/a .
'
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 7
324 East Eleventh St.
Kansas City, Mo. 64106
EPA 907/9-84-007
September 1984
EPA REGION VII IRC
Air Branch
Carbon Monoxide
Nonattainment Study
For Wichita, Kansas
069212
Final
/
^
-------
-------
CARBON MONOXIDE
NONATTAINMENT STUDY FOR
WICHITA, KANSAS
by
PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246-0100
Contract No. 68-02-3512
Work Assignment No. 73
PN 3525-73
Project Officer
Larry Hacker
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VII, AIR BRANCH
324 EAST 11TH STREET
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64160
September 1984
-------
CONTENTS
Pac
Figures iii
Tables iv
1. Introduction 1
2. Ambient CO Concentrations 4
2.1 Ambient CO levels 4
2.2 Impact of 1979 CO control strategy 5
3. Modeling Methodology 7
3.1 Overview 7
3.2 Traffic and street characterization 8
3.3 CO emission characteriztaion 10
3.4 Meteorology 13
3.5 CALINE-3 model 14
3.6 Urban background concentrations 15
4. Analysis of the Special Purpose Monitor 17
5. Alternate CO Receptor Site Analysis 29
6. Conclusions and Recommendations 40
6.1 Conclusions 40
6.2 Recommendations 41
Appendices
A Traffic Counts for Main, Douglas, Broadway, and First
Streets A-l
B Example Calculations of Idle and Queue Emission
Factors B-l
C MOBILE-3 Calculations - Main and Douglas C-l
D Mobile-3 Calculations - Broadway, 1st, and 2nd Streets D-l
E CALINE-3 Concentrations for Worst-Case Wind Direction
at the Special Purpose Monitor E-l
F CALINE-3 Concentrations for Worst-Case Wind Direction
at the Alternate Monitor F-l
11
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area and Existing
CO Monitor in Wichita, Kansas 2
2 Average Daily Traffic Volumes for Streets in the
Vicinity of the SPM and WFD No. 2 Monitoring
Sites 9
3 Location of SPM Site and Approximate Route of
Friday and Saturday Night Street Congestion and
Dragging 18
4 Intersection at Main and Douglas in Wichita Show-
ing Traffic Direction and the Location of the
Special Purpose Monitor 19
5 Queue Link Layout at the Intersection of Main and
Douglas 22
6 Through Roadway Link Layout at the Intersection
of Main and Douglas 23
7 Alternate CO Monitoring Site and Nearby Streets
and Intersections 30
8 Queue Links Near the Alternate Monitor on Broadway,
1st, and 2nd Streets 32
9 Through Roadway Links Near the Alternate Monitor
on Broadway, 1st, and 2nd Streets 33
111
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Concentration of CO Exceeding the 8-hour NAAQS
At the Wichita Special Purpose Monitor 4
2 Urban Background Concentrations as Derived From
WFD No. 2 16
3 Queue Analysis for the Intersection at Main and
Douglas 20
4 Link Characteristics and Estimated CO Emissions
at 24°F For Main at Douglas 21
5 Link Characteristics and Estimated CO Emissions
at 80°F For Main at Douglas 25
6 Estimated Concentrations of CO for the Base Year
1983 at the Special Purpose Monitor 26
7 Estimated Concentrations of CO for the Projection
Year 1987 at the Special Purpose Monitor 28
8 Queue Analysis for the Intersection at Broadway
and 1st and Broadway and 2nd 31
9 Link Characteristics and Estimated CO Emissions at
24°F for Broadway at 1st and Broadway at 2nd 35
10 Link Characteristics and Estimated CO Emissions at
80°F for Broadway at 1st and Broadway at 2nd 36
11 Estimated Concentrations of CO for the Base Year
1983 at the Alternate Monitoring Site 37
12 Estimated Concentrations of CO for the Projection
Year 1987 at the Alternate Monitoring Site 38
IV
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This report was prepared under the direction of Mr. Larry
Hacker of the Air Branch of Region VII in Kansas City, Missouri.
Mr. George Schewe of the PEDCo office in Cincinnati, Ohio, was
the author under the direction of Mr. Keith Rosbury of the PEDCo
office in Denver, Colorado. Additional assistance was provided
by Mr. Joseph Carvitti on the traffic analysis and Mr. Jeffrey
Winget in all computer simulations.
Also appreciated was the aid and assistance of Ms. Joyce
Hart of the Wichita Metropolitan Area Planning Department and
Messrs. William McKinley and Robert Mielke of the Wichita Depart-
ment of Operations and Maintenance for the traffic data and
information provided for downtown Wichita.
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was furnished to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency by PEDCo Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio
45246, in fulfillment of Contract Number 68-02-3512. The
opinions, findings and conclusions expressed are those of the
authors and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection
Agency or of cooperating agencies. Mention of company or product
names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the
Environmental Protection Agency.
VI
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Two of the three existing carbon monoxide (CO) monitors near
the central business district (CBD) of Wichita, Kansas, showed
exceedances of the 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) during the period extending from 1974 to 1982. As a
result, a fully-approved State Implementation Plan for CO was
implemented in Wichita. Since 1982, no exceedances have been
detected at either of these monitors (the Health Department or
Fire Department No. 2). Because of these previous exceedances,
however, a portion of Wichita was designated as a nonattainment
area for CO (failing to meet the NAAQS for CO). EPA requested
that the SIP be reviewed because they believed that CO violations
were still occurring. These revisions should demonstrate both a
reduction in CO emissions and a subsequent reduction in ambient
CO concentrations. The nonattainment area is bounded by 13th
Street on the north, Grove Street on the east, Kellogg on the
south, and the Big Arkansas River on the west. Figure 1 shows
this CO nonattainment area and the locations of the two permanent
CO monitors.
In 1983, an additional CO monitor, a Special Purpose Monitor
(SPM), was installed in the central business district (Figure 1)
as a check on the attainment progress of the area. This monitor
has shown exceedances of the 8-hour NAAQS, whereas the two per-
manent monitoring sites have not. The SPM site exceedances have
all occurred on Friday or Saturday nights when vehicular traffic
is heavy as a result of "cruising" by persons of high school and
college age.
The Special Purpose Monitor, which is located at 111 West
Douglas Street, has operated continuously since its installation.
-------
Figure 1.
WATER: WICHITA WATER PLANT
WFD #2: WICHITA FIRE DEPARTMENT N0.2
H.D.: HEALTH DEPARTMENT
SPM : SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
and exlstin, CO mon1tor
-------
This monitor meets the general guidelines for the horizontal and
vertical placement of a CO probe (40 CFR 58, Appendix E). The
following shows these guidelines versus the SPM siting:
0 Distance from edge of nearest traffic lane
Guideline - 2m to 10m
SPM - 3.05m
0 Distance from intersection street corridor
Guideline - minimum of 10m
SPM - 27.4m
0 Vertical placement
Guideline - 3 ± 0.5m
SPM - 3.05m
The only notable difference between the actual SPM site and the
recommended siting is the distance from the intersection. The
guidelines strongly recommend a midblock location of CO monitors
in downtown areas rather than near intersections. The SPM site
is much closer to the intersection of Main and Douglas Streets
than to midblock.
For the area in question to be able to show attainment, the
Wichita implementation plan must be revised to demonstrate that
concentrations of CO at the SPM will be less than the NAAQS by
1987. This analysis allows for any transportation control mea-
sures (TCM's) that have already affected traffic flow and/or CO
emissions in the nonattainment area. For example, the 1987
analysis considers the impact of the projected Federal Motor
Vehicle Control Program on CO emissions.
The plan to demonstrate attainment by 1987 includes detailed
dispersion modeling, which first compares existing monitored CO
concentrations with estimated values (model evaluation) and then
estimates the 1987 CO concentrations. The following sections
describe the dispersion modeling, emissions estimates, and the
resulting CO concentration projections, both for the SPM site and
for an alternative site (in an attempt to establish a CBD site
that is not directly affected by the cruising phenomenon).
-------
SECTION 2
AMBIENT CO CONCENTRATIONS
2.1 AMBIENT CO LEVELS
Concentrations of CO at the SPM site exceeded the 8-hour
NAAQS (10 mg/m ) a total of 10 times in 1983 and have exceeded it
once thus far in 1984. Table 1 shows these concentrations and
when they occurred. As shown', the noncomplying concentrations
are well distributed throughout the year and have ranged from
10.2 mg/m to 12.2 mg/m . The distribution of values is very
atypical (e.g., one would expect to find the maximum 8-hour value
in one of the winter months, whereas it occurred in August).
This distribution indicates that either the meteorological condi-
tions or variations in traffic volumes and patterns (or both) may
have offset the normal variation in CO emissions, which are
temperature-dependent. Urban background CO concentration (the
concentrations against which all dispersion modeling calculations
were compared) also may have varied.
TABLE 1. CONCENTRATION OF CO EXCEEDING THE
8-HOUR NAAQS AT THE WICHITA SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
Eight-hour
concentration,
mg/m3
11.0
10.5
11.1
10.7
10.8
12.2
11.5
10.2
11.6
11.8
11.0
Ending
day, date
Sunday, 1-16-83
Friday, 3-4-83
Friday, 4-15-83
Saturday, 7-23-83
Sunday, 7-24-83
Saturday, 8-6-83
Saturday, 9-3-83
Saturday, 10-8-83
Sunday, 10-16-83
Saturday, 10-29-83
Sunday, 1-8-84
Ending
hour
3 a.m.
12 p.m.
12 p.m.
1 a.m.
3 a.m.
4 a.m.
3 a.m.
1 a.m.
3 a.m.
1 a.m.
4 a.m.
-------
Examination of attendance records at the nearby Century II
Convention Center indicated that events occurred on 8 of the 11
dates with high CO concentrations. The attendance per event
ranged from a minimum of 500 persons to 3300 persons, who arrived
and departed over a limited time span, i.e., immediately before
and after the event. An examination of the 8-hour periods of
high concentrations shows that no single hour of measurements
could be associated with attendance at a Century II event and
that the concentrations were high over a longer period of time
than expected with an influx of traffic for a particular event.
Based on the assumption that ambient concentrations are not
directly related to Century II activities alone, it was further
assumed that nighttime street cruising (observed visually and
appearing in street counts) was a primary contributor to the high
ambient CO concentrations.
2.2 IMPACT OF 1979 CO CONTROL STRATEGY
In 1979 an SIP for CO was implemented in Wichita. As of May
31, 1984, 11 transportation control measures (TCM's) had been
committed.
1. Voluntary I/M
2. Improved traffic flow - Grove Street
3. Improved traffic flow - lst/2nd Street Bridge
4. Improved traffic flow - 2nd Street
5. Transit - 26 new buses
6. Rideshare program
7. Alternate fuel use in county, city and school vehicles
8. Transit service improvements
9. Signal improvements
10. On-street parking restrictions, Phase I—not
implemented
11. On-street parking restrictions, Phase II—not
implemented
Since 1982 no exceedances of the CO NAAQS have been detected at
the three permanent CO monitoring sites (see Figure 1). This
improvement can possibly be attributed to the implementation of
the first nine TCM's. Of concern in this analysis, however, is
the SPM site that continued to have exceedances of the 8-hour
-------
NAAQS. Of all the TCM's proposed in the SIP, only the voluntary
I/M Program will have an effect on the late-night cruising phe-
nomena. Other TCM's are primarily effective during peak-hour
periods in the morning and afternoon.
-------
SECTION 3
MODELING METHODOLOGY
3.1 OVERVIEW
The basic modeling methodology used in this analysis com-
bines the use of Mobile-3 emission factors (EPA-460/3-84-002, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, June 1984) with the CALINE-3 highway dispersion
model (FNWA/CA/TL-79/23, Sacramento, California, November 1979)
into a microscale analysis. Because the emission factors esti-
mated by MOBILE-3 are given per vehicle (moving) and per vehicle-
minute (idling), traffic volumes, speeds, queuing lengths, and
delay times were also calculated or estimated. Inputs to the
MOBILE-3 program include temperature, inspection/maintenance
parameters, cold/hot start percentages, year of analysis, vehicle
speed, vehicle class mix, and model year distribution within each
vehicle class.
Source characterization consists of dividing nearby roadways
and intersections into individual through and queuing links.
Because this is primarily a microscale analysis (only the inter-
section and midblock streets in the immediate vicinity are mod-
eled; all other contributions are considered urban background),
the CO concentrations reflect small changes in traffic volumes
and flow.
One-hour dispersion modeling of specific events is very
difficult given the uncertainty in emissions, source character-
istics, vehicle movement, and the complex flow of the downwind
roadway plumes. Rather than attempting to use Wichita airport
meteorological data, worst-case conditions were assumed with a
varying wind-roadway angle. The worst-case one-hour CO concen-
trations (including background) were converted to 8-hour esti-
mates by using a persistence factor of 0.7 (as recommended by
7
-------
Volume 10, EPA-450/4-77-001, October 1977). This factor includes
some implicit meteorological variability and permits comparison
with the 8-hour measured CO concentrations. (Further detail
regarding modeling procedures are given Subsection 3.2.)
3.2 TRAFFIC AND STREET CHARACTERIZATION
The Wichita Department of Operations and Maintenance
provided 1983 traffic counts and signal cycle timing for the
streets and intersections near the SPM site. (The signal and
phase timing represents the most up-to-date signalization used in
the downtown area.) The average daily traffic (ADT) counts for
the downtown area (shown in Figure 2) indicate that the
intersection at Main and Douglas has high traffic volumes on all
four legs.
Hourly traffic distribution taken on July 13 and 14, 1984,
from the permanent traffic counter on Main Street (just south of
Douglas) and from a temporary counter located on Douglas (just
west of Main) confirms the high traffic volumes associated with
late-night cruising. Traffic counts during the period from 8:00
p.m. to 2:00 a.m. are often greater than 50 to 60 percent of the
weekday peak hour (which normally occurs from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m.),
and on Saturday the counts are greater than for any individual
daytime hour. Appendix A shows the individual hourly traffic
counts used for the analysis of the streets near the SPM site and
for the proposed CO monitor site.
The expected growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was used
to estimate the potential growth in traffic volumes on each
street. These estimates (made by KDOT with a travel demand model
in a March 1980 dispersion modeling study of vehicle miles trav-
eled in Wichita in 1982 and the year 2000) were used with a
straight-line approximation to estimate the growth rate from 1983
to 1987. The resulting growth rate of 1.0639 was used to esti-
mate 1987 through-traffic volumes on all streets modeled. No
growth projections were made for queuing traffic volumes (they
-------
c
n>
ro
a>
Q)
(£3
tt>
Q.
Q)
CL a*
a o
•z. <
o o
ro i
o
3 -h
_•. o
c* -S
O
-S m
-•• r+
3 -S
UD n>
n>
ft) -••
in 3
n
3
fD
OO
"a
1
/
/
fe
• KJ
40121
1
. 4114
IOBW
3144
n
r-
r
c
o
i
OJ30
r-J
*
_l
— i
8201
7!
r~~j
c
TZ36 K
145.29
•
^^
0
rxj
O
D900 S
^
3
W^:
Sj
^
13^01
L**
-J
-J
63S3
L*
>l
Mt4
Z4ZS
S 5 1
5 - S
10160
LV
O
LTI
IOIZB
£
<3
I^>016
— I
r-J
S11A
S5
_i
S4U
t/1
S
34VI
II^BS
^
if
UZ3&
r-J
fsl
—J
12531
^!>50
tnz
/^'
11381
61 01
'fi
.••
^
^ZIO
••» 'ri
!3 ^
^)0 1 4
1 I/I "I 5
~
u
—1
r,ns?
^J
in
W1&
3
°^
4r,(s:>
!G
13 1 F §
r- — &
V
6*
H
-=s
J»
1I<5?.
7i
f
ftZJI
"ti
j
40.14
^
0 —
n t^
I
i
i.
Min
^3£c>
^
v:
11004
,»
J
0310
Cl
0°
mza
-: *3
j. 0
' -a
MJI40
3 m
-j
r,wo
Q
S
do?"?
_?
o
im
vr
i
ni
¥
LA*
1151
r
5
M4Z
(X-
niw
5!
f>
10ZO
D-
1
0320
IBM
—
a
1121
inn
&.&Z3
IDZtt
4439
&12r
310
n
m
•z.
