  secondary particulates.  Where
these concentrations  are high,  the  control  of precursors of secondary
particulates should be considered in the control  strategy.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  -
     (1)  Stelgerwald, B.J., Memorandum to Roger  Strelow, "Fine Partlcu-
late Control Strategy,"  July 2, 1975.
     (2)  Padgett, J.  and Bachman,  J., "Regulatory and Technical Control
Strategies for Fine Particles," Presented  at the  June 1976 APCA Meeting,
Portland, Oregon, Paper No.  76-30.7.
     (3)  H1dy, G.M. , Characterization of  Aerosols in California, Final
report to the A1r Resources  Board,  State of California, Volumes 1-4,
1974.
     (4)  Position Paper on  Regulation of  Atmospheric Sulfates, EPA
450/2-75-007, September 1975.
QUESTION - How should fugitive  dust sources be considered in the control
strategy?
ANSWER - A fugitive dust policy has been developed.  The recommended
policy with regard to consideration of fugitive dust sources 1n SIP
control strategy development is as  follows:
     1.  The major emphasis  for fugitive dust control will center upon
urban areas.  Rural areas should be encouraged to develop programs on
a voluntary basis at  this time  where  1t  1s determined by measured air
quality concentrations that  some action  may be desirable.
                                  VIII-10

-------
                 2.   In urban areas, an analysis should be made to Identify  all
            sources of particulate matter and to consider various  measures that
            might be  used to reduce particulate emissions from both conventional
            stationary and fugitive dust sources and determine what the impact of
            such measures would have on ambient air quality.   From this evaluation,
 J         an appropriate control program should be developed.
                 3.   It 1s not recommended that unreasonable  controls be implemented
 •         which would cause severe adverse social or economic disruption.
 •              4.   In urban areas, control of fugitive dust at construction acti-
            vities is reasonably available and should be required  if needed  to meet
 I         national  standards or minimize the ambient concentrations greater than
            national  standards in urban areas.  Also, reasonable efforts can be taken
 •         to stabilize cleared land awaiting construction.   Similarly, it  is gen-
 •         erally reasonable in urban areas to control fugitive dust from demolition
            and similar activities, commercial driveways, parking  lots, and  truck
 I         parking areas.  In urban areas where there is enough rain or water avail-
            able, it may be reasonable to require owners of vacant lots to maintain
 B          some type of vegetative cover to minimize the potential  for soil loss by
 •          wind erosion.
                5.   In urban areas, fugitive dust control  measures  such as  street
 •          sweeping or street cleaning, paving of roads, stabilizing road shoulders
            and roadways, requiring that new roads be paved,  and constructing curbs
 •          along roadways may be reasonable.  Such measures  should be considered
 •          by the State, where needed, and adopted when they can  be successfully
            implemented.
I

I                                           vm-n

-------
     6.  At the present time, 208 water planning  agencies  are  considering
various techniques to minimize water runoff from  "non-point  sources"
which are similar to fugitive dust sources.   In particular,  dust which
collects on streets may be a water pollution problem as well as an  air
pollution problem.  Coordination of air management  planners  with water
management planners may be mutually beneflcal  and 1s encouraged.  See
reference for additional Information and page V-4 for a discussion  of
this coordination.
     7.  In urban areas where fugitive dust contributes to violations
of national standards, existing stationary sources  should  generally be
required to apply all reasonable measures to minimize emissions if  they
contribute significantly to the air quality levels  in the  area of question,
In such areas, a case-by-case determination of needed controls for  sta-
tionary sources within fugitive dust areas is 1n  order.   (Note:  Thus
all sources throughout an AQCR will not necessarily need to  apply such
measures, but only those sources within the particular geographic area
where excursions of national standards occur and  their impact  is judged
to be significant.)
     8.  The calls for SIP revisions 1n July 1976 set July 1978 as  the
deadline for submitting revisions to account for  fugitive  dust.  Under
the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, this date has been  changed to
January 1, 1979.
                                  VIII-12