O
IIIO& V-
^S. ./^
5? ^x— x\>
—
WATER
fcZOft
= MAIN
LS
1X1
SI4I
—
£
If
O*
ry
** 4G3&
&
->J
0101 53%
E
2
38ZS i&46
K
r^
1601
g WACO
K
WICHITA
WCLLINGTOf
^
PARK,
4Z1I
- WARRCT
M
3ZRO r
S KROAOWAt
/i
4 VIZ
«3 TOPERA
>
w&<;
^ tMPORIA
«n
^ ST. FRANCIS
^^^^i^ ^ ^
5 J ^ i^ r- 5
-------
are calculated for the purpose of estimating total queue emis-
sions) . The assumption made throughout this analysis is that the
projected vehicular volumes will not exceed street capacities and
that queue lengths will not change significantly.
Each leg of the intersection (s) was divided into smaller
links as appropriate. These model links represented traffic
traveling through the intersection at representative speeds.
They also represented vehicle queues where appropriate. If a
left-hand turn lane had vehicles left over from a green light
cycle, or if differences arose between queuing in different
lanes, more links were used to simulate the intersection leg.
(Individual links are described in subsequent chapters.)
3.3 CO EMISSION CHARACTERIZATION
Emissions from a vehicle traveling through an intersection
or street without experiencing delay were calculated directly by
MOBILE-3. For queuing vehicles, the idling CO emissions calcu-
lated by MOBILE-3 were combined with the approximate vehicle
length (4.35 m/veh) to determine the emissions per unit length
per second per lane. This information combined with the number
of lanes and the delay in each queue yields a total emission
estimate for the queue. For inputing this emission estimate into
the CALINE-3 model (which requires both an emission rate and
vehicle count), an arbitrary emission rate of 100 g/mi was set.
Based on the total emissions and 100 g/mi, a vehicle-per-hour
count was estimated for use in CALINE-3.
The use of the MOBILE-3 emissions model is dependent on a
number of factors, each of which is discussed in the following
subsections.
3.3.1 Year of Analysis
For this modeling analysis, CO emissions were estimated for
1983 and 1987. The 1983 estimates were made to correspond with
the year of most of the 8-hour CO violations at the special
10
-------
purpose monitor. The purpose of the 1987 estimates was to esti-
mate the CO emissions (and related ambient air quality impacts)
for the year when attainment must be demonstrated.
3.3.2 Route Speeds
Estimates were made for route speeds of 10, 15, 20, and 25
miles per hour, which correspond with speeds estimated for the
streets and intersections in the subject analysis.
3.3.3 Vehicle Mix
The MOBILE-3 default mix of vehicle types is not applicable
for analysis of the SPM site because of the late-night period and
nature of the cruising phenomenon. In a previous modeling study
(Wichita Carbon Monoxide Dispersion Modeling Study, Update,
October 1981), the Kansas Department of Transportation suggests
the following vehicle mix for arterial and collector streets:
LDV LDT1 LOT 2 HDG LDDV LDDT HDD MC
0.777 0.089 0.089 0.030 0.0 0.0 0.010 0.005
Because heavy-duty vehicles were not observed during cruising
periods, these percentages were redistributed to the LDV, LOT,
and LDD classes, and the following distribution was used in this
analysis for Main and Douglas Streets:
LDV LDT1 LDT2 HDG LDDV LDDT HDD MC
0.797 0.094 0.094 0.0 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.005
These distributions were used in both the base year (1983) and
projection year (1987) analyses.
For the alternate intersection analysis and proposed monitor-
ing site, the KDOT vehicle mix was assumed to be representative
of peak hour traffic (peak hour was modeled as the worst case
because the cruising pattern is such that cruising does not
affect this site).
3.3.4 Vehicle Registrations
The vehicle age distribution observed by PEDCo during a
Friday night cruising period (July 13-14, 1984) was skewed toward
11
-------
somewhat older vehicles. The effect of this was accounted for by
adjusting the national average mix in MOBILE-3 for LDV and LDDV
classes. The adjustment involved moving the age of 10 percent of
the vehicles back 2 years each year starting with the current
year. This resulted in fewer new cars on the downtown Wichita
streets during the late-night periods.
The national averages of vehicle registrations for the
proposed monitor locations during peak-hour traffic were believed
to be representative and were used in the MOBILE-3 calculations.
These vehicle registrations were used in both the base year
(1983) and projection year (1987) analyses.
3.3.5 Vehicle Mileage Accrual Distributions
Because of the lack of local information, the national
averages contained in the MOBILE-3 model were used for vehicle
mileage accrual distributions for both the base year and projec-
tion year emission calculations.
3.3.6 Ambient Air Temperatures
Temperatures are discussed under meteorological considera-
tions; however, because CO emissions are a direct function of
ambient temperature, they are summarized here. Two cases (Jan-
uary and July) are reviewed and analyzed for both the baseline
and projection years. In an attempt to correlate the modeled and
measured CO concentrations, average temperatures were documented
during selected high CO events. Temperatures for each 8-hour
period were taken from Local Climatological Data, Wichita, Kan-
sas, 1983. During the period January 15-16, 1983, the average
temperature was 24°F; during the August 5-6, 1983, period (the
maximum in 1983), the average temperature was 80°F. These two
average temperatures were used in both the baseline and projec-
tion year analyses.
3.3.7 Cold Start/Hot Start Percentages
In the absence of local data to support specific cold- and
hot-start percentages, the following Federal Test Procedure
12
-------
percentages were used, as specified in the MOBILE-3 user manual:
20.6 percent cold start of noncatalyst LDV
27.3 percent hot start of catalyst LDV
20.6 percent cold start of catalyst LDV
These values were used in both the baseline and projection year
calculations.
3.3.8 Inspection/Maintenance Credits
The city of Wichita currently conducts a voluntary inspec-
tion/maintenance (I/M) program. A total of 68,777 cars were
tested from April 1981 to June 1984. Because the program is
voluntary, it is difficult to assess the overall pass/fail percent-
age (i.e., stringency level) within the context of the entire
Wichita vehicle fleet. Even though the fail rate in 1983 was
35.4 percent,* only 1954 of the 5513 cars that failed returned
for a retest. Of these, 785 failed a second time. The effect of
voluntary inspection, therefore, was to have 1169 vehicles re-
paired, which represents a 7.5 percent stringency level. The
lowest stringency level option available in MOBILE-3 is 10 per-
cent, which was selected as representative of Wichita's voluntary
program, given the other uncertainties in projecting the program
on the overall vehicle fleet.
Only the LDV class was assumed to be affected by I/M. The
idling test at the 3 percent CO/300 ppm HC level was assumed to
be in effect. These assumptions were used for both the baseline
and projection year analyses.
3.4 METEOROLOGY
Inasmuch as event-by-event modeling of specific CO measure-
ments is nearly impossible because of uncertainties in the emis-
sions, traffic, and meteorology at a particular site, a worst-
case modeling analysis was performed in an attempt to model the
*
Wichita TCM Summary, July 13, 1984, in a letter from Robert Eye,
Kansas Department of Health and Welfare, to Carl Walker, EPA
Region VII.
13
-------
maximum concentrations of CO. Rather than use specific airport
meteorological data, which might not be totally representative of
the urban core, and because site-specific data were unavailable,
worst-case conditions modified by local measurements were applied.
For most of the dates showing high CO concentrations at the SPM,
the local climatological summaries from the airport and from the
Wichita Health Department indicated windspeeds of about 1.5 m/s
or greater. Only for the August 5-6, 1983, exceedance did wind-
speeds measure about 1 m/s. Thus, a windspeed of 1.5 m/s is used
for the January analysis, and 1.0 m/s for the July analysis.
Other conditions include a mixing height of 100 meters
(conservative nighttime mixing height), neutral stability class
(4) for the urban area, and multiple wind angles at 10 degree
intervals. An 8-hour average to 1-hour average ratio of 0.7 was
used as a persistance factor throughout the analysis.
3.5 CALINE-3 MODEL
The CALINE-3 Model was used to simulate the dispersion of CO
emission plumes from vehicles on roadways. Each roadway was
broken into through traffic links and queuing vehicles as appro-
priate. The coordinates and the width of each link were input to
the model. All links near the SPM and proposed monitor sites
were modeled coincidentally to obtain a total roadway impact as
well as to ascertain each link's contribution to the total concen-
tration. Traffic volumes of all through vehicles and MOBILE-3
emission factors were used for each through link. Volumes and
emissions for 1983 were input for the base year, and growth-ad-
justed volumes and MOBILE-3 projected emissions were input for
1987. Queue-link traffic volumes were adjusted to reflect idling
CO emissions projected by MOBILE-3 for 1987.
Deposition and settling velocities were assumed to be 0.0
because CO is a gaseous emission. The averaging time was 60
minutes. A surface roughness of 321 cm is assigned to the anal-
ysis area, which is consistent with the CALINE-3 guidance for
14
-------
surface roughness for a central business district. The coordi-
nates and the vertical displacement of the SPM site and the pro-
posed site were input as appropriate. Meteorological conditions
were assigned as discussed in Section 3.4. Background concentra-
tions are discussed in Section 3.6.
Results obtained from the CALINE-3 Model were given as
1-hour CO concentrations in parts per million. For calculation
of the 8-hour concentrations (in mg/m ), the 1-hour values (in
ppm) were divided by a conversion factor of 0.875 and multiplied
by the 1-hour to 8-hour persistence factor of 0.7.
3.6 URBAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS
Because the SPM site and the proposed monitoring site are
both located in an urban area and because the extent of the
analyses described herein is microscaled spatially and temporally
(only nearby roadways are considered), the background concentra-
tion must reflect the overall CO concentrations in what is termed
an urban background. This type of background must reflect much
more than just the natural background; it must also reflect the
upwind contributions from other CO sources in the area during the
same time period.
Examination of the three permanent monitor sites shown in
Figure 1 and the average wind direction during high CO concentra-
tions at the proposed new SPM site (generally from the south)
indicates that the Wichita Fire Department No. 2 (WFD No. 2) CO
monitor may be appropriate to serve as an urban background site.
This site is near the intersection of Lewis and Topeka, about
four blocks south and three blocks east of the SPM site. It is
far enough from the urban core and from major thoroughfares to
prevent the monitor from being subject to high direct CO impacts
from any major roadway. The WFD No. 2 monitor is also generally
upwind of the SPM site during high CO periods, and it is nestled
in an area that is impacted by a major portion of the CO emissions
in Wichita.
15
-------
For the purpose of this analysis, the CO concentrations at
the WFD No. 2 monitor were the best suited to represent urban
background concentrations. The highest concentrations during
each of the analysis months (January and July) were selected on
the basis of the highest value for the season (which included any
exceedance periods in December, January, and February and June,
July, and August). Table 2 presents the selected WFD No. 2
concentration and its 1-hour counterpart in parts per million for
input to the CALINE-3 Model for both 1983 and 1987. A 1987 back-
ground concentration of CO was obtained by adjusting the measured
1983 values by multiplying them by the VMT growth rate (1.0639)
and by the approximate 1983 to 1987 MOBILE-3 emission ratio
(0.75). (At speeds varying from 10 to 25 miles per hour, the
ratio actually varies from about 0.7 to 0.73; the factor of 0.75
was chosen to provide a conservative estimate.)
TABLE 2. URBAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS AS DERIVED FROM WFD No. 2
Month of
analysis
January
July
Date of
measurement
1-16-83
8-6-83
8-hour
concentra-
tion, mg/m3
2.6
1.2
1-hour
concentra-
tion, ppm
3.7
1.7
1983
1-hour
background
concentra-
tion, ppm
3.3
1.5
1987
8-hour
background
concentra-
tion, ppm
2.8
1.2
16
-------
SECTION 4
ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
As shown in Figure 3, the special purpose monitor is located
at 111 West Douglas Street, near the intersection of Main and
Douglas Streets. The approximate route of the late Friday and
Saturday night cruising is also shown in this figure. Traffic
moves in both directions on Douglas Street. The loop for the
return trips from the west are to proceed south on Main and
around Century II Drive or north on Water, east on 1st, and south
on Main. The east return loop is made by going south on St.
Francis, west on William, and north on Emporia.
Onsite observations (on the evening of July 13, 1984) indi-
cated heavy congestion in both directions on Douglas Street. The
heaviest congestion was in the center lanes next to the median.
Of primary concern in this analysis is the impact of the inter-
section at Main and Douglas on the SPM site. With this in mind,
queuing vehicles were also observed during this period. Table 3
presents the results for each leg of the intersection (Main and
Douglas). This table also shows the number of vehicles selected
for this analysis as being representative of each queue and the
estimated queue length for each lane.
The intersection at Main and Douglas was modeled to estimate
the impact of CO emissions on the Special Purpose Monitor. Fig-
ure 4 shows the roadway configuration and the location of the
SPM. Each leg of the intersection was broken into through and
queue roadway links. Queuing vehicles were represented by short
17
-------
Figure 3. Location of SPM site and approximate route of Friday and
Saturday night street congestion and dragging.
18
-------
N
( !
C
3
a
DOUGLAS - WEST
12' ^
12'
12' +
10J MEDIAN
IT
IT
12'
brn (Noni tor )
I
z
1
GO
o
0 50ft
SCALE
E
»
•^
•
>
1
j
t-
»-
(-
-»•
-*•
»•
,,
T
i
4
_i
r-o
i
*
— '
>N>
I
ro i-
- t
DOUGLAS - EAST
*- 11.5'
*- 12'
•+- 12'
j— ^^^-^^SSSMEblANS^
* + IT
-»• IT
-^ 11.5'
« 90' r « 50' *•!
n
Figure 4. Intersection at Main and Douglas in Wichita showing traffic
direction and the location of the Special Purpose Monitor.
19
-------
TABLE 3. QUEUE ANALYSIS FOR THE INTERSECTION AT MAIN AND DOUGLAS
Intersection
leg
Main, north
Main, north
Main, south
Douglas, east
westbound
eastbound
Douglas, west
eastbound
Lanes
3 west
1 left turn
No queue
2 west
1 left
Near median
Near median
Center
Right turn
Cars
in
queue
1-5
10-15
1-5
12-16
30-40
10-13
6-8
1-3
Modeled
queue
number
3
12
3
15
38
12
7
2
Modeled
queue
length, m
13.1
52.2
13.1
65.4
165.0
52.3
30.5
8.7
links equal in length to those described in Table 4. Where
vehicles moved from one queue to a subsequent queue (i.e., were
delayed more than one total signal cycle), additional end-to-end
links were constructed. These are shown along with x and y
coordinates in Figure 5, where the center of the intersection is
considered to be the center of the coordinate system (0,0).
In a like manner, the through traffic was characterized by
links extending into the intersection and arbitrarily assigned a
length of 300 m. Figure 6 shows these links and the end coordi-
nates of each link.
The signal cycle time for the intersection is 60 seconds
during the off-peak hours when the cruising occurs. The green
light at Main Street lasts 25.2 seconds. Westbound left-turning
and through traffic on Douglas has a green light for 34.8 seconds
(9 seconds for left turns) and eastbound Douglas traffic has 25.8
seconds of green light.
Vehicle counts for the streets were obtained from a permanent
monitor located on Main Street south of the intersection (assumed
to be applicable to both the north and south legs because the ADT
on both legs is nearly identical; see Figure 2). Traffic volumes
for Douglas were obtained from ADT averages and from a temporary
20
-------
TABLE 4. LINK CHARACTERISTICS AND ESTIMATED CO EMISSIONS AT
24° F FOR MAIN AT DOUGLAS
Link
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
Identification
Main N-5B
Main S-5B
Doug W-WB
Doug E-WB3
Doug W-WB2
Doug W-EB
Main E-EB
Main N.L1-3
Main N, L4
Doug E, L2-3
Doug E, left-}
Doug E, left-1,2
Doug E, left-2B
Doug W, left-3
Doug W, left-2
Doug W, left-1
Doug E, left-5
Doug W, left-3
ext.
Type
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
3 Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Speed,
mph
25
25
20
10
10
15
10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Number
of
lanes
4
4
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Year
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
Delay time,
s
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
34.8
34.8
34.8
34.8
25.2
25.2
51.0
51.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.58
0.58
0.58
0.58
0.42
0.42
0.85
0.85
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Emission
rate,
yg/m-s
per lane
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
67,468
50,401
22,489
16,800
32,571
24,332
32,959
24,621
38,775
28,966
38,775
28,966
22,102
16,511
22,102
16,511
22,102
16,511
38,775
28,966
38,775
28,966
Emission
factor,
g/mi
49.68
36.49
49.68
36.49
62.17
45.97
112.25
79.13
112.75
79.13
79.92
58.64
112.75
79.13
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Traffic
volume,
vpha
668
711
668
711
554
589
599
637
599
637
572
609
618
658
3909
2920
1303
973
1887
1410
1910
1426
2247
1678
2247
1678
1281
957
1281
957
1281
957
2247
1678
2247
1678
vph = vehicles per hour.
21
-------
N)
L- (.INK R-»
N
(—-—*-
^ M no r\> r-
,
z
,
z
o
-H
DOUGLAS - WEST
jro Link H
:»
4,
| t
f
7?
L_4^-fc_J
•* r n
12' •«-
12' *-
12' •«-
1 0 l> S::S *' ' : •> ;M£P I AN mt: g: ;:S;
•4 II*1 1 TMtf M 1
P LINK U L
12' i*T~1i
»•• /
SPM (Monitor) LINK p
z
1
0
cr
ar
0 50ft
^ i J
SCALE
0,0
»•
7
•^
-H
*•
Link I
Link J
Link K
Link L
Link N
Link 0
Link P
Link M
Link Q
Link R
xl
-1.8
5.5
9.6
9.6
31.4
-9.6
-9.6
-9.6
53.2
22.7
-48.8
Yl
14.2
14.2
7.0
1.7
1.7
-1.68
-5.02
-8.53
5.2
-1.68
-1.68
X2
-1.8
5.5
22.7
31.4
53.2
-48.8
-40.1
-18.3
75.0
150.
-61.9
Y2
27.3
66.4
7.0
1.7
5.2
-1.68
-5.02
-8.53
5.2
-1.68
-1.68
DOUGLAS - EAST
*-4 PARKING 11.5'
.
-«-3 12'
^ £fl * 'ml* 1 T UV U »J
^^ " ,«„._._._. ,Mi/ \*fir^J"JLi LIMN n ^
PT 1 LINK K— Jt^^^^r^^W^ll^mir
—^3 p LINK l| - -*T • —
•• -* ir
*•
-*- PARKING 11.51
1 M 1
13
Z
^
Of
«t
D_
J- - - -
^ rot IN> ro|r\>
in
-------
DOUGLAS - WEST
12'
12T
12~"
> iMEDIAN
IT
IT S__LINI<_F_> ^
•SPM (Monitor)
50ft
SCALE
Link A
Link B
Link C
Link D
Link E
Link F
Link G
Xl
0
0
0
0
44.7
0
0
Yl
0
0
8.5
5.2
7.0
-5.0
-3.4
X2
0
0
-300
44.7
300
-300
300
Y2
300
-300
8.5
5.2
7.0
-5.0
-3.4
DOUGLAS - EAST
PARKING
LINK D
i__LINJLG__L
PARKING
CD
1
I ro I ro ! ro | ro i
C5
LINK E
MEDIAN^ IT
_L.T
J]'
11.5'
Figure 6. Through roadway link layout at the intersection
of Main and Douglas.
23
-------
counter placed on the western leg of Douglas from July 13, 1984
to July 15, 1984. Volumes on the east leg were estimated by
adjusting the east leg volumes by the ratio of the ADT for the
east leg and west leg (east leg ADT = 18061; west leg ADT =
16,718; ratio = 1.08). In all cases the traffic volumes between
the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. were reviewed, and the
peak-hour traffic was selected for analysis regardless of whether
the hours coincided.
Each link was characterized according to EPA Region I Mobile
Source Modeling Procedures, which include the queuing link analy-
sis as outlined here and in Section 3.3 for idling emission con-
sideration. (See Appendix for an example calculation.) Tables 4
and 5 present the individual link characteristics for both a
January and July modeling analysis, respectively, for 1983 and
1987. The inclusion of growth rates and temperature-dependent CO
emission factors is evident in the tables.
The selected meteorological conditions were a 1.5 m/s wind-
speed for January and 1.0 m/s for July, neutral stability, and a
100-m mixing height. Wind direction was varied from 270 degrees
(from the west) to 90 degrees (from the east) in 10-degree inter-
vals from west to north back to east.
Background concentrations were assigned to the CALINE-3
modeling as described in Section 3.6.
Table 6 presents the results of this 1983 worst-case 1-hour
CO analysis at the SPM site in parts per million. These values
are much lower than the 1-hour NAAQS (35 ppm). The highest
concentrations occurred with winds from 70 degrees (east north-
east) . The maximum 1-hour CO concentrations were 13.4 ppm in
January 1983 and 13.9 ppm in July 1983. Conversion of these
values to milligrams per cubic meter (by dividing by 0.875) and
to 8-hour averages (by multipling by 0.7) yields maximum 8-hour
concentrations of 10.7 mg/m and 11.1 mg/m for January and July
1983, respectively. A comparison of these values with the
measured 8-hour CO concentrations of 11.0 mg/m in January and
24
-------
TABLE 5. LINK CHARACTERISTICS AND ESTIMATED CO EMISSIONS AT
80°F FOR MAIN AT DOUGLAS
Link
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
p
Q
R
Identification
Main N-5B
Main S-5B
Doug W-WB
Doug E-WB3
Doug W-kB2
Doug W-EB
Main E-EB
Main N.L1-3
Main N, L4
Doug E, L2-3
Doug E, left-1
Doug E, left-1, 2
Doug E. left-2B
Doug W, L3
Doug W, L2
Doug W, LI
Doug E, LS
Doug W, L3 Ext
Type
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
B Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Speed,
mph
25
25
20
10
10
15
10
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Number
of
lanes
4
4
3
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Year
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
Delay time,
s
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
34.8
34.8
34.8
34.8
25.2
25.2
51.0
51.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
34.2
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
t
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.58
0.58
0.58
0.58
0.42
0.42
0.85
0.85
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Emission
rate,
i.g/m-s
per lane
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
67,468
50,401
22,489
16,800
32,571
24,332
32,959
24,621
38,775
28,966
38,775
28,966
22,102
16,511
22,102
16,511
22,102
16,511
38,775
28,966
38,775
28,966
Emission
factor,
g/mi
28.69
18.16
28.69
18.16
35.83
22.91
66.03
-:.4c
66.03
£0.40
46.18
29.40
£6.03
40.40
i&C.O
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Traffic
volume,
vph
668
711
668
711
554
589
599
599
637
572
609
616
658
3909
2920
1303
973
1887
1410
1910
1426
2247
1678
2247
1678
1281
957
1281
957
1281
957
2247
1678
2247
1678
25
-------
TABLE 6. ESTIMATED CONCENTRATIONS OF CO FOR THE BASE YEAR 1983
AT THE SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
UfinH
rV 1 Flu
direction,
degrees
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1-hour CO
concentration, ppm
January
1983
5.3
6.3
7.0
7.3
7.4
7.6
7.3
7.4
7.7
8.1
8.6
9.4
10.6
11.5
12.4
12.8
13. 4C
12.7
9.8
July
1983
3.3
4.4
5.5
6.2
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.6
7.0
7.6
8.3
9.4
10.8
12.0
13.0
13.6,,
13. 9C
12.7
9.5
8-hour CO, 3
concentration, mg/m
January
1983
4.2
5.0
5.6
5.8
5.9
6.1
5.8
5.9
6.2
6.5
6.9
7.5
8.5
9.2
9.9
10.2
10. 7C
10.2
7.8
July
1983
2.6
3.5
4.4
5.0
5.4
5.4
5.4
5.3
5.6
6.1
6.6
7.5
8.6
9.6
10.4
10.9,.
11. 1C
10.2
7.6
dCALINE-3 output.
Derived by use of conversion and persistence factors.
cMaximum concentrations.
26
-------
12.2 mg/m in August indicates that the modeled concentrations
are within about 2 to 9 percent of the measured values. Further
calibration was performed to account for the range of agreement
between the modeled and measured 8-hour CO concentrations by
simply adding the difference to the maximum estimated concentra-
tions.
The CALINE-3 and projected MOBILE-3 CO emissions were used
to estimate 8-hour concentrations at the SPM site in 1987. Based
on the 1983 to 1987 growth rates and emission and traffic char-
acteristics discussed previously for the projection year analysis,
1-hour CO concentrations were calculated. Table 7 presents both
the 1-hour and 8-hour CO concentrations at the SMP site, includ-
ing projected background concentrations from the WFD No. 2
monitor.
As shown in Table 7, the projected SPM concentrations are
less than the 8-hour NAAQS (10 mg/m ), which indicates that the
nonattainment area will be in compliance by 1987. Based on the
worst case (July 1983), the modeling value was 1.1 mg/m less
than the measured value of 12.2 mg/m (August 6, 1983) at the SPM
site. This 1.1 mg/m was added to the highest 8-hour concentra-
tion (8.2 mg/m ) to "calibrate" the modeling. The calibrated
1987 8-hour concentration (9.3 mg/m ) is less than the NAAQS.
Using the difference between the modeled January 1983 value of
10.7 mg/m and the January 16, 1983, measured value of 11.0 mg/m
(i.e., 0.3 mg/m ) results in a calibrated 1987 8-hour CO concen-
tration of 8.5 mg/m . Thus, both the January and July 1987
modeling show that the SPM site will be less than the NAAQS (10
mg/m ) .
27
-------
TABLE 7. ESTIMATED CONCENTRATIONS OF CO FOR THE PROJECTION YEAR 1987
AT THE SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
Wind
direction,
degrees
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1-hour CO
concentration, ppm
January
1987
4.3
5.1
5.5
5.8
6.0
6.1
5.8
5.9
6.0
6.4
6.8
7.3
8.1
9.0
9.5
10.2
10. 2C
9.8
7.8
July
1987
2.5
3.3
4.1
4.6
5.0
5.0
4.8
5.0
5.3
5.6
6.2
7.0
8.0
8.9
9.7
10.1
10. 3C
9.3
6.9
8-hour CO. 3
concentration, mg/m
January
1987
3.4
4.1
4.4
4.6
4.8
4.9
4.6
4.7
4.8
5.1
5.4
5.8
6.5
7.2
7.6
8.2
8.2C
7.8
6.2
July
1987
2.0
2.6
3.3
3.7
4.0
4.0
3.8
4.0
4.2
4.5
5.0
5.6
6.4
7.1
7.8
8.1r
8.2C
7.4
5.5
'CALINE-3 output.
Derived by use of conversion and persistence factors.
'Maximum concentrations.
28
-------
SECTION 5
ALTERNATE CO RECEPTOR SITE ANALYSIS
An alternate CO receptor site location was necessary to
estimate typical downtown concentrations apart from those found
in the nighttime cruising area on Douglas Street. Reviews of the
cruising route eliminated most of Douglas Street and several
associated cross streets as possible alternative receptor sites.
Based on the high volume of traffic on Broadway in both direc-
tions and the need for locating the monitor at least one block
from the cruising route (to minimize the nighttime cruising ef-
fects on CO concentrations), a site was selected on Broadway one
and a half blocks north of Douglas, between 1st and 2nd Streets.
Figure 7 shows the proposed monitoring site with respect to the
two nearby intersections. The proposed monitor would be 12 feet
from the curb at a height of 10 feet and situated at the midblock
between 1st and 2nd Streets (consistent with 40 CFR 58 Appendix
E).
Estimates of traffic volumes and hourly variations in such
volumes were obtained from the Wichita Department of Operations
and Maintenance (WDOM), as were the number, dimensions, and
directions of each traffic lane as shown in Figure 7. The peak
hour was determined to be 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. on both 1st and 2nd
Streets and between 12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m. on Broadway. Be-
cause the peak-hour traffic on 1st Street was much higher than
the peak-hour traffic on Broadway (and the difference between
12:00 noon to 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. traffic on Broadway
was less than 10 percent), the 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. peak hour was
used in the worst-case 1-hour dispersion modeling. (The effects
of cruising are assumed to be minimal at this location; thus, the
focus is on peak-hour analysis.)
29
-------
PARKING
«-
«-
•«-
2ND ST. - WEST
N
I .
T g
-<
PARKING
i
— »
— *
1ST ST. - WEST
1
T
33
2
O
r
11
.
I**
*
i
1
IT
11
.
(
|
Jr
*
IT
11
t
^
t
t
11
11
It
t
t
t*-
11
11
-yo
Z
CD
IV
1
PARKING IT
«- IT
•*- IT
*- IT
2ND ST. - EAST
. PROPOSED CO MONITOR
PARKING IT
IT
IT
IT
1ST ST. - EAST
50ft
t
SCALE
Figure 1. Alternate CO monitoring site and nearby streets
and intersections.
30
-------
Hourly traffic volumes were available for Broadway and 1st,
but only ADT was available for 2nd Street. The ratio of peak
hours to ADT volumes on 1st was used to calculate the peak-hour
volumes for each leg of 2nd street.
As shown in Figure 7, traffic moves in two directions on
Broadway, west only on 2nd, and east only on 1st. Queues develop
on specific legs only. Best estimates by the WDOM of queues that
develop during peak hours are presented in Table 8 along with the
length of the queue. Figure 8 presents the analysis area and the
queue links as input to the CALINE-3 Model.
TABLE 8. QUEUE ANALYSIS FOR THE INTERSECTIONS AT BROADWAY AND 1ST
AND BROADWAY AND 2ND
Intersection leg
Broadway,
northbound
Broadway,
southbound
1st, eastbound
2nd, westbound
Lanes
Left-turn
Right-turn
Left
Right-through
3 lanes
3 lanes
Cars
in
queue
7-8
3-4
7-8
3-4
15-20
4-5
Modeled
queue
number
8
4
8
4
18
5
Modeled
queue
length, m
34.8
17.4
34.8
17.4
78.3
21.8
Through-traffic links were characterized in a similar manner
and are shown in Figure 9. A 50-50 directional split was assumed
for traffic on Broadway during peak hours. The maximum length
given to the east-west through links was 100 m.
The total cycle time for signals at each of the two inter-
sections is 65 seconds. The lengths of the green lights for each
phase were as follows:
Broadway and 1st Broadway and 1st
Broadway, southbound left: 10.4 s
Broadway, north-south: 23.4 s
1st, eastbound: 31.2 s
Broadway, northbound left: 9.1 s
Broadway, north-south: 29.9 s
2nd, westbound: 26.0 s
31
-------
PARKING
""
«-
•*-
•«-
2ND ST. - WEST
20
N
(
1
PARKING
CD
TO
^
15
iT,n n
-a
•»
T3
Z
(T>
'
>~
z
1
>
1—
Z
o
J-
1T11 11
f
Z
c-
IV
t
1
r
;
\
\
ir
1
-o
Yr
20 QUENE
PARKING n-
•*- r ~T" IT
— JLINKlt- li-
•*~ T T" IT
2ND ST. - EAST
20
/. PROPOSED CO MONITOR
x * 13.72 m
y • Om
i • 10 ft • 3.05 m
X, Y. X- Y0 W
1 1 22
Link G -1.68 -54.9 -1.68 -20.1 3.35+6 = 10.0
Link H -5.03 -54.9 -5.03 -37.5 3.35+6 = 10.0
Link I 5.03 54.9 5.03 37.5 10.0
Link J 1.68 54.9 1.68 20.1 10. C
Link K -10.1 -63.2 -88.4 -63.2 16.1
Link L 10.1 59.9 32.0 59.9 16.1
PARKING IT
3~^J~ i 11 '
LINK K
"1 1
1ST ST. -
15
-*•
WEST
15
1 *
t t
1
1
1
1
1
1
+t
IT *"
IT
1ST ST. - EAST
20
15
ITIT'ITIT'II IT
50ft
SCALE
Figure 8. Queue links near the alternate monitor on Broadway,
1st, and 2nd Streets
32
-------
2N
F
...
1
PARKING
r~ T *-
D ST. - WEST
N
>
15
ARKING
x
ST ST. - WEST
15
15
1
r,n
U
r
*•
a
7
3
1—
JO
t
1
TIT
1
11
1
1
:
*
>
f
„
1
T
11
t
r
;
7
0
t
t
i
iipi
t
t
:
^
D
VRKINGJ;
t
H
T'IV
20 THRU LINKS
PARKING IT
•*- r~ ~}_ IT
--=--f ] IT
2ND ST. - EAST
20
15
T . PROPOSED CO MONITOR
x - 13.72 m
y • On
z « 10' « 3.05 m
Xl Yl X2 Y2 W
Link A -3.35 -100 -3.35 100 12.7
Link B 3.35 -100 -3.35 100 12.7
Link C 0 -63.1 -100 -63.1 16.1
Link D 0 -63.1 100 -63.1 16.1
Link E -100 63.1 0 63.1 16.1
Link F 0 63.1 100 63.1 16.1
PAP,KING_ JJ-
1ST ST. - EAST
20
5
0 50ft
SCALE
Figure 9. Through roadway links near the alternate monitor on
Broadway, 1st, and 2nd Streets.