-------
          REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
I             (1)  Briedenbach, W. ,  and Strelow,  R.,  Memorandum  to  all  Regional
          Administrators, "Relationship Between A1r  Quality  Planning and the State
I        and Areawlde Water Quality  Management Program;  Eligible Uses  of Section
•        208 Funds for A1r Quality Analyses,"  November 15,  1976.
               (2)  "Fugitive Dust Policy:   New Source Review," CPDD-OAQPS, August
I        1, 1977.
I
I
          QUESTION - How should ambient data collected during dust storms  and other
          unusual events be considered in a control strategy?
          ANSWER - 40 CFR 51.12(d) provides that:  "For purposes of developing a
I        control strategy, data derived from measurements of existing ambient
          levels of a pollutant may be adjusted to reflect the extent  to which
•        occasional natural or accidental phenomena, e.g., dust storms, forest
•        fires, Industrial accidents, demonstrably affected such ambient  levels
          during the measurement period."  The rationale underlying this policy is
•        the concept of "reasonableness" in control  strategy development,  in that
          strategies based on such unusual conditions would clearly be unreasonable.
I        REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
•             Guidelines for the Interpretation of Air Quality Standards.  OAQPS
*        No. 1.2-008, February 1977, (Revised).
•        QUESTION - How does the EPA new source review emission offset policy
          affect SIP revisions?
I        ANSWER - The Clean Air Act of 1970 required State Implementation  plans
•        (SIPs) to Insure that National  ambient air quality standards  be attained
          not later than mid-1975 (or 1977 if an extension has  been granted).   Since
I        the statutory attainment dates  established by the 1970 Act,  have  already
          pased and the ambient standards have not been attained 1n many areas  of the
I        country, questions
                                            VIII-13

-------
have arisen as to whether and to what extent  new  sources  may  legally
be permitted to construct in these areas.   In answer to this  question
EPA has developed an "emission offset" policy.  Essentially,  this
policy would allow construction of major new  sources in areas of non-
attainment if, in the area of the proposed  source,  emission reductions
are obtained such that the total  emissions  from existing  and  proposed
sources are significantly less than emissions in  the area prior to con-
struction of the new sources.   This result  might  be reached by "off-
setting" reductions in emissions  from existing sources for the emissions
of the new source, i.e., more stringent control of  existing facilities.
     The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 will change the use of the
offset policy before July 1, 1979.   The offset policy may be waived
by the Administrator for any pollutant if the State review program meets
requirements as stated in the amendments.   These  requirements include
an inventory of emissions, an enforceable permit  system which has emis-
sion limitations and control on existing sources  incorporating reasonably
available control technology as a minimum,  and a  program to reduce
emissions prior to January 1, 1979, to provide reductions equivalent to
the reductions possible under the offset policy.  This waiver can be
terminated by the Administrator if the requirements are not met.
     For the period after July 1, 1979, the new Act requires  as a pre-
condition for the construction or modification of major stationary
sources in nonattainment areas that SIPs in nonattainment areas provide
for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but  not later  than
December 31, 1982, for the primary standards. There are  also additional
requirements specified in the Act for a new or modified major stationary
source to obtain a permit after July 1, 1979. These requirements appear
1n Section 173 of the Act.
                                 VIII-14

-------
I
•        REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
               (1)  Steigerwald, B.J., Memorandum to All  Regional  Administrators
I        "Meeting to Discuss EPA New Source Review Policy in Non-Attainment  Areas,"
          October 28, 1976.
I             (2)  "Air Quality Standards; Interpretative Ruling", (41  FR 55525),
_        December 21, 1976.
          QUESTION - How should the impact of stationary  fuel switches  under  the
•        Energy Supply and Environmental  Coordination Act of 1974 (ESECA) be
          considered in control strategy development?
I        ANSWER - Under ESECA, the Federal Energy Administrator (FEA)  has authority
«        to order facilities to switch from oil  or gas to coal, but any such order
          shall not become effective until EPA certifies  that such plan  or installa-
I        tion will be able to comply with the applicable air pollution  require-
          ments.   These requirements are the applicable State Implementation  Plan
|        (SIP).   In practice, EPA requires, in 40 CFR 55.06(a), that sources ordered
_        to convert to coal submit to EPA (1) "A certification  of the  date that
          the source will  be able to burn  coal and comply with all applicable air
•        pollution requirements,"  and (2) a plan for compliance which  includes
          the necessary steps the source must take to comply with  all applicable
|        air pollution requirements."  Even 1f the affected facility 1s in an
_        area estimated to be a "nonattainment"  area and/or 1s  in an area covered
™        by a SIP which is suspected tp be or declared to be "substantially
•        inadequate,"  the only requirement which must be met is the applicable SIP.
               Therefore,  if a fuel conversion under ESECA is expected to be
|        ordered 1n the area of concern for the control  strategy, the strategy