33
-------
These two intersections were modeled by using the seasonally
adjusted and yearly adjusted (for 1987) peak hour traffic volumes
to describe the vehicle flow on the streets. Each through and
queue link shown in Figures 8 and 9 was characterized as to
speed, number of lanes, and emission rates according to EPA
Region I Mobile Source Modeling Procedures. Tables 9 and 10
present the individual link characteristics for January and July
modeling analyses, respectively, for 1983 and 1987. Growth rates
in VMT, reductions in CO emissions in future years, and depen-
dence of temperature are included in the tables.
As described in Section 3.4, selected worst-case meteorolog-
ical conditions were as follows: a 1.5 m/s windspeed in January
and a 1.0 m/s windspeed in July, neutral stability, and a 100-m
mixing height. Wind direction was varied in 10-degree increments
from south at 180 degrees to northeast at 40 degrees. Background
concentrations (as discussed in Section 3.6) were seasonally and
yearly adjusted in the same manner as for the SPM site analysis.
Table 11 presents the results of the microscale CALINE-3
dispersion modeling analysis for 1983 January and July condi-
tions. The maximum 8-hour concentrations of CO at the alternate
3 3
monitoring site are 6.3 mg/m in January and 5.9 mg/m in July.
Both of these maximums are associated with a southwest (210
degrees) wind. If the calibration factors from the baseline SPM
3 3
analysis are considered (0.3 mg/m in January and 1.1 mg/m in
July), the resulting concentration estimates are 6.6 and 7.0
mg/m , respectively. These values are less than the NAAQS.
Eight-hour concentrations were also estimated for 1987 by
use of growth projection and emission techniques similar to those
described in the SPM site analysis. Table 12 presents the 1-hour
CALINE-3 CO concentration estimates and the derived 8-hour
values. Estimated maximum 8-hour CO concentrations for January
and July 1987 were 5.0 and 4.2 mg/m , respectively. If the
calibration factors from the SPM analysis (0.3 mg/m in January;
1.1 mg/m in July) are considered, the maximum estimated CO
concentrations are 5.3 and 5.3 mg/m for both January and July,
1987.
34
-------
TABLE 9. LINK CHARACTERISTICS AND ESTIMATED CO EMISSIONS AT
24°F FOR BROADWAY AT 1ST AND BROADWAY AT 2ND
Link
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Identification
Broad SBND
Broad NBND
1st W, EBND
1st E, EBND
2nd W, WBND
2nd E, WBND
Broad S, left
Broad S, Thru
Broad N, thru
Broad N, left
1st EBND
2nd WBND
Type
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Speed,
mph
15
15
15
15
20
20
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Number
of
lanes
2
2
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
Year
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
Delay time,
s
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.6
56.6
31.2
31.2
26.0
26.0
55.9
55.9
33.8
33.8
39.0
39.0
%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.87
0.87
0.48
0.48
0.40
0.40
0.86
0.86
0.52
0.52
0.6
0.6
Emission
rate,
ug/m-s
per lane
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30,867
22,233
17,030
12,267
14,192
10,222
30,512
21,978
55,349
39,867
63,862
46,000
Emission
factor,
g/rni
83.3
61.3
83.3
61.3
83.3
61.3
83.3
61.3
64.1
47.6
64.1
47.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Traffic
volume,
vph
390
415
390
415
1017
1082
1293
1375
858
913
762
811
1788
1288
987
711
822
592
1768
1273
3207
2310
3700
2665
35
-------
TABLE 10. LINK CHARACTERISTICS AND ESTIMATED CO EMISSIONS AT
80°F FOR BROADWAY AT 1ST AND BROADWAY AT 2ND
Link
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Identification
Broad SBND
Broad NBND
1st W, EBND
1st E, EBND
2nd W, WBND
2nd E, WBND
Broad S, left
Broad S, thru
Broad N, thru
Broad N, left
1st EBND
2nd WBND
Type
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Through
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Queue
Speed,
mph
15
15
15
15
20
20
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Number
of
lanes
2
2
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
Year
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
1983
1987
Delay time,
sec.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
56.6
56.6
31.2
31.2
26.0
26.0
55.9
55.9
33.8
33.8
39.0
39.0
%
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.87
0.87
0.48
0.48
0.40
0.40
0.86
0.86
0.52
0.52
0.6
0.6
Emission
rate,
pg/m-s
per lane
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30,867
22,233
17,030
12,267
14,192
10,222
30,512
21,978
55,349
39,867
63,862
46,000
Emission
factor
g/mi
52.2
34.3
52.2
34.3
52.2
34.3
52.2
34.3
40.2
26.4
40.2
26.4
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Traffic
volume,
vph
390
415
390
415
1017
1082
1293
1375
858
913
762
811
1788
1288
987
711
822
592
1768
1273
3207
2310
3700
2665
U)
ON
-------
TABLE 11. ESTIMATED CONCENTRATIONS OF CO FOR THE BASE YEAR 1983
AT THE ALTERNATE MONITORING SITE
Wind
direction,
degrees
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
10
20
30
40
1-hour CO
concentrations, ppm
January
1983
5.6
6.9
7.7
7.9C
7.5
6.7
5.5
4.8
4.3
4.2
4.2
4.3
4.5
5.1
5.8
6.4
6.9
7.2
6.7
6.3
5.9
5.4
4.9
July
1983
4.2
5.5
6.8
7.4C
6.7
5.7
4.3
3.2
2.6
2.4
2.4
2.6
2.8
3.3
4.2
5.1
6.0
6.1
6.0
5.4
5.0
4.3
3.5
8-hour CO. 3
concentrations, mg/m
January
1983
4.5
5.5
6.2
6.3C
6.0
5.4
4.4
3.8
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.6
4.1
4.6
5.1
5.5
5.8
5.4
5.0
4.7
4.3
3.9
July
1983
3.4
4.4
5.4
5.9C
5.4
4.6
3.4
2.6
2.1
1.9
1.9
2.1
2.2
2.6
3.4
4.1
4.8
4.9
4.8
4.3
4.0
3.4
2.8
CALINE-3 output.
DDerived by use of conversion and persistence factors.
'Maximum concentrations.
37
-------
TABLE 12. ESTIMATED CONCENTRATIONS FOR CO FOR THE PROJECTION YEAR 1987
AT THE ALTERNATE MONITORING SITE
UlinH
n 1 MU
direction,
degrees
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
10
20
30
40
1-hour CO
concentrations, ppm
January
1987
4.6
5.4
6.1r
6.2C
5.9
5.3
4.5
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.8
4.2
4.6
5.2
5.7
5.6
5.4
5.1
4.6
4.3
3.9
July
1987
3.0
4.1
5.0
5.2C
4.9
4.3
3.2
2.4
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.5
3.1
3.7
4.5
4.6
4.2
3.9
3.6
3.2
2.7
8-hour CO. 3
concentrations, rng/m
January
1987
3.7
4.3
4.9r
5.0C
4.7
4.2
3.6
3.0
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.9
3.0
3.4
3.7
4.2
4.6
4.5
4.3
4.1
3.7
3.4
3.1
July
1987
2.4
3.3
4.0r
4.2C
3.9
3.4
2.6
1.9
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.6
3.7
3.4
3.1
2.9
2.6
2.2
'CALINE-3 output.
3Derived by use of conversion and persistence factors.
t*
"Maximum concentrations.
38
-------
Estimates indicate that the alternate monitoring site will
yield 8-hour CO concentrations that generally somewhat exceed 50
percent of the 8-hour NAAQS (10 mg/m ). The alternate site is
such that nighttime cruising should not influence the monitor
significantly, but it is close enough to the central business
district to be considered representative of downtown ambient air.
39
-------
SECTION 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 CONCLUSIONS
Two conclusions were drawn from the dispersion modeling
analysis of the streets affecting the special purpose monitor at
111 W. Douglas. The first was that the combination of MOBILE-3
CO emission factors (queuing and delay) and the CALINE-3 Model
provided a reasonable modeling methodology. Considering the
great variability in emission and source characteristics and the
influencing meteorological conditions, the model-versus-monitor
maximum 8-hour concentrations compared quite well, i.e., within 2
to 9 percent (underestimates by the model).
The second conclusion was that, based on the representative-
ness of the 1983 modeled concentrations at the SPM site, the SPM
site will show NAAQS attainment by 1987. The maximum 8-hour con-
centrations estimated for 1987 and calibrated by 1983 model/moni-
3 3
tor comparisons were 8.5 mg/m (January) and 9.3 mg/m (July).
Thus, the results of this modeling analysis should be included as
part of the State Implementation Plan for CO in Wichita in addi-
tion to the Transportation Control Measures already presented.
An alternate monitoring site proposed in this analysis was
located midblock on Broadway between 1st and 2nd Streets. A
microscale analysis (similar to the SPM site analysis) that
determined the impact of nearby streets on the proposed monitor
was used to evaluate CO concentrations with respect to this
model. Concentrations of CO were estimated to be about 60
percent of the 8-hour NAAQS in 1983 and to decrease to about 50
percent by 1987. This monitor is believed to yield more repre-
sentative measurements of downtown air quality because it is
40
-------
affected less by the downtown nighttime cruising phenomenon but
is situated on a main downtown street in the urban core.
6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Although the dispersion modeling performed in the vicinity
of the SPM site showed attainment of the CO NAAQS by 1987, this
attainment may be possible at an earlier date if additional TCM's
are implemented. The primary focus of any additional TCM's
should be with regard to the weekend nighttime cruising problem.
Improvements in number of vehicles, traffic flow, signalization,
etc. will decrease CO emissions on and near Douglas Street and
should contribute to reaching acceptable CO levels prior to the
projected 1987 attainment date.
Possible alternative TCM's for reducing the downtown cruis-
ing problem include:
1. Ban left turns from Douglas to Main. This would de-
crease queue lengths on both westbound and eastbound
Douglas.
2. Make Douglas Street one-way. Even if cruising per-
sisted, the problem would be diluted.
3. Barricade certain downtown streets on weekend nights.
Only specific streets would need to be blocked to
disperse nighttime cruising; e.g., Douglas between Main
and Market and between Broadway and Topeka. All north-
south streets would remain open.
4. Add traffic police to critical intersections to improve
traffic flow.
5. Require special licensing for use of area.
While these potential solutions to improving urban core air qual-
ity range from possible to improbable, they do represent alterna-
tives. Of particular use may be the first recommendation banning
left turns from Douglas to Main. This will reduce queueing on
Douglas at Main Street, which should in turn improve overall
traffic flow even during nighttime cruising conditions. Further
review of the overall implications of these suggested TCM's is
necessary before implementation would be advised.
41
-------
Other TCM's such as anti-tampering and anti-fuel switching
are probably not warranted at this time. Because the area is
projected to be in compliance by 1987, the recommendations given
here are somewhat more reasonable and cost-effective when com-
pared with areawide emission and fuel control programs.
42
-------
APPENDIX A
TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR MAIN, DOUGLAS,
BROADWAY, AND FIRST STREETS
A-l
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT n* OPERATION: ANO MAINTENANCE
TRArfiC E:aGl!:£E?>iNa.
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
SIS420CO
{CHECK ONE)
E
|
DON'T
|
3-t
START: HOUR -3p,-,-,
STOP: HOIK fc&,-,-\
STREET
LOCATION
OH
^.
w
24 HOUR TOTAL
1 1
7-11
USE
n
DATE: YR igfrT
DATE: YR 19[F
2] MO
"S MO
3
13
PEDESTRIAN LJ p
jD TRAN EH "
" VEHICLE M v
(A'l\ DA I/ 131 COUNTER NUMBER 03
r\ ,', r /3
/v Jf. 1.1-0 J'xQ->/ (^ VL)
l/rlf
^
"
«^>
l/l7b
14-M
DAY OF WEEK
DATE
D JC.UL
HV| F
SUN
711*!
L-l
1
i
1
J4-53 • '
ACTO
flON
7IIL-
^i
!
TUE
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
WED
HOUR
U-l
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
1
1-12
•^5i'
_y L2'
35 W
_c54.*i
r/,c,.
3j
(£>.->
*4(c
32
l(r
1.54
11
_Lrh
,3 'i
1,9-
13
1 &
M-
1^:1
*-IQ 1
THU
FR!
1112!
SAT
*7//4
3EAK HR
AM
4ft2-
r?n^
,^i P-
/PP-
IM
«3P.)
Ul
/OS
-2u3f'
^Vpc/
PM
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
TOTAL
t AVG WK
DAY
SURFACE TYPE
REMARKS
^n
3/3
J'15
.35,0
ricll
jS.M.3
JLJ.3-
|6)A
X>cJ |
r53&
^.^
14 (p
./5'//':s'
ft/O
Mf)
433
6^,6
'V,?^
^fl 1
3/3
J^
4(08
£73-
£>()*/
^-1135
• '
±l£j(a
h%4
37?'
3ih
APy-t
3/7
r3c0^2.
V)^
J
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
TRAFFIC E:JG1>:EE:VINS.
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
D
DON'T USE
n
START: HOUR „. -yy-,1 DATE: YR 1
STOP: HOUR^XVn DATE: YR
STREET ON_
SIS420CO
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN
VEHICLE
COUNTER NUMBER
LOCATION hvl
24
U_.^ ^ **>
HOUR TOTAL I/ 13 1^ 19 IU FACTOR! 11
u-a f*62
DAY OF WEEK
DATE
SUN
7//5
MON
1IK/5
TUE
_J 24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
WED
THU
FRI
111 3
SAT.
1/14
PEAK HR
HOUR ' AM
U-l
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
45 <3_
USZ
1L^ 1
jO, '-tip
f,[j
34
*4C
M
P>(-
1 (r^
|£)1
53-1
A.Q
/."/^
/C)
'} 7^.
/^ /I
i-Hv
//L/
^/n
4pO
H.^'1
Ab\
i(n
(>*')-
33
Acj?i
III
^550
esSl'M
44^
4 ?3
PM
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
&-/
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
TOTAL
t AVG WK DAY
"•ill
£&\
28 \
<58cj
^3'r)ci
^5Q^
A 5,2
c3.^ 1
J/L3
rPJS'i
r5|4
1 c^A-
^i/% i
W^3Pi
u43
QS3
lOln^S
1 CiA1^
4
_^/Cj
."S31
*n4
5^fj\
^j-i |
/. tj^
^i (4
*43i^
«^5tC1^'
*io
JD^
~%DH
~<-3l&
4/O
Ljpfy
•4*^i
Tmto
SURFACE TYPE J^f/LilC^
REMARKS
284-01-010
(Rev. 4/81) See Procedure SIS-15
CONDITION.
SIGNED .
A-3
-------
CONTINUOUS TPiFi-If.
KAVSAS r
si '.TTC*; - wrrKi Y
.AC! 1 or T" A"<;r>nrT /
•.-.',, rr-.T AT K.', r^ /.: '
UFF If.
_WEEK_.BEGIN:;ING
DAY
DATT
.HOI':?
I- 2 AC
2- 3 A"
5- 6 AH
>
""
j
',."
e i
'''"'I
''"'1
ST''
|
6- 7 A1''
7- 8 AM
8- 9 Al^
9-10 A''
10-11 AH
11-12 A^
12- I PW
1- 2 PC
2- 3 Pf
1- 4 PV
4- 5 PM
5- 6 PM
6- 7 PK
7-8 PH
8- 9 Pf
9-~10 P"
10-11 PM
'11-12 P«
TOTAL
* DAY I S
OF KFFK
REMARKS:
11-7 11 -"B
26 " 49
29 35
" ? ' " ' 2 '
24 27
39 4 !
193
775
96R
749
921)
1 047
1141
1071
1023
1076
1337
1347
556
434
281
" "281
178
in
13696
1 11.5
» IN
1 65
795
1018
9D8
El fa
975
1081
1036
872
"1062
1303
" " 124~6
515
409
266
243
219
153
rT336?
ICB.fi
niCAT.ES
wro
11-9
1 ! 5
46
27
1?
34
214
733
756
"~ fH5"
"00
11 50
1 143
1041
1036
1052 '
1313
1424"
636
- 376 -
345
266
228
"^13902
113.2
RFVISED
THI)
1 1 - ; C'
5?
36
62
199
795
1107
95 =
106S
1 1 68
1353
1 162
1 126
1241
1540
1460
597
447
333
304""
259
" 207
15666
127.5
HCURLY
r P T SAT
li-1 1 11-12
139 1
79
44
192
501
823
7 f, 2
741
02s*
1002
070
799
684" "
957
""982
485
- 638 '
f550
563 ""
583
"\_556"
13187
107.4
VCUIMF.
4RO
?2^
1 1 •>"
35
44
b-:
179
367
" 432
5'.?
"701
717
651
606
611
472
"387
317
472
492
',475
!562
9869
80.3
SUN TOTAL
11-13
' >• ^ ? 1 A i 2
"•; 379 " 95A '•- --•
'219 t?C
j-f7 ,,-0-
56 2?1
3R ?02 .
I?.
C t
1C9
190
171
""253
509
"~ 556
471
633 "
383
339
325
— 776
287
168
152
133
6299
51.3
1063
-7RA,q
51A3
4R54
5 ! r, 8
6218
69-,',
6395
5933
6^59 "
7305
7 1 R 5
3431
- 3052 — -
7554
230~
2181
—1911
85981
700.0
.. .
- — ,
-••-
. .._- ~
^
'*.r
- •*.
i;.c
'r,: *•
t- '
V:
F
I'S
C
A-4
-------
i M;< !.<• i(-/fiir TMM STMICN - KFFKLY TR.-.Frir
K/'.',.•' prp.-rlvM
ST;
. .J CF 1 1. i
T i r \' t, \ • •
' • N S ^ 1 :; T j
t r CK urGi MV i N; ycf- r A*
i1
i -- i
1- 7
7- -'.
3- 4
4- '•
c _ ^
( - /
7- .'•
P- c,
9-1C
ic-: i
11-17
17- 1
1- 7
7- 3
3- 4
4- 5
5- f
6- 7
7- P
e- s
9- 1C
IC-11
11-17
*, v N1 r K 1 'j r
A 1 F- 1 7 - •) 1 7 - .'
i y f " •-, 7
A •• '. n ', '
i '•• 14 IT
.'. !•' 1 •• 2 ?
,'. •>' "> "/ > c
A " 44 11
A " 7 ••• ,' 7 T 7
Ay 771 7 7 5
A c I .T" 7 1 D 11
A" 81 74 1
A " 975 711
A V 1779 f 3 .•>
P IY i4?i 9?r
P N 1778 P 4 H
Py 1117 6f)-5
py 1151 834
Pf 1574 1303
P y 1 4 4 P 1556
py 6M 6h4
Py 471 706
P" 212 _420
Py 234 23?
Py 169 735
ry 119 187
TPTAL 15164 .12056
» DAY
CF kF
'
EK_115.7 99.6
* INDIOTTS
wrr
, 17- 7
74
54
3'.
27
3f
47
71 3
69P
1005
79R
acn
B31
1171
1 OfU.
979
997
. 1358
133C
594
441
178
337
279
13?
TH1
17- P
1 34
F3
34
2p.
37
41
746
7 (-4
10C5
860
977
116?
1154
1047
941
1139
. 1.327
13P7
6P4
-469
_._ J49__
334
773
175
' T 1CN t:L 'Vf> I'.'C
rrrrvrrr. 5, IQ?: "
r * i
1 7- '•>
1.--
66
4 1
•Ji,
31
35
715
R31
1054
P69
934
1 15?
1334
1761
1 175
1151
1631
!559
686
490
513 .
466
*C5
63?
i?'- n
4C.-;
'52
269
144
.1"
?7
91
?1 1
364
54T
7f B
f S'.
732
9C5
769
697
.561.
527
476
710
__A7L.
513
506
617
' 1 ••;
17-11
C * 1
/, - J
241
1 "J 1
73
?7
<^
t7
1C?
77?
?f 1
?.PO
551
5C1
67f
466
. ..419_.
453
311
277
2.45
177
.1*1
17C
T.TAl
! 4 9 :
ic«-c
es-
4 c r
?,7
7r.i
17T
/, f ^ <,
557'
'.9-:
5T7 1
', 4 1 /.
771?
', 9 ? (.-
^34^
64 5 C
H : ; 3
R76C
4C7P
3514
7594
729'
2216
1933
_ J35J3 146C8 Ij6192._ai775 t/.fl 51.76.1
103.6
"FFVi^EC
111.4
HCUfiLY
128.9
VCLUS«E.
B9.8
51.0
700. C
A-5
-------
9-V
G'OOi
_.. 1002
s:
•J)-.
5.
5
2 ;
3
j":
8£it
Ulb
!?1 Oi.
? 1 y 1
Jto9
L. V C 4.
JI-..9
t b c <,
c-^b
ua '11
01Z
i££
££1
oil
CLi
i.11
^•/<;
!".
-.<: i
z [i
t. I
3L9
dli
i'jl
iCI
_. V>11 0251.. H9V1 ,.J S* -S
S291" I iil lo£l i-iit liVl ftci !• -1?
10ei 'i-oll UJl Jill. VICI .so V -e
1511 iool 95b JiJl 5£0l tsu t -i
O'/Cl 'ci.ll f.'/ll jilt 16T! .-,,: c -1
57CI V)ll £ilt 1-oll SiJI ...I 1 -~i\
j a 11 a t J I -lit veil 0 d j I ., V r. I - i I
Ol'
o o
b ja
-701 / •/ j I -> c' J 1 1 J
v I i
'CO J
,-.V I I-01
i.V u I-b
r. , o -•!
,,'i t. -4
,., i -q
•O 'j -'/
..v -/ -t
I:'I C -2
,.v ,: -t
.• i -di
7 i - I (.1-1
i.;s i j J
•^ ~ *.j«.ior
Di-JJ Jt-Jti-^
1 u:
j ,1. ;/ Is sj )K» io i.'i^s ,' i
.; K; L j j j 5 < ? -i i. j J t •. i M. ,
n -1 '.. 1 -1
-. j i j i L
i •; -n 11 v L i
-,'U'j T.JJ7..L
-------
f •
DAY
DA T "i
1 IJ- 1 .'.'>
!'. ?- i A;<
••• 3- 4 /,'•!
4 - r> i '•'
5- 6 ."•'
'"' 6- 7 A'l
7- fi A".
p.- 9 ;,".
:.• 9-10 V, •'•
'~\ 10-11 AM
• • 11-12 !••'•
",: 17- 1 PM
.-. - i--? -pv
^i ?- 3 PM
3 r r,r,T
1ITN K'.l-PFR
r> i '.';! *;o *•' i*1'.'1^ -* v
WED 71'.!
2-2? 2-23
t= 1 1?
42 41)
40 36
70 " 21
30 30
"30 41"
719 ?0«
-- fi32 -" B7C-
997 970
~""~~76"6 71R"
805 777
"""1075" " 910
1210 1150
~~1 081 1076
959 995
994 1088""
1309 1385
1293 1392
596 630
403 47?
358 ~~31B
279 "35B
240 256
13818 1392R
111.9 112.7
RFVISED HOURLY
- WCr:-l
r r n ^ \j :. " >
r-p.l
2-.? 4
114
11
40
" " 30
73
47
201
" 9?7
1105
"' ~BR5
90P
11 '.3 "
1385
1752 "
1176
" -1306--
1546
151R
635
443
443
529
551
57A
16B29
136.3
VOLUME.
Y Tr •
0-7.1
IIP,*,
- - -
2-75 ?-'?6
4.' 2
319
736
76
3">
—•,-,-
97
?r,5
431
4°f.
643
7)7
R90
"777
R^2
71-^
56?
35?
334
383
445
47«5
'411
10501
85.0
?f.7
3 SO
240
" 1 3R
f \
33""
48
--' 00 — -
R4
1"13" "
715
739 " "
477
79R
44?
-- 4?.6r-"-
37B
296
299
47*
130
115
121
115
6049
49.0
1277
642
309
231
" 27? ""'
1 1 5->
-4"36-? -
5791
4M 6"
5051
6022"
7?f-R
7Q95 ~
6197
6570 "
7479
"737R
3551
7R55 '
7137
2201
2067
1660
P.6453
700.0
,C
A-7
-------
CONTINUOUS TkAf-FIC CCUNT STATION - KLEKLY TRAFFIC So
^fi ii f E A t ~ C r ~ T K A N i PCS T A T 1 L.\ PLAr.:. J.',G
STA11CN MiPEEk 5-63C-90CC-70
:h 5. 1964
WEEK BECIKMNG KGt.DAY
HOUR
12-
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
? —
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
D.',
DA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 2
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9-10
10-11
Y
7E
AM
AH
AM
AK
AM
AM
AM
AH
AM
AH
AM
AM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
PM
11-12 PM
TOTAL
J DAY IS
OF WEEK
REMARKS:
HGN
3- 5
38
48
18
16
19
41
20d
BIZ
1045
P30
1029
1170
1380
1215
1122
1278
1399
1467
641
414
301
269
202
178
15200
TLE
3- 6
51
43
22
24
3C
47
2C2
£42
1C21
f 65
E51
1C23
1275
1114
1CC7
1058
1245
1428
640
444
294
263
214
158
14261
113.6 106.8
* INDICATES
1 EC
3- 7
104
55
23
23
2 C
37
205
£57
1C3£
824
E85
117C
1223
1131
1117
1343
141C
706
523
370
291
245
181
14775
11C. 6
REVISED
ThU
3- 8
1C5
85
22
3
17
63
2C7
£22
991
737
812
'.90
1203
1082
1064
1122
1395
1422
727
_514
344
324
230
215
14504
108.6
HCURLY
FP.l
3- 9
123
37
38
2C
23
42
212
£71
1050
818
955
U3C
1275
127C
1114
1227
1479
156C
698
559
567
549
538
568
16739
125.4
VOLUME
SAT
3-10
4 4 9
359
2C4
146
-.9
37
92
199
311
381
543
677
623
813
8C7
779
609
523
451
674
444
498
535
578
10981
82.2
i
SUN
3-il
47G
337
314
135
4*-*
25
54
94
103
205
27V
343
710
607
597
715
435
377
297
241
206
164
139
131
7028
52.6
TOTAL r
136C ' |
9C4
641
375
2C2
292
neo
4557
5557 V
46EC
5394
6519 i
7889
7232
67C7 *"
73CO
7905 ^
8187
4160 '
3369
2528 *
2356 _ j
2103 ' * i
2009
93488 *
700.0 £
C
c
c
A-8
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT Cr OPERATIONS i MAINTENANCE
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DIVISION
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS
(CHECK ONE)
u
1
START: HOUR
STOP: HOUR
STREET ON
LOCATK
W
^Orr^
\
^iOmi
*z.
1
P^ior
)N |6l£lT. 1
— ^
24 HOUR TOTAL
DAY
ill!?
v&
OF WEEK
DATE
HOUR
DON'T USE
MM
7-11 12
\ g| ol TRAN[~]
DATE: YR iglS'BI MO |0|r-)l DA 19.1^
19-19 2(W1 J2-2J
DATE: YR igjgle,! HO fpFSI DAgJto]
XOLtOOuuf
/)
LS4* J AK'fl 3 1'ifl 1 M 1
24-u
PEDESTRIAN Q p
VEHICLE [g] V
1*
COUNTER NUMBER El
IT
II I'M I
lf>PI FACTOR! IclPlsl 24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC /&?2£
M-E
SUN
11-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
MON
TUE
WED
"S~o!r~>
THU
^-•Ofc
FR!
AM
1
5-6
6-7
7-6
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
-J*5 12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
^4-5--,
' 5-6
6-
i
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
II-
12
TOTAL
X AVG WK DAY
SURFACE TYPE
REMARKS L/^b
r/Otx^
'•fo?^
T'vO^S
i
^/*\
^
*< ' ' &?t
) ,
/"
CONDITION
?7 lorn SIGNFn V JlM"
"/"
^.7t
J-?°
yy 1
J0*?4
.
U l^NODJIJ^
A-9
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
ILiPARTMEKT OF OPERATI&wb a riAlMlhiiANCE
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE DIVISION
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS
D
DON'T USE
START: HOUR.7') nn~\ DATE: YR 19
n
I
STOP:
DATE: YR
i MO
MO
DA|<
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN Q p
1*
VEHICLE [X] v
it
COUNTER NUMBER @
STREET ON
LOCATION filer* i i/niq-ieikigiTi i A mi pi rRigiy
| 24-S3
24 HOUR TOTAL I l\3-\ l\ri\¥-\ FACTOR]
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
DAY OF WEEK
DATE
SUN
MON
HOUR
U-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
TUE
WED
(£>-/
THU
0?^5
AM
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
->j 5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
TOTAL
* AVG WK DAY
(
PM
'
SOU
uw=-
mo-
^Q,
?AM
xS^i
>U£>
^^
Mln
(.n<~f^
IQM
M'?
W"7
^^
<3 I
f^G
A^)(r
q/'O,
Sgu
1/6
"?5<2i
^R6o
(7/0
TO
X(
X>7
51\
^ttiii
fi?%
•' " ^
SURFACE TYPE .^ ^4/l/g
REMARKS ^3
(Rev.)
284-01-010 April 27, 1983
CONDITION
SIGNED
A-10
-------
c
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
D
DON'T USE
n
START: HOUR ^
DATE: YR IS
III HO \C\t
Dft
SIS420CO
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN £] P
16
VEHICLE Q v
1C
COUNTER NUMBER Q
STOP: HOUR c3 .0"?)'! DATE: YR 19JTJ3] 110 | c\S
STREET ON /
LOCATION
21 HOUR TOTAL I/ HrtB'Ikl FACTOR! I PI BIT] 24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC '2(~3°
DAY OF WEEK
DATE
SUN
nof,
v-5/3 ^
TUE
i'^V
WED
THU
FR!
SAT
PEAK HR
HOUR ' '' ' AM
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
/JO
£~^
3?
.? "7
A 7
^V
.i?^i
/i3.T
e)£~f
7&%'
% /*+
9JV-
-T '
J •
' f
-i^
f '^
)
M"
v27/
34f
344
$%*•
'?.OI?
~
^ PM
12-1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
10-11
11-12
. TOTAL
% AVG WK DAY
/£>£>/
i/3&
/J-f-f/
/ 'TJ)1
£.6"Y
*j-<3^'
3L1 1
3 &^)~
3 f-n
i 7C
~l 3L, (o
^
/If-e '
To 9-^
~7& 7O
4^
^
/••?•
^5'
'^
aP^
~yrj
/ •"
^~-
43?
4*1
£L 7
3V2<-
l'/j 7
- -
SURFACE TYPE
REMARKS
CONDITION
L^<^>-
(Rev.)
KJ-010 ll-e-76 See Procedure SIS-15
SIGNED .
A-ll
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
EXAMPLE CALCULATION OF IDLE AND
QUEUE EMISSION FACTORS
B-l
-------
Idle Emission Factors for CO - Example Calculations
1983: CO idle emissions = 10.12 g/veh min
To convert to emissions per length per time per land multiply
idle emissions by unit conversions and divide by average vehicle
length: ,
(10.12 g/veh min) (* x 10 P9) ( () = 38774'8
Total emissions (Q, ) are obtained by multiplying by the number of
lanes in the queue and the delay time percentage:
Q1 = (38774.8 yg/m sec lane) (No. lanes) (percent red time)
Noting that this Q.. is the same as the resulting total link
emissions in CALINE-3 and that the equation used in Caline-3 is:
Qj = (0.1726) (EF) (VPH)
where :
EF is the CO emission factor is g/mi
VPH is the number of vehicles per hour
Because Q, is calculated above for queue links but CALINE-3
requires EF and VPH to be input, EF is arbitrarily specified at
100 g/mi and VPH is calculated:
x /1
VPH = (.1726^ ^10
100
Specifying these EF and VPH as inputs to CALINE-3 results in the
appropriate emissions assigned to the queuing links.