I
•                                          VIII-15

-------
developer must evaluate the expected Increase  1n  emissions which will
result from the conversion on a case-by-case basis  and  adjust the
overall strategy accordingly.  Where the conversion causes a violation
of the NAAQS, a SIP revision would be called.   This revision would  be
handled like any other SIP revision.
     In addition, the Clean Air Act Amendments  of 1977  require  States
to review the effects of fuel conversion in preparation for the SIP
revisions due in January 1979.
REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
     Energy Supply and Environmental  Coordination Act of 1974 (ESECA),
Public Law 93-319, 93rd Congress, H.R.  14368,  June  22,  1974.
QUESTION - What is the effect of malfunctions  or  breakdowns of  control
equipment on ambient air quality and what 1s the  present policy in
handling such periods in a control strategy?
ANSWER - Studies have indicated that under certain  conditions a mal-
function or breakdown will effect ambient air  quality.   Present policy
toward including such periods as violations under enforcement pro-
visions shall be continued.
     In the decision, as to whether notices of violation issued under
such conditions would be followed by any other action,  the agency
would look at the following conditions  stated  1n  the April 27,  1977
Federal Register (42 FR 21473):
     (1)  The air pollution control equipment  process equipment or
processes were at all times maintained and operated, to the maximum
extent practicable, in a manner consistent with good practice for mini-
mizing emissions.

                                  VIII-16

-------
I
I
I
                  (2)  Repairs were made as expedltlously as practicable Including
            the use of off-shift labor and overtime.
                  (3)  The amount and duration of the excess emissions  were  m1n1-
 •         mlzed to the maximum extent practicable during periods  of  such  emissions,
            and
 I               (4)  Bypass of strong S02 streams around acid plants  was  limited
 •         to the maximum extent practicable.
                  If these conditions were met then it is present policy not to
 I         proceed with the implementation of criminal  penalties.
                 There are many different State controls for malfunction or break-
 •         down occurences, but there is no uniform manner to incorporate  them into
 m         one control  strategy for PM.
            REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -
 I              Assessment of Particulate Attainment and Maintenance  Problem, Vol.
            1, Appendix A (GCA Report) Sept.  1976.
 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

 I

I

*                                            VIII-17

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
                                 IX

                              GLOSSARY
Aerosol - A dispersion of solid or liquid particles of microscopic
size in a gaseous medium, such as smoke, fog or mist.

Affected Fa elli ty - With reference to a stationary source, any apparatus
to which a standard is applicable.

A1r Quality Control Region (AQCR) - The basic geographic area on which
air pollution control strategies are formulated.   The  AQCR boundaries
are designated as much as possible to be consistent with the air shed
concept.  That is, the sources in a given area theoretically share a
common air mass and the air quality Is a result of the emissions con-
tribution of all the sources in a given area.  EPA, assisted by the
States, has devided the country into 247 AQCRs.  A region may cover
only part of one State or it can Include portions of several States
which share a common air pollution problem.

Air Quality Maintenance Plan (AQMP) - A control strategy designed to
ensure that once an air quality standard 1s  attained,  pollutant levels
will not increase to levels that would again exceed the prescribed air
quality standard.  An AQMP 1s part of the State Implementation Plan.

Background Concentration or Background Level - Ambient concentrations
which are caused by natural sources of pollution.  In  some cases, back-
ground may also include man-made pollutants  advected into the area.  Back-
ground 1s often used to denote those concentrations which are uncontroll-
able, either because they are of natural origin or because they are trans-
ported from another area not subject to the  jurisdiction of the air
pollution control agency.

Best Available Control Technology (BACT) - The best available control
technology means an emission limitation based on  the maximum degree of
reduction of each pollutant subject to regulation emitted from any
major emitting facility, taking into account energy, environmental,
and ecnomic impacts.

Control Strategy - Those activities and functions within a broader pro-
gram of air resource management that collectively are  directed toward
the reduction of excessive emissions of pollutants; the regulatory
aspects of an air resource management program.

Emission Factor - An estimate of the rate of which a pollutant is
released to the atmosphere as a result of some activity such as com-
bustion or industrial production, divided by the  level  of activity.
                                  IX-1

-------
Emission Standard - A part of a  legally enforceable  regulation setting
forth an allowable rate of emissions  Into  the  atmosphere or prescribing
equipment specifications for control  of air pollution  emissions.

Fugitive Dust - A type of partlculate emission made  airborne by forces
of wind, man's activity or both, such as unpaved  roads, construction
sites, tilled land, or windstorms.