B-2
-------
APPENDIX C
MOBILE-3 CALCULATIONS
MAIN AND DOUGLAS
C-l
-------
o
1
ro
**** MAIN AND DOUGLAS THRU 10,25 MPH JANUARY- JULY ****
I/M PROGRAM SELECTED:
START YEAR (JANUARY 1): 1981
PRE-1981 MYR STRINGENCY RATE: 10Z
MECHANIC TRAINING PROGRAM?: NO
FIRST MODEL YEAR COVERED: 1968
LAST MODEL YEAR COVERED: 2020
VEHICLE TYPES COVERED: LDGV
1981 a LATER MYR TEST TYPE: IDLE
1981 a LATER MYR TEST CUTPOINTS: 3.0Z ICO
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATIVE
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES
/ 300 P
PM IHC
HC EMISSION FACTORS.
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 43.88 75.57 79.28
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES
LDGT
77.43
10.41
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 30.63 65.51 61.43
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GH/MIN)
IDLE CO: 7.89 6.75 6.65
LDGT
63.47
6.70
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.4
HDGV
25.0
.000
.00
.00
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
25.0
.000
.00
.00
(F) REGION: LOU
/ 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
LDDV LDDT HDDV MC
25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
.010 .000 .000 .005
1.01 .00 .00 28.91
.18 .00 .00 2.79
(F) REGION: LOU
/ 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
LDDV LDDT HDDV MC
25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
.010 .000 .000 .005
1.03 .00 .00 27.32
.1? .00 .00 2.52
ALL VEH
49.68
10.12
ALL VEH
36.49
7.56
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL "."TERR: 1983 I/H PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: RO.O (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.4 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEF. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
1 1
VEH. SPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
25.0
.797
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
USER SUPPLIED
CAL. YEAR: 198
VEH. TYPE:
0 VEH. SPEEDS:
w VMT MIX:
24.58
25.0
.094
(GM/MILE)
44.96
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.23
10.21
25.0
.094
50.77
(GM/MIN)
10.61
47.87
10.41
25.0
.000
.00
.00
25.0
.010
1.01
.18
25.0
.000
.00
.00
25.0
.000
.00
.00
25.
,
18.
2 .
0
005
07
79
"8.6?
10.12
VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
7 I/M
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
25.0
.797
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
USER SUPPLIED
13.96
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
25.0
.094
(GM/MILE)
36.15
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
7.89
6.75
YES
AMBIENT
NO OPERATING
LDGT2
25.0
.094
37.67
(GM/MIN)
6.65
LDGT
36.91
6.70
TEMP: 80.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
25.0
.000
.00
.00
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LDDV
25.0
.010
1.03
.19
20.6 AL
LDDT
25.0
.000
.00
.00
REGION: LOU
TITIIDE: 500.
HDDV
25.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
25.
16.
2.
0
005
50
52
ALL VEH
18.16
7.56
VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/H
VEH. TYPE:
VEH. SPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
10.0
.797
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
97.67
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
10.0
.094
(GM/MILE)
169.91
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.23
10.21
YES
AMBIENT
NO OPERATING
LDGT2
10.0
.094
197.21
(GM/MIN)
10.61
LDGT
183.56
10.41
TEHP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LDDV
10.0
.010
2.34
.18
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LDDT
10.0
.000
.00
.00
HDDV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
10.
*
74.
2.
0
005
07
79
ALL VEH
112.75
10.12
-------
o
1
*>.
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/HILE)
EXHAUST CO: 64.15 145.03 148.85
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 7.89 6.75 6.65
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES
LDGT
146.94
6.70
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/HILE)
EXHAUST CO: 55.76 101.57 125.48
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
100:>P 100
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/H PROGRAM: YES
LDGT
113.52
10.41
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
LDGT
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
TEMP: 80.0
MODE: 20.6
HPGV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
TEMP: 80.0
MODE: 20.6
HPGV
10.0
.000
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LDDV
10.0
.010
2.38
.1?
'F)
/ 27.3 /
LDDV
10.0
.010
2.34
.18
(F)
/ 27.3 -•'
LDDV
10.0
.010
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LDDT
10.0
HDDV
10.0
.000 .000
. 00
.00
.00
.JO
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LDDT
10.0
.000
.00
.00
20.6 AL
LDDT
10.0
.000
HDDV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
REGION: LOU
TITUDEr 500.
HDDV
10.0
.000
FT.
MC
10.0
.005
70.03
2.52
FT.
MC
10.0
.005
•46.04
2.79
FT.
MC
10.0
.005
ALL VEH
79.13
7.36
ALL VEH
«6.03
10.12
At.. VEH
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 30.08 80.79 91.50 86.14 .00 2.38 .00 .00 42.26 10.40
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/HIN)
IDLE CO: 7.89 6.75 6.65 6.70 .00 .19 .00 .00 2.52 7.56
-------
**** MAIN AND DOUGLAS 7HWT5,20 MPH
I/M PROGRAM SELECTED:
JMUAIRT-JUIY *t**
o
I
en
START YEAR (JANUARY 1): 1981
1 * PRE-1981 MYR STRINGENCY RATE: 10Z
MECHANIC TRAINING PROGRAM': NO
FIRST MODEL YEAR COVERED: 1968
LAST MODEL YEAR COVERED: 2020
VEHICLE TYPES COVERED: LDGV
1981 X LATER MYR TEST TYPE: IDLE
1981 X LATER MYR TEST CUTPOINTS: 3.0Z ICO
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATIVE
/ 300 PPM IHC
HC EMISSION FACTORS.
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE:
VEH. SPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
LDGV
20.0
.797
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
USER SUPPLIED
54.77
LDGT1
20.0
.094
(GM/MILE)
94.64
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.23
10.21
LDGT2
20.0
.094
100.38
(GH/MIN)
10.61
LDGT
97.51
10.41
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
20.0
.000
.00
.00
(F)
/ 27.3 t
LDDV
20.0
.010
1.28
.18
20.6 AL
LDDT
30.0
.000
.00
.00
REGION: LOU
TITUDE: 500.
HDDV
20.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
20.
•
36.
2.
0
005
06
79
ALL VEH
62.17
10.12
VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/H
VEH. TYPE:
YEH. SPEEDS:
VHT MIX:
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
20.0
.797
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
38.37
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
20.0
.094
(GM/MILE)
83.04
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
7.89
6.75
YES
AMBIENT
NO OPERATING
LDGT2
20.0
.094
78.67
(GM/MIN)
6.65
LDGT
80.86
6.70
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HPGV
20.0
.000
.00
.00
(F)
/ 2?. 3 /
LDDV
20.0
.010
1.30
.19
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LDBT
20.0
.000
.00
.00
HDDV
20.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
20.
•
34.
2.
0
005
23
52
ALL VEH
45. 97
7.5A
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: RO.O
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/H PROGRAM: YES
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LPGV LDGT1 LDGT2
i i _
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 48.50 106.55 103.89
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 7.89 6.75 6.65
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES
LPGT
105.22
6.70
AF "!:>''
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
0 VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0
1 VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
^ COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 39.27 71.92 84.55
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES
LDGT
78.23
10.41
AMBIENT
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .797 ' .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 22.25 58.86 63.62
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 7.89 6.75 6.65
LDGT
61.24
6.70
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
15.0
.000
.00
.00
,MP: 80.0
MODE: 20.6
HPGV
15.0
.000
.00
.00
TEMP: 80.0
MOPE: 20.6
HDGV
15.0
.000
.00
.00
'F)
/ 27.3 /
inpy
15.0
.010
1 .72
.1"
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LPDV
15.0
.010
1 .4?
.18
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LDDV
15.0
.010
1.72
.19
20.6 AL
I.PPT
15.0
.000
.00
. 00
REGION: LOU
I ITU HE: riOO.
HTiD1,1
15.0
.000
.00
.00
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LPPT
15.0
.000
.00
.00
HDDV
15.0
.000
.00
.00
REGION: LOU
20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LDPT
15.0
.000
.00
.00
Hnw
15.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
15.0
.005
45.51
2.52
FT.
MC
15.0
.005
29.86
2.79
FT.
MC
15.0
.005
27.47
2.52
ALL VEH
5P.68
7.56
ALL VEH
4i.11
10.12
ALL 1' EH
2C.40
7.56
-------
-------
APPENDIX D
MOBILE-3 CALCULATIONS
BROADWAY, 1ST, AND 2ND STREETS
D-l
-------
•fttt RPHAPUAY - 1ST-7NP : IJICHITA ****
I/M PPOGRAM SELECTED:
START YEAR (JANUARY 1 ): 1981
PRE-1981 MYR STRINGENCY RATE: 10Z
MECHANIC TRAINING PROGRAM1?: NO
FIRST MODEL YEAR COVERED: 1968
LAST MODEL YtA* COVERED: 199?
VEHICLE TYPES COVERED: LPGV
1781 X LATER MYR TEST TYPE: IDLE
1981 5 LATER MYR TEST CUTPOINTS: 3.02 ICO / 700 PPM IHC
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATIVE HC EMISSION FACTOR
CftL. YEAR: 1783 I/M PROGRAM: YES
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0
0 VMT MIX: .657 .131 .088
NO COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 68.67 121.17 132.90
AMBIENT
OPERATING
LDGT
125.89
TEMP: 24.0
MOPE: 20.6
HPG1-'
15.0
.040
230.96
R.
(F)
/ 27.3 /
LPPV
15.0
.016
1 .68
REGION: LOU
20. A ALTITI'DF: 500.
I.PPT HPPV
15.0 15.0
.004 .057
2.'? 17.69
FT.
MC
15.0
.007
47.95
ALL VEH
83.26
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.01 10.21 10.61
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .647 .124 .087
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 47.73 106.55 103.89
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN
IDLE CO: 7.71 6.75 6.65
10.37
AMBIENT
OPERATING
LDGT
105.46
)
6.71
8.73
TEMP: 24.0
MODE: 20.6
HDGV
15.0
.040
172.82
4.'7
.in
(F)
/ 2 -''.3 /
LDPV
15.0
.031
1 . 71
.17
.'4 .89
PEGION: LOU
20. A ALTITUDF. : 500.
LPTiT HOPV
15.0 15.0
.012 .051
2.00 15.54
.35 .86
2.7?
FT.
MC
15.0
.007
45.51
2.52
9.26
AL'. VEH
n .27
6.67
-------
CAL. YEAR:
VEH. TYPE
VEH. SPEEDS
VMT MIX
1983 I/M
'•
•
:
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
15.0
.657
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO
•
•
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO
CAL. YEAR:
VEH. TYPE
V VEH. SPEEDS
w VMT MIX
•
1987
•
•
•
:
38.23
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
15.0
.131
(GM/MILE)
71.92
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.01
I/M
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
15.0
.647
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO
:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO
CflL. YEAR:
VEH. TYPE
VEH. SPEEDS
VMT MIX
:
1983
•
•
•
:
21.67
10.21
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
15.0
.124
(GM/MILE)
58.86
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
7.71
I/M
ANTI-TAM.
LPGV
20.0
.657
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO
HOT STABILI
IDLE CO
:
ZED
:
53.75
6.75
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
20.0
.131
(GM/MILE)
94.64
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.01
10.21
YES
NO
LPGT2
15.0
.088
84.55
(GM/MIN
10.61
YES
NO
LDGT2
15.0
.087
63.62
(GM/MIN
6.65
YES
NO
LPGT2
20.0
.088
100.38
(GM/MIN
10.61
AMBTFNT
HPPRAT INR
LDGT
76. "9
)
10.37
AMBIENT
OPERATING
LI»GT
60.83
)
6.71
AMBIENT
OPERATING
LPGT
96.94
)
10.37
TEMP:
MfW:
80.0
20. A
HT1GV
15
223
8
TEMP:
MODE:
.0
, o .1 0
. 77
.73
80.0
20.6
HDGV
15
157
A
TEMP:
MOPE:
. 0
.040
.67
.97
24.0
20.6
HDGV
20
171
8
.0
.040
.53
.73
( M REGION: LIU
' 7 ' . 3 •' ?o r ••'•• A! T r T! IJ1F : ^OO .
l.nr'M ! [iriT HDPV
111.0 ' 1 . •" 1 ""• . 0
.016 .00/1 .057
'.68 2.1V 17.49
.18 .34 .89
(F! REGION: LOU
/ 2 \ 1. ! 2° - A Al. r T Tlipp : ^'OO.
LDDV LDPT HDDV
15.0 15.0 15.0
.031 .ni2 .051
' . 7 1 "> . 0 ft 1 r: , f , lj
.19 .35 .86
(F ) ' PFGION: LOU
/ 2 .'.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500.
I ppu LDPT HDDV
2'1 . 0 70.0 20,0
.016 .004 .057
i .27 \ .66 17.35
.18 .34 .89
FT.
MC
15.
.
?9.
2.
FT.
0
007
36
7?
MC
15.
„
27.
2.
FT.
MC
20.
.
36.
T
*~ •
0
007
47
52
0
007
06
79
ALL VEH
52.17
?.26
ALL VEH
74.27
6.67
ALL VEH
$4.41
7.26
-------
o
CAL. YEAR: 1787 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 2".o ''M REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MOPE: 70.A ' ? •'.:', ! 7.0.A ALr!T!jriF.: 500. FT.
VEH., TYPE: LPGV LDGT1 LPGT2 LDGT HPG1,' I PI".' LDPT Hnpy HC ALL VEH
VEH. bPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
20.0
.647
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
CAL. YEAR: 1983
VEH. TYPE:
VEH. SPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
37.7?
20.0
.124
(GM/MILE)
83.04
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
7.71
I/M
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
20.0
.657
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
CAL. YEAR: 1987
VEH. TYPE:
VEH. SPEEDS:
VMT MIX:
29.81
6.75
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
20.0
.131
(GM/MILE)
56.13
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
10.01
I/M
ANTI-TAM.
LDGV
20.0
.647
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO:
HOT STABILIZED
IDLE CO:
17.06
10.21
PROGRAM:
PROGRAM:
LDGT1
20.0
.124
(GM/MILE)
45.7?
IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
7.71
6.75
20.0
.087
78.67
(GM/MIN)
6.65
YES
20.0
81.24
6.71
AMBIENT
NO OPERATING
LDGT2
20.0
.088
64.03
(GM/MIN)
10.61
YES
LDGT
5?. 30
10,37
AMBIENT
NO OPERATING
LDGT2
20.0
.087
48.18
(GH/HIN)
6.65
LDGT
46.78
A. 71
12B
4
TEMP:
MOPE:
.010
.35
."7
30.0
70.6
HDGV
20
166
8
TEMP:
MOPE:
.0
.040
.1?
.73
80.0
20.6
70.0
.031
1.2?
.19
(F>
/ 77,3 /
LI fly
70.0
.016
1 .77
.18
(M
/ 7 7 . 3 /
HDGV LlifiV
20
117
4
.0
.010
.06
. °7
20.0
.07'
1 .2?
.1?
7^.0
20.0
.017 .051
1.51
.35
70.6 AL
I.DPT
70.0
.004
1 .66
.34
70.6 AL
IFipT
^o.o
.017
1 .51
.35
1 1 . 7-1
.86
REGION: LOU
TITIJHE: 500.
HDDV
20.0
.057
n. 3*
.9?
PEG TON; 1.0 !•!
T'TMDF: 500.
MDDV
20. n
.051
1 1 . 7-4
.R6
20.0
.007
34.23
2.52
FT.
MC
20.0
.007
TJ «;n
*-. £ • w V
2.7?
FT.
MC
20.0
.007
20.67
2.5?
4;. 64
6.67
ALL VtH
40. \6
«'.26
ALL "EH
26.43
6.67
-------
APPENDIX E
CALINE-3 CONCENTRATIONS FOR WORST
CASE WIND DIRECTION AT THE
SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
E-l
-------
J06»_ WICHITA, KANSAS_...CO..SIP_S_tUOY
LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
3525-73_. _._ KUN:_ MAIN AND DOUGLAS. 1983 JANUARY
M
1
N)
U a 1.5 M/S CLAS =
_BRG _a 70. OEG&E.ES Z0_. = _32
H» AIN* VARlAeLtS
LINK DtSCSIPTIuN LINK
A. "AlN N STiBND TnBiJ A
e>. «*AIiY S sTrt*oj[) Tntfu rt
C. DOUG rt wSfH^O TM&IJ C
0. OOUb E rt"5M) 3 TnWu 0
E. DOtlii E «-l if) 2 TnflU t
F. "ollG w ti:iO THKU F
6. 0 0 1 1 G E E ^ • < n T H K u G
H. "A IN M Ht LA Up 1-3 H
I . «• A I IM N U C L A ( 1 1 4 I
J. rtlHIG fc 11 LANt-!-3 J
K. nuuii t It LArjt IL >*
L. OuHG t Jt LAuE 23 L
M. OHIIG t 'ic LANE 2-J ^
N. COUG rt ut LAi^iE 3 i<
0. r>ulllj H • J t LA I'M E 2 U
P. Ijjllb rt lit LAuE 1 M
g. fijillj t J''t LA-iF 5 'J
K. "uUb « <'lt LN 3 E A K
XI
0.
0.
0.
0.
45.
0.
o.
-2.
b.
10.
10.
31.
-10.
-10.
-10.
d 3.
-49.
4 (D)
U. CM
CuUHOlNA
Y 1
0.
0.
9.
5.
-5.
-3.
I 4 .
7.
,J .
5.
-2.
-9.
-2.
-
TtS
X2
0.
0.
500.
45.
300.
3oO.
3uO.
-?.
b.
23.
31.
b3.
/S.
-«9.
--tO.
1'jO.
-t>2.
VS = .0 CM/S
VO = ,JD CM/S
(M) LINK LtNGTH
Y2
3o 0.
-300.
9.
5.
7.
-5.
-3.
31.
ob .
7 .
2.
5.
-2.
-b.
-9.
-2.
-2.
(M)
ioo.
300.
300.
<45.
255.
3uO.
300.
17.
32.
13.
22.
22.
£ £
39.
31.
10.
127.
13.
ATIM = 60.
AMB = 3.3
LINK HKG
(UEGJ
3bO.
IHO.
270.
90.
90.
270.
90.
3oO.
3oO.
9U .
90.
ttl.
90.
270.
270.
270.
90 .
270.
MINUTES
PPM
TYPt
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
Ab
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
VPH
bod .
bfa8.
554.
599.
599.
572.
old.
3909.
1 303.
i •" • * 7 «
1 4 I 0 .
2247.
2i4/.
12*1.
1201.
1281 .
2«;4 7 .
2247.
EF
IG/MI)
49.7
«9.7
62.2
113.0
113.0
79.9
113.0
100.0
100.0
1 u u . u
luo .a
luu.u
luo.u
I ••> 0 . 0
loo. u
100.0
1 IJ U . U
100. U
MIXH
M M
(M) (M)
.5 20. b
.5 20. b
.5 1 7.0
.5 16.7
.5 13.3
.5 ib.a
.5 12.7
.5 7.0
.5 0.0
.5 i.u
.5 I) . 0
.5 o.D
.5 o.u
.5 o.O
.5 u.O
.5 u.O
.5 O.U
. S 0.0
100. M
-------
I I
CALINE3: CALIFO&NIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER. 1979 VERSION ~" PAGE 50
J08:_ WICHITA, KANSAS CO^SIP STUDJL 3525-73 NUN? MAIN AND DOUGLAS 19B3 JANUARY
1. SHE VARlAdLtS
U = 1.5 M/S CLAS = 4 (D) V3 = .0 CM/S ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 100. M
BHG » 70. DEGREES Zo = 331. CM VD = .0 CM/S AMU = 3.3 PPM
------ - - - -- —- - - ___^_- .... ._ ... _. . .... . _ . _.—.__. ,. ^ .- . —
III. RECEPTOR LOCATIONS AND MuDEL RESULTS
.__ . . ._._t . ..__ t TOTAL "
« COOROINATES CM) * + A'^d
RECEPro« * X r L * IPPM)
1. SPECIAL CCT MONITOR * -37. -13. 3.1 * 13.4 ^ '" " "'
-------
CALINE3: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPIEMBFR, 1979 VEKSION
JOb: MChJTA, KANSAS CU SIP SlUuY 35£S-73_ KUn: I- AIN AI»D DUUGLAS 19S3 JANIJAkY
PAtE 51
w
I
11=
=
1 . b H / 5
70. UFi,
CLAb = 4 (Dl
7U = 3?1. CM
VS =
VD =
.0 CM/S
. 0 C'-'./b
ATIM = 60. KlNUTtS
A Kb = 3.3 f- Pi--
MIXh =
100. M
TV.
KELEPTuH
1. SPfcClAL CO MuNlToR
A
. e
CO/LT'vH
(PFMJ
.2
.d
1.0
.«
.2
.«
.b
.«
.? 1.2 ?.B
1.0
-------
~ CALINEjr CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
JOB: WICHITA, KANSAS__CO SIP STUDY 3525-7$ HUN: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JANUARY 1987
!,._..SITE VARIABLES
PAGE
(Tj
A
Ul
\J I
U a 1.5 M/S CLAb 2
BR6 = 70. uEGREES Zo 3
II. .L.INK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION L
A. *AlN IN bTttSNO TH L 31.
M. nuiii, t jut u*Nt ?o M 33.
N. t'U'lb rt j'Jt LAi^E 3 ij — It).
U. riJ''G *^ ^''fc L A iM E ^ t.J —10.
P. "UUG rt'jilt LA, -10.
u. ' oUG t ''lit LA^E 5 .j 23.
ft. ' UUG rt j'lt l_N 3 FA « -49.
4 (0)
321. CM
INK COORDINA
0.
0.
9.
5.
7.
-5.
-3.
14.
lu.
7.
2.
a.
5.
• s .
-9.
-2.
-2.
TES
<2
0.
0.
300.
<45.
300.
3oO.
500.
-2.
b.
23.
31.
53.
75.
-49.
-40.
-20.
1 jO.
-t>2.
VS = .0 CM/S
VO = .0 CM/S
(M) LIMK LENGTH
300.
-3oO.
9.
5.
7.
-5.
-3.
31.
06 .
7.
2.
5.
5.
-2.
-5.
-2l
-2.
(M)
3oO.
300.
300.
45.
255.
300.
300.
17.
52.
13.
22.
22.
£2 .
^9 .
31.
I".
127.
13.
ATIM = 60.
AMB = 2.8
LINK BUG
(OEG)
3t>0.
180.
270.
90.
90.
270.
90.
3oO.
3t>0.
90.
90.
81.
90 .
270.
270.
270.
90.
270.
MINUTES
PPM
TYPE
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
Ab
AG
AG
AG
AG
AG
VPH
711.
711.
589.
637.
t>37.
609.
t>58.
2920.
973.
1410.
1 4 2*3 •
Ib78.
1 f 7 9 »
957.
957.
'^7.
1»78.
Ib78.
EF
IG/MI)
3b.b
3o.5
4o.O
79.1
79.1
58.7
79.1
100.0
100.0
lOu .0
1 U 0 . 0
100.0
1 »' U . 0
1 0 0 . 0
1 00 . 0
I 00 .0
100.0
1 o u . o
H
(M)
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
Is
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
. b
MIXH = 100. M
H
IM)
20.6
20.o
17.0
16.7 "
13.3
10.4
12.7
17.0
10. 0
13.o
10. 0
10. 0
1 U . 0
10. 0
10.0
1 0 .u
10.0
1 0 .<)
-------
CALTNE1: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION PAGf 50
joe; WICHIIA, RANSA3 C.OsiP_stUDY 352.5.-?.3. RUN: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JANUARY j^ar
u » 1.5 M/S CLAS = a (D) vs = .0 CM/S ATIM = t>o. MINUTES MIXH = 100. M
W 8»S *.._^70. OE(j"tE3 ..... ._. Z.O =^331. CM . ._ _ VO = . .0 CM/S ._ AMB =._.£.8 PPM
CTl
IH. RECEPTUR LOCATIONS AND MODEL RESULTS
RECEPTuR
t. SPECIAL CO MuNlTuP
COURDINATE5 (M)
* Y i
-jr.
—
-U. ^.1
*
*
Ik
*
TOfAL
+ AMB
(.PPM)
10.2
-------
I I
w
1
" "" CAL1NE3: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
: HICHITA, KANSAS CO—SIP-iTUQt 3525-73 NUN: _MAIN AND DOUGLAS JANUARY 1987
U SITE VARIAdLtS
U = 1.5 M/3
__BR6 ~_._70.. uEGREE^
CLAS = a (D)
ZO..= _321...CM
VS =
VO =
.0 CM/3
.0 CM/5
ATIM = 60. MINUTES
AMB = I. 8 HPM
MIXH =
100. M
IV. MODEL RESULTS (RECEPTOR-LINK MATRIX)
I .
rfECEPTuR
SPECIAL CO MONITOR
. - ...
A
. 1
t)
.1
c
.1
u
.3
E
.2
F
.8
G
.5
CO/LI.
(PPM
H I
.3 .1
*K
J
.3
K
.4
L
.3
M
.2
N
.9
0
1.5
P
.5
_
U
,f~~
R
.0 •-
-------
CALIN61: CALTFOHNIA LINE bOU&CE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
_.-jna!_WICMLT.A*. KANSAS—CO..SIP. STUUY_._. -SSiS^! KUN:_ MAIN AND DOUGLAS JULY 19B3 . __
VARlA4Lt3
PTGE 19
M
I
00
II 3 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4
BH6 = 70. UELiRtES. . ZlL = 331
IL. LINK. V.APlAbLhS_
LTNK DtSCPfPTTON LINK
....... . . -
A. MAIN n STHHND THRU A
8. MAIN s STHRNO THRU rt
C. OuUG •» JUSTIN" TMPU C
I). OOIIG t «RND 3 TH»U 1)
E. OOM14 t **NO 3 TnHU t
F. noilG rt FR^n THOU F
6. OOUG E tUNO THRU G
H. MAIN M IJIIl- AhFl-3 rl
I. MATN N QMK AI^F a i
J. OOIIG r. u'lc .••••.•Fej-l J
K. Ou'lli t 'jilt A.;F IL *
t . O(|ll(4 f (JUt ANF ?H I
'M. I^UI'b t ijHr Ai^F r'ri M
N. ni)M(, -M IjMt A.'viF 3 iM
I). OUIIG « 'Jilt AN£ 3 U
P. 0(111 U * ijllh *uF f P
U. OlillG h Ul't ANF S
-------
I I
ONE SOURCE OISPFKSION MOOEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VEHSIOU ~ ~ PAGE 5u
JOBJ WICHIT*. MNSA3_CQ SIP_-STUDY_ 35£5-73 _. . . . RUN: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JULY 1983 . . _
VARlAbL£3_ . .. . . .. _. . . _.
M
1 II a 1.0 M/3 CLAS = 4 fD) V3 = .0 CM/S ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 100. M
. CM VD = »0 Cw/S AM8 = 1.5
ITI. RECEPTOR LUCATIONS AND MontL "ESULTS
~" - - --- t - -- * TOTAL
* COuPUINAfFS (M) * * AMij
RFCFPTlJR • X V L • (PPM)
.__._._._-_.........-....•___..__.__.___.-_...-._....._-.»--_._...
1. S»ECl»L cn MriNiTuO • -37. -1?. 3.1 * 13.9
-------
CA1IN6T: C*LtFOKUr* ClNt SOURCE" DISPERSION MODEL - SPPTEMBEfc, 1979 VERSIOM PTTCr 51
_. JOB: wiCMi TA. KANSAS CO...S.IP...3T.UM. 3525-75 KUNI...MMN AND DOUGLAS ..jutr 1983
II x 1.0 M/S CLAS = 4 fO) VS = .0 CM/S ATIM = bO. MINUTES MIXH = 100. M
s 70.. .DEHPEES Zo_.s_3.21 ^_CM yp = .0 CM/S AMB s_ 1.5.PPM
o "~ •" "
TV. MODEL WFSDLTS (RtCEPTOR-LIN* MATRIX)
* ~ - ~ - CO/LINK" ~ '
* (PPM)
*ABCUEFGH IJKLMNOPQ
1. SPECIAL CO MONITOR * .1 .1 .1 .« .3 .8 .5 .6 .3 .6 .8 .6 .3 1.7 2.9 .9 1.4
-------
I I
- - - - CALTNE1: CALTFOrtMiA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979
_jnu: .WICHTT».._K*NS»S.__..CO Sip, 5THUY ... ._ 3525-73 HUN: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JULY 1987
PAGE
I, SITE VARIABLE
II a 1.0 M/S
G 3 ,70, DEGREES,
LINK VARlAiLtS
CLAS = 4
Zo =. 331 ,
fn)
vs =
VD =
.0 CM/3
.0 CM/3
ATIM = bO. MINUTES
AMB = 1.3 PPM
MIXH =
100. M
LTNK DESCRIPTION
f A. MA!M M STriRND THRU A
1 8. "ATN S STM«ND THPu r»
["" C. OllUli « rtSIH.-jH THRU C
^ 0. Di)UG E rtRND ^ THRU 0
E. DUUS t *BND 3 TH"U E
F. DOUG * t^NO THRU F
G. DljUG E fef^D THOll G
H. MATN N uut- ANFI-J H
i. MAT* u uuf. A P, P i i
.1. I>H>IG t- uut .Ai\jF,e-4 .1
K. DDUG t- ijnt- »I»F IL ~
1 . riuUG t IJUK Ai\iF ?* i
M. nfjMi"; f
7.
-5.
1 4 •
i 4
7l
?
s.
-s!
-9.
— p -
-? .
0.
0.
-300.
30 0
-mo!
_p
^
ct ^ I
^ |
b?I
71?.
-yq.
-40.
1 ^ol
(M)
Y3
mo
-3uol
9.
5.
7.
-5.
_ ^
31 .
07l
si
-^'.
-9.
• p ^
-?.
LINK LENGTH
mo.
300.
500.
45.
3i)0l
3uO.
17.
•53.
13.
<^
18 3
33.9
aol<4
39.4
U0.4
10u.ll
lOu.O
10 u . 0
1»U. V
100.0
1 IIK.O
I Go .u
100.0
1 o o . o
1 '/ u . u
lOu.O
H
(M)
.5
Is
.5
.5
Is
.S
.s
# *)
.5
, "^
.-5
."5
.S
. ^
.S
rt
(M)
30. b
30.6
1 7.0
lb.7
13.3
lb.4
13.7
1 / . U
1 0 . U
13.0
1 u.u
10.0
0.0
o.u
o.u
u.O
U . 'J
0.0
-------
w
1
CALINE3: CALIFDMNU Ll'Nt SOURCE OlSPEHSION MODEL"- SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
_-..JOa:._WIChITA... KANSAS.. CO. SIP..STUDt__3525-73 .. HU*: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JULY 1907
!.._ SHE VARlAbLES..
II r 1 . u M / S
= ___ 70.
CLAS = a (o)
Z«._=_32l^-CM
IT[. KFCFPTOR LfiCATIONS »NO MuDEL PtSULTS
COUPUTNAIRS (M)
« V i
i. s«»ecr»L en
-17.
-13.
VS = .0 CM/S
VO = .0 CM/S
ATIM = 60. MINUTES
AMB = l.i
MIXH = 100. M
» fOlAL
1.1 * 10.1
-------
I I
M
I-1
UJ
CALINE3: CALIFOhNlA LlNt SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
JOB: WICHITA. KANSAS co SIP_.SIUUY ..... 3525-73 ............. _ _______ RUN: MAIN AND DOUGLAS JULY 1937
!._ SITE VARiABLtS
II s l.U M/S
BRS ..=.. 70.. QEUREE3
CLAS =
4 (0)
. CM__
VS =
.. VD =
.0
.0 CM/5
ATIM = 60. MTNUTES
AM8 = 1.2 PPM
PAGE" 51
MlXM = 100. M
TV. MOOEL HE3MLT3 (RECePTON-LTNK MATRIX)
1 .