Fugitive Emissions - Particles which  are generated by  Industrial or
other activities and which escape to  the atmosphere  not through primary
exhaust systems, but through openings such as  windows, vents or doors,
m-f1tt1ng oven closures, or poorly  maintained equipment.

Ground Level Concentration - The mass per  unit volume  of solid, liquid,
or gaseous material In mlcrograms per cubic meter of air, measured from
0 to 2 meters above the ground.

High Volume Sampler (Hi-Vol) - A device for collecting fine suspended
partlculate matter by drawing air through  a filtering  medium.  The
Federal Reference Method for Total  Suspended Particulates.

Model/ModelIng - A mathematical  or  physical representation of an
observable situation.   In air pollution control,  models afford the
ability to predict pollutant distribution  or dispersion from identified
sources for specified whether conditions.

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) -  A legal limit on the
level or atmospheric contamination  necessary to protect against adverse
effects on public health and welfare.  Primary standards are those
related to health effects.  Secondary standards are  related to protec-
tion against adverse welfare effect.

Opacity - The degree to which emissions reduce the transmission of light
and obscure the view of an object in  the background.

Particle Size Distribution - The relative  percentage of weight or
number of each of the different  size  fractions of partlculate matter.

Re-Entrainment - The resuspension in  the atmosphere  of particles from
streets, rooftops, etc., by wind, passing  vehicles,  or other such forces.
                                  IX-2

-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Reference Conditions - EPA requires that all  measurements of air quality
be corrected to a reference temperature of 25°C and to a reference pres-
sure of 760 millimeters of Hg (1,013.2 millibars).

Settleable Particulate - Partlculate matter which Is emitted Into the
atmosphere such that 1t may deposit onto horizontal surfaces due to
gravitational settling.

State Implementation Plan (SIP)  - A document prepared by each State,
as required by^the Clean Air Act, describing existing air quality condi-
tions and setting forth a program to attain and to  maintain National
Ambient Air Quality Standards and prevent significant deterioration of
air quality.

Suspended Particulate - Particulate matter which will remain airborne
for an appreciable period of time.
Source:  Glossary derived from Appendix A of Technical  Guidance  for
         Control  of Industrial Process Fugitive Particulate Emissions
         Prepared "by "^Ed'Co" Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio,
         EPA 450/3-77-010, Contract No.  68-02-1375.
                                  IX-3

-------
                                X

                           BIBLIOGRAPHY
AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES

A1r Quality Analysis Workshop, Volume I  -  Manual,  Prepared  for  EPA by
Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, 111.,  EPA 450/3-75-080a,  Nov. 1975.

Guidelines for A1r Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis, Volume
11, A1r Quality Monitoring and Data Analysis,  OAQPS No.  1.2-030,
Sept. 1974.

Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis, Volume
3 (OAQPS No. 1.2-022, July 1974),  Volume 7 (OAQPS  No. 1.2-026,  Jan. 1975),
Volume 12 (OAQPS No. 1.2-031, Sept.  1974), Volume  13  (OAQPS No. 1.2-032,
Nov. 1974), Volume 13, Appendices  A and  B  (OAQPS No.  1.2-032, March 1975).

"Maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards,"  (40 FR_ 18382),
May 3, 1976.

AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS

Guidelines for the Evaluation of A1r Quality Data, OAQPS  No. 1.2-015,
Feb. 1974.

Guidelines for the Evaluation of A1r Quality Trends,  OAQPS  No.  1.2-014,
Feb. 1974.

40 CFR Part 51, Appendix A, Air Quality  Estimation.

Guidelines for the Interpretation  of Air Quality Standards, OAQPS No.
1.2-008, Aug. 1974.

Monitoring and A1r Quality Trends  Report,  1974, EPA 450/1-76-001,
Feb. 1976.

National Air Quality and Emission  Trends Report, 1975, EPA  450/1-76-002,
Nov. 1976.

AIR QUALITY MONITORING

Designation of Unacceptable Analytical Methods  of  Measurement for Criteria
Pollutants, OAQPS No. 1.2-018, Sept.  1974.

40 CFR_ Part 50, Appendix B, "Reference Method  for  the Determination of
Suspended Partlculates in the Atmosphere (High  Volume Method)."

Guidance for Air Quality Monitoring Network  Design and Instrument Siting
(Revised), OAQPS No. 1.2-012, Sept.  1975.
                                 X-l

-------
Strelow, R., Memorandum to various Division  Directors,  Regions  I-X,
"Use of Dispersion Model Estimates to Identify  Potential  A1r  Quality
Standard Violations," Nov. 1, 1976.
EMISSION INVENTORY AND MEASUREMENT
Guide for Compiling a Comprehensive Emission Inventory, EPA/APTD  1135,
March 1973.
Compilation of A1r Pollutant Emission Factors  (AP-42),  Second Edition,
with Supplements 1-5, Feb. 1976, with Supplement  6,  April  1976.
"Emission Monitoring of Stationary Sources," (40  £R_ 46240), Oct.  6,
1975.
"Emission Monitoring Requirements and Revisions to Performance  Testing
Methods," (40 FR. 46250), Oct. 6, 1975.
(40 FR 43850), Sept. 23, 1975, 40 CFR 60.273.
(41 FR_ 18502), May 4, 1976, 40 CFR 60.264.
PARTICULATE MATTER STANDARDS AND GENERAL STUDIES  OF PARTICULATE MATTER
PROBLEMS
40 CFR_ Part 50.7, "National Primary and Secondary Standards for Parti-
culate Matter," April 30, 1971.
Air Quality Criteria for Parti oil ate Matter, AP-49, Jan.  1969.
National Assessment of the Urban Particulate Problem, Prepared for  EPA
by GCA Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts,  EPA 450/3-76-024, July  1976.
Control of Particulate Matter from 011  Burners  and Boilers, Prepared
for EPA by the Acurex Corp., Mountain View,  Calif., EPA 450/3-76-005,
April 1976.
Controlled and Uncontrolled Emission Rates  and  Applicable Limitations
for 80 Processes, The Research Corporation  of New England (TRC),  Sept.  1976.
"Fuels and Fuel Additives - Control of Lead 1n  Gasoline", (41 FR_ 12675),
Sept. 28, 1976.
1972 National Emissions Report, National Emissions Data System (NEDS)
of the Aerometrlc and Emissions Reporting System  (AEROS), EPA 450/2-74-012,
June 1974.
Bernard Steigerwald/Delbert Barth Memorandum to Roger Strelow and
William Talley, "Revision of A1r Quality Criteria Documents," Aug.  26,  1976.
                                  X-2

-------
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
 I
I
I
I
Total Suspended Particulates:   Review and Analysis, Prepared for EPA
by Radian Corporation, Austin, Texas, EPA 600/2-76-092, April  1976.

LHHs, E.J., and Dunbar, D.R., "Impact  of Automobile  Particle
Exhaust Emissions on A1r Quality,"  OAQPS, EPA,  Nov. 13, 1975,  un-
published paper.

Pace, T.C., "Impact of Energy  Conversion Processes on  Particulate
Matter A1r Quality," presented at the 1976 Energy and  Environment
Conference, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Breidenbach, A.M., and Strelow, R., Memorandum  to All  Regional Adminis-
trators, "Relationship Between A1r  Quality Planning and the State and
Areawlde Water Quality Management Program; Eligible Uses of Section 208
Funds for A1r Quality Analyses,"  November 15, 1976.

FINE AND SECONDARY PARTICIPATES

Steigerwald, B.J., Memorandum  to  Roger Strelow, "Fine  Particulate
Control Strategy," July 2, 1975.

Padgett, J., and  Bachmann, J. , "Regulatory and  Technical Control
Strategies for Fine Particles," Presented at the June  1976 APCA
Meeting, Portland, Oregon, Paper  No.  76-30.7.

Hitz, G.M., "Characterization  of  Aerosols in California," Final
Report to the A1r Resources Board,  State of California, Volumes 1-4,
1974.

FUGITIVE DUST AND FUGITIVE EMISSIONS

mils, E.J., and Young, D. , "EPA Looks  at 'Fugitive Emissions',"
Journal of the Air Pollution Control  Association, 25:1015-1018, Oct. 1975.

Dunbar, David, "Resuspension of Particulate Matter," Standards Imple-
mentation Branch, Control Programs  Development  Division, OAQPS, March
15, 1976, unpublished report.

Investigation of  Fugitive Dust, Volume I  - Sources, Emissions, and
Control, Prepared for EPA by PEDCo  Env.  Specialists, Cincinnati, Ohio,
EPA 450/3-74-036a, June 1974.

An Implementation Plan for Suspended Particulate Matter in the Phoenix
Area, TRW, Inc.,  Draft Report, Nov.  1976.