RFCFPTOR
3P6CTAL CO MONITOR
A H C 0
.1.1.1 .2
F
.2
F
.5
(
r, M
.1 .«
:U/LTI
(PpMJ
I
.2
iK
J K L M
.4 .b .a .3
f<
1.3
o
2.2
P Q
.7 1.1
•*
.0
-------
-------
APPENDIX F
CALINE-3 CONCENTRATIONS FOR
WORST CASE WIND DIRECTION
AT THE ALTERNATE MONITOR
F-l
-------
CALINf?: CALIFORNIA LINt SOURCE L>1 SPF.kS 1 UK MODEL - SEPTtMHKk, 1979 VERSION
JOB: wlCHllA, KANSAS CO SIP STUDY 35>aS-73 KUi<: HnOAUnAr bTwig 1ST AM.> r=!vD JAUUAKY
1. bilE
U = 1 .b M/S
11. Li'vK
CLAb =
?U =
1ST WbT EMM) TfiPj C
IsT EbT t'tnil"/ TM-MJ 0
?NO "AST n^ivO TMiVu E
?ivH EaT r.H.gi) T-tf-'u K
HixflrtAY b LEFT ut)t Is
PKL'II A f b I fniti-i'L 't
Bhrtr^AT >4 (MH'llw11^ 1
Phn^A T 'si LF f T ij((F J
1 a T w a i Q U t. IS
?NH EbT OuE L
XI Yl Xe! Yd
- 3 . -KG. - 3 . 1 u C .
3. -lt;ll. 3. IOC.
P. -b3. 100. -b3.
0. -o3. 100. -o3.
-100. t>3. 0. b3.
0. b3. loO. b3.
~S. -bb. -?. -cO.
-s. *jb. ~^. •3^.
S. 5^. b. 36.
p. SS. £*. cO.
-10. -'.•<. -e«. -o3.
10. bO. n2. bO.
LINK LEM
?HU
e? 0 U
100
1 Of
1 00
100
j5^>
1 7
1 /
3*3
7 f
bi!
, TH LIMK ^
I0c.bj
3t>u
3 on
9li
9 U
90
90
3oO
3^> ii
1 00
1 on
c?7 i>
9u
)Pb 1YPK VPH Ef
to/1
A'., 490. Hi
AI-, 39 U. H-,
A b 1017. 0 3
A b 1^93. 83
Ab Obh. b»4
AG 7bc?. b«
Ab 1780. 100
A fi y rt 7 . 1 u li
AL, « (? . 1 0 u
Ab 3«?d 7 . 1 On
Ab 37l>0. lOW
>
'}) (^
3
3
3 j
3
1
1
0
II
u
V
0
^ iv
') I'-)
"> lc-,7
S Id. 7
b 10. 1
S lb.1
5 lo.l
b lt>.l
b 10.0
b 1 u . u
b 1 u. u
b 1 O.u
S Ib. 1
b lb.1
p AGE io
M I X H =
loo.
-------
I I
1
U)
: CALJFOkNlA LINt SUuRCE DISHF.kSlOU MOUEL - StPTfcMBEkr 1979 vFHSION
JOB: WlChlTAt KANSAS CO SIP STUDY 3525-73 ._ kUn: bkOAUMY BTwN 1ST ALL) 2NP JANUARY 1<>83
1. SITE VARiAbLtS
U = l.b M/b
BKG = 210. DEb^tEb
CLAa = 1 (0)
ZO = 3?1. CM
Vi> =
VD =
111. ktLhHluk LULAljlM»b
1. P»uPuSEf) CHO
Mul'fcL KLSULlb
CUuKUl IMAI tb
\t. 0.
3.1
.0 C'-i/b
.0 CM/b
ATIM r b". MlsllTF.S
AMH s 3.3
* 1 111 A(
7.9
PAGE IT"
MJxH = JOO.
-------
" CALINE3:C*LJ.FOKNt» LINE SOURCE DISPEkSlON MODEL - SEPTEMBEK, 1979 VE«SIUN P*&E~T2
JOB: MCnlTA, KAivSAS CO SIP STUDY 35<;5-73 HUU: HNOAOMAY bTwN 1ST AND ^ivlf) JAMUASY 19b3
I. SHE VAklAoLtS ..
U= l.bw/b CLAb= >4 (0) vb= ,(
-------
I I
JOB: MCMITA,
CAL1NE3: CALIFORNIA LINE SHUKCE D1SHEKS10N MOUEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION
CO SIP STUDY 3525-73 hUi,: BROADWAY bT-vN IbT AKO 2.MO JANUARY 1487
PAGE 10
1. SITE
it = i .5 M/S
BKG = 810.
CLAb = H
Zo = 3?1.
(0)
vs =
. 0 CM/b
. 0 O /b
AT]M= bO. MINUTES
A Mb = 8.6 H^M
r 1 X H r
1
l/l
JJ. LlN*> VAW
L I u K D t S 1 " I p
A. RROAO«AY bHign
b. B*OAn»jAY :jSi\n
C . 1ST ». b T t « iv i.i
U. IbT EbT t^n
E. ? N n w s T o " N n
f. ?NO EST *HM>
G. BKOwAY b LEFT
M. KSO*A Y b 1 HkM
1 . HbOft A Y IM 1 HH U
J. HKOnA Y N Lf F T
K. 1ST *ST QUE
t. ?NO E6T OOE
lA3Ltb
Tlu'^J LI'JK
XI
Thwu A -3.
Tr.ku n 3.
1^(J C 0.
T r i. U ij 0 .
TH»U E -100.
TM«U F 0.
u'Jt b -2.
unt ii -s.
v"fc I 5.
U U F J 2 .
* -10.
L 10.
COOKDIMA
VI
- 1 0 0 .
-10(1.
-b3.
b 3
b3.
« t,s .
CjS
t,sl
-b3.
bO.
TES (M)
X2
-3.
3.
1 oO.
IOC.
o.
1 00.
-2.
-**.
f e
— b 6
b2.
Lli^K Lt^bTh LH'K, HKG TYPfc Vfh tf H t,
Y2 ("J (PEG) IG/MJ) (M) (M)
lOO. 2oO. 3bO. Of, alb. bl.3 .5 Id. 7
lo'). ^(.'0. 3o'i. A^ ^Ib. bl,3 .^ 1c.7
-c3. 100. "SO. At lot*,?. M.3 ,S li-.l
-o3. luO. 40. «b 1375>. bl.3 ,S Jt, .1
o3. 100. 9(1. «6 ^13. «7.b ,S ],, .]
bS. 100. VO. Al, ttll. 07. b .5 H..1
-20. 3b. 3bO. AU l2oti- 100. o .5 10. o
-3H. 17. 3bO. AG 711. 100.0 ,S H.. . (.
3P. 17. 100. AU SO?. 100.0 .5 U.O
20. 3"3. 1«0. AG 1273. 100.0 .5 U' . U
-o3. 78. 270. AG 2310. 100.0 ,S JD.1
bO. 52. 90. AG 2bb5. 100.0 .3 lb.1
-------
1
CTi
tl: CALlfUhNl* LINE.
JOB: MCHI1A. KAivSAS CO SIP STUDY 3535-73
1 . & 1 1 E V A I-' 1 A •) L t
n s i .b M/.-,
PkG = 3 K1. L
III.
CLAb = 4 fl>)
S Ai\'b MuOtL
VS a
DISHE«SIOlv MCIUEL - SEPTEfcBfck, 1979
KUU: BROADnAY bT«N 1ST AM) 2ND JANUARY 1VB7
11
.0 CM/S
.0 C-'/b
A T I M = b 0 . M 1 r< in E S
A*H = 2.8 Pf'V
"I XH = 10U. I"
1. PWuPUStO CbO
n.
J.l
-------
I I
CAL1NE3: CALlFOkNIA LINt bduRCE OlSPEkSION MOI'FL - bEPTt»htk, 1479 VERSION >Ai,fc 12
JOB: MCHIIA, KAr.sAS cn SIP STUDY 3S?s-73 HUN: BROADWAY BTWN 1ST AM> SNO jANUAkr I«JB? .. .
II = l.b M/b CLAb = i
I
* " C0,^1-IK|K
kEcFHTuR *AHCUEFPHIJKL
1. P^UPOSF'I CH|I Mi.NlTil" » .« .fr .0 .1 .0 .(> 1.0 .? .0 .0 1.1 .0
-------
00
CALlNt.3: LALlFOnKjA LINE SOoPCE DISI-ERolOl, MOJEL - bEPTEMBEK, 1979 v
: ftlCnllA, Kft,,bcS CO SjP SlUuY 352b-73 h OK : BnOADnAY hT,,'J 15T AlvO gl-jfi JULY
19R?
1 . bl IE
.k j
(1= 1 .0 M/b
BUG = 210. UFG»tEb
11. LJN* VcKJ AhLt S
Cl «b = t fill
7u = 321. O,
vs =
vi) =
.OO>/b
. U C M / i
AT1N<= bO. MlUurtb
AMb= l.
LINK UhM,t< 1 PI I ui'J
A. PKOADrtAI Srtlill) THUU A
b, F"«0«OM>Y K^'vD TI->VL< B
C. IbT w b T t b M I IhMu L
0. IbT EbT tBuD Tn^u u
E. 2ND »«bT *9uD THPu E
F. 2lvO EbT »,eNt) IhkU F
6. BhtOftAY i> LEFT uut G
H. HKft^AY b lM«UuUt 11
1. BKDftAY (^ THkll^i.lt 1
J. BWOrtAY .» LFFT CouE J
K. IbTWSTQuF K
tl 2uO EbT OoE L
Lli»
XI
-3.
3.
0.
0.
-100.
0.
-2.
-5.
5 B
2.
-10.
10.
i\ CulifcOl
Yl
-100.
-1 Ul>.
-o3.
"b3l
b3.
-bb!
bb.
bb.
bO .
NMtS (-
-3.
3.
100.
100.
0.
100.
— 2 .
- 5 .
b.
2.
-d6.
» oc.
) LluK LENbTh Lll.K bRG IYPE VPh EF H r.
Y2 (MJ (UtGJ CG/M1) (M) (M)
100. 200. 3i,0. Ab 3SO. be! . e .b 1 «: . 7
loO. 200. 3ot. AG 390. bi.f .b lc.7
-b3. lyO. 90. Ab 1017. be1. 2 .b lb.1
-o3. 100. 90. AG 1293. S2.2 .5 lb.1
b3. 100. 90. AG bb6. «U.2 .b lb.1
b3. 100. 90. AG 7oer. «0.2 .5 lb.1
-20. 3b. 3bO. AG 17eb. 10U.O ,S 10.0
-ift. 17. 3oo. AG 9n7. lou.o .5 lo.o
30. 17. loO. AG 622. 10U.O .S 10. o
20. 35. 1«0. AG 17t>b. 10U.O .5 10.0
-63. 78. 270. AG 32u7. 10U.O .5 16.1
bO. S2. 90. AG 37oO. 100.0 .5 Jb.l
PAGf 10
(-. J X H =
1 UU. M
-------
CAL1NE3: CALIFORNIA LINE SOORCE DISPERSION MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 197S VERSION
t WICHITA, KANSAS CO SIP STUDY 3525-73 KUN: BHUADfcAY BThN 1ST AND aNO JOLT 1
-------
LD
<
a.
-e _i
jj ID
> -j
a
£
O
J)
C
U-
_J
» —
O:
2 a.
j in
«
in
in
o
x>
o
r
o
33
O
f\j
U II
Q-
X
F-10
-------
I I
CAL1NE3: CALIFORNIA LlM SOURCE DlSPEKSlUN MOUEL - SEPTEMbEH, 1979 VEKSION
JOB: WICHITA, KAUSAS co SIP STIH>Y 3S25-73 K'IM: HKOADHAY BT«N IST AND 2ND JULY 19R7
I. blTE
(I = 1.0 M'b
11. Ll.vK VAP 1 AbL Li
CLAb =
VD =
CM/b
C i-; / S
ATIM =
AIM* =
60.
HI (gUTtS
HPK
PAGE
Ml XH =
100. M
LIlvK r>h. SCR) M ] u'»
A. HhOA[)i»»Y bluO Ihki)
b . R«n»|i».AY uHM") Tt'Uy
L . 1 b T * b T t M 'v 1.' T >• T u
D . 1ST F S T H P i, 0 T « w u
t. 2NH WbT rvHiMli TuKu
F. 2M> fST rtlirvO Tn^u
G. HHOwAT b LEFT UUt
H. HWO«*Y b IHkUuUt
I . PKOiK A1 N 1 Hrtli(>Ht
J. HWD»«AY lv LtFT (JUF_
K. 1ST WbT IJDF.
L. 2ND tST OuE
A
11
^
I)
t
F
G
h
1
J
L
LIK
-i.
f'l
-lool
0.
-•3'.
f *
-JO.
10.
K CUdkO
-loO.
- 1 u 0 .
~o ^
-b^I
63l
— bb
t,c,
bsl
-b3 .
oO.
I IM A T t S ( M )
X2
-3.
3.
1 (-0.
Inf..
0.
100.
-si
2l
o2.
4
100.
lot).
-D 3.
-b?.
b3.
o3.
— 3tt
3H.
-o3.
oO.
L 1 ijK LtNGIh
(MJ
2oo.
Pool
1 uO .
100.
100.
loo.
35.
17.
17.
7«I
IDfcbJ
3bO.
^h 0 .
90.
90 I
90.
3bO.
3bO.
IbO.
160.
270.
90.
T YPt
Ab
Ab
Ab
AT,
Ab
Ab
Ab
Ab
Ab
AG
Ab
VPH
^ \ ^
t$ ] *•)
1 0 P c?
137SI
913.
Mil.
1288.
71 1.
12731
2310.
2bb5.
F F
iM.i
3^.3
3^.3
3'l.3
2b .4
2 o .**
! ilO.'l
100.0
100. (i
1 UO.V
100. U
100. U
h H
(M) (M)
.5 le:.7
. S 1 c* . 7
.5" lb.1
> Ih. 1
.5 lb.1
.S lb.1
.5 10.0
. *> 10.0
. S 10.0
.5 10.0
.^ lb.1
.S lb.1
-------
CAL1NE3: CAL1FOHNIA LINt SOU»CE OISPEKSIOI" MOUEL - StPTtMBEK, 147<* VEKS10N
: WICHITA, KANSAS CO SIP STUDY 358b-73 RUN: BROAOnAY BTwn IbT AND 2"JO JULY 19H7
PAGt"I 1
i. bin
II = 1.0 M/S
IIJ)
vS =
vn =
.0
.0
ATI" = 60. M'v'MES
AMH = \.g (-pi..
MJXHr 100. M
K)
III. KELFHTiiS LuCATlOivS AND MuDhL RtSULTS
t OuRi) II,AT fcb
» Y
* TfiTAL
* * ft •••< i)
« (PPM)
0.
3.1
-------
I I
CAL1NE3: CALIFORNIA LlNE SOURCE UISHEkSIOlM MODEL - SEPTEMBER, 1979 VERSION "PAGE 12
: WICHITA, KANSAS CO SIP STUDY 3525-73 KLIN: S«OA')»>AY BT«N IST AND ?ND JULY l<»«7
I. SUP vtP J AOLES
(I r l.{) M/S CLAS r ^ (n) VS = .0 CM/S ATl^ = 60. MINUTES HIXH = 100. M
Bk(» = e i ii. ^if. to^Lta . . Zn = i?l. C"-i v U = . 0 Ci--/a A-iti = 1. "UNlTu" « .3 .1 .(i .0 .0 .0 J.S .1 .0 .0 1.5 .0
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read 1 nitrite lions on the reverse before completing)
. REPORT NO.
EPA-907/9-84-007
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Study for
Wichita, Kansas
5. REPORT DATE
September 1984
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
AUTHOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02=3512
2. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII
Air Branch
324 East llth Street
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
6. ABSTRACT
In order to comply with the NAAQS for CO in Wichita, Kansas, a special study was
necessary to demonstrate that a special purpose monitor (SPM) located on Douglas
Street would give results less than the NAAQS by 1987. The SPM site is located
near the urban core in an area characterized by high nighttime traffic volumes and
congested traffic flow. Exceedances of the 8-hour NAAQS were measured in 1983 and
early 1984. A dispersion modeling analysis was performed using the CALINE-3 Model
for dispersion, the MOBILE-3 Model for vehicle emissions, and local or national
traffic and ambient conditions. Background concentrations were derived from other
monitors in the area. Results of modeling the SPM site for baseline (1983) emis-
sions indicate agreement within about 10 percent of maximum measured CO concen-
trations. For 1987 the SPM is projected to be in compliance. An alternate CO
receptor location was proposed on Broadway in order to avoid the downtown cruising
phenomena and to offer a more representative site for evaluating the attainment/
nonattainment status of Wichita. Results indicate CO concentrations less than the
NAAQS in 1983 and about half of the NAAQS in 1987. Transportation control measures
are recommended to decrease the time needed to achieve compliance at the SPM site.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Mathematical Model
Carbon Monoxide
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport/
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
-------
------- |