Development of Emission Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources, Prepared
for EPA by Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, MO, EPA 450/3-74-037,
June 1974.
                                 X-3

-------
Technical Guidance for Control  of Industrial  Process  Fugitive  Parti -
culate Emissions.  EPA Report 450/3-77-010,  March  1977.   Prepared
by PEDCo, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Guideline for Development of Control  Strategies  in Areas  with  Fugitive
Dust Problems, Draft Report, Prepared for EPA by TRW, Redondo  Beach,
California, Nov. 1976.

SIP REVISION
Strelow, R., and Legro, S., Memorandum to All  Regional  Administrators,
"Agency Policy Regarding Calling for Plan Revisions  to  Approved State
Implementation Plans that are Substantially Inadequate  to Attain
National Standards," Nov. 12, 1975.

Strelow, R., Memorandum to Regional  Administrators,  "Regional  Air
Quality Attainment/Maintenance Activities," March  15, 1976.

Guidelines for Determining the Need  for Plan Revisions  to the  Control
Strategy Portion of the Approved State Implementation Plan, OAQPS No.
1.2-011, Nov. 1975.

ENERGY SUPPLY AND ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATION ACT

Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination Act of  1974  (ESECA),
Public Law 93-319, 93rd Congress, H.R.  14368,  June 22,  1974.

NEW SOURCE REVIEW

Steigerwald, B.J., Memorandum to All Regional  Administrators,  "Meeting
to Discuss EPA New Source Review Policy in Non-Attainment Areas,"
Oct.  28, 1976.

CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1977

Public Law 95-95, 42 USC 7401, et seq.
                                  X-4

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 1 REPORT NO.
   EPA  450/2-77-023
 4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
  Control  Strategy Preparation  Manual for Particulate
  Matter
                                                            3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOf»NO.
                                                            5. REPORT DATE
              Sept. 1977. Date  of approval
              6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 7. AUTHOR(S)

  Standards  Implementation  Branch
                                                            8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO,
               OAQPS No. 1.2-049
 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Environmental  Protection Agency
  Office  of Air Quality Planning and Standards
  Control  Programs Development  Division
  Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
                                                            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                             Final
                                                            14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                               200/04
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
 16. ABSTRACT

       This  manual has been prepared to assist EPA,  State and local agencies  in the
  task of developing control strategies for particulate  matter (PM).  The  manual
  Includes  a general discussion  of the technical aspects of control strategy  develop-
  ment under 40 CFR 51.  The emphasis in the manual  is on a brief review of pertinent
  facts  supplemented by references to generally available technical documents.   Sub-
  jects  addressed include:  Attainment of NAAQS; Procedures for review  and develop-
  ment of a  PM control strategy;  and Question and answer sections discussing  parti-
  culate emission sources and types, measurement methods, data and funds utilization,
  modeling,  control technology,  and control strategy Issues.   The manual also contains
  a glossary and subject oriented bibliography.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.  COS AT I Field/Group
  Particulate  Matter
  Control  Strategy Development
  Control  Technology Review
  Emission Sources
 8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

  Unrestricted
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)

  unclassified
                           21. NO. OF PAGES
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                unclassified
J2L
                                                                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
                                                                        3)
                                                                        fl>
                                                                        en
                                                                        CD
                                                                        01

                                                                        O
                             <

                             33
   w
   W
o
   10
   6
   tsi
   co
                                              NO
                                               -CO —.
                                                CD v>
                                                 ,
                                                "* 0>
                                                D) CD
                                                Q. rt
                                                0) <•
                                                K o
                                                _ c
S-o
Q- H

PI

-— - o
o to
s <'
re ™

S-J
CD t/>

cE 3
CD OJ
 _

ID
                                                                  D
                                                                  o ;:
                                                                  II
                                                                  m e/j
                                                                  S "
                                                                  -a
                                                                  r~
                                                                  O
                                                                  <
                                                                  m
                                                                  33
                                                                        2. o g.
                                                                        § 3|
                        zlfS
                        2 2 -• H
                        S t» o m
                        2
                          ^. DO
                        o§§i
                        5'  S- >
                        01    O
                                                                        ro
                                                                             m
                                                                             z
                                                                             o
                                                                      O

                                                                    Si
                                                                           <

                                                                           31
                                                                           O
• -a
;O
! M
                                                                          m!--
                                                                      o
                                                                      co
                                                                      en
                          to H TI
                          u\ m m
                           n m
                           H tn
                                                                           >D
                                                                           O
                                                                           m
                                                                           Z
                                                                           n

-------