REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
GREATER METROPOLITAN CLEVELAND INTRASTATE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
February, 1969
-------
REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
GREATER METROPOLITAN CLEVElAND. INTRASTATE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
-------
CONTENT~
PREFACE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . .0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4
EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING FACTORS............ 12
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS.................'. 29
THE PROPOSED REGION.......................... 39
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL.................. 39
-------
3
PREFACE
The Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, is .
directed by the Air Quality Act of 1967 to designate "air quality
control regions" to provide a basis for the establishment of air
quality standards and the implementation of air quality control
programs. In addition to listing the major factors to be considered
in the development of region boundaries, the Act stipulates that the
designation of a region shall be preceded by consultation with
appropriate State and local authorities.
The National Air Pollution Control Administration, DREW, has
. conducted a study of the greater Cleveland area, the results of which
are presented in this report. The Region* boundaries proposed in this
report reflect consideration of a]l available and pertinent data; however,
the boundaries remain subject to revision suggested by consultation with
State and local authorities. Formal designation will be withheld pending
the outcome of the meeting. This report is intended to serve as the
starting point for the consultation.
The Administration is appreciative of assistance received either
directly during the course of this study or indirectly during previous /
studies from the official air pollution agencies of the affected states
and counties, the Seven County Transportation Land Use Commission, the
Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, and the Stark County Regional
Planning Commission.
*For the purposes of this report, the word region, when capitalized, will
refer to the Greater Cleveland Intrastate Air Quality Control Region. When
not capitalized, unless otherwise noted, it will refer to air quality
control regions in general.
-------
4
INTRODUCTION
"For the purpose of establishing ambient air
quality standards pursuant to section 108, and for
administrative and other purposes, the Secretary,
after consultation with appropriate State and local
authorities, shall, to the extent feasible, within
18 months after the date of enactment of the Air
Quality Act of 1967 designate air quality control
regions based on jurisdictional boundaries, urban-
industrial concentrations, and other factors including
atmospheric areas necessary to provide adequate
implementation of air quality standards. The
Secretary may from time to time thereafter, as he
determines necessary to protect the public health
and welfare and after consultation with appropriate
State and local authorities, revise the designation
of such regions and designate additional air quality
control regions. The Secretary shall immediately
notify the Governor or Governors of the affected
State or States of such designation."
Section 107(a), Air Quality Act of 1967
Air pollution, because of its direct relationship to people and
their activities, is an urban problem. Urban sprawls often cover
thousands of square miles; they quite often include parts of more than
one state and almost always are made up of several counties and an even
greater number of cities. Air pollution, therefore, also becomes a
regional problem, and the collaboration of several governmental juris-
dictions is prerequisite to the solution of the problem in any given area.
Air quality control regions called for in the above-quoted section of the
Air Quality Act of 1967 are meant to define the geographical extent of
air pollution problems in different urban areas and the combination of
jurisdictions that must contribute to the solution in each.
The regional approach set up by the Air Quality Act is illustrated in
-------
5
Figure 1. The approach involves a series of steps to b~ taken by Federal,
. State, and local governments, beginning with the designation of regions,
the publication of air quality criteria, and the publication of informa-
tion on available control techniques by the Federal Government. Following
the completion of these three steps, the Governors of the States affected
by a region must file with the Secretary within 90 days a letter of intent,
indicating that the States will adopt within 180 days ambient air quality
standards for the pollutants covered by .the published criteria and control
technology documents and adopt within an additional 180 days plans for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of those standards in the
designated air quality control regions.
The new Federal legislation provides for a regional attack on air
pollution and, at the same time, allows latitude in the form which regional
efforts may take. While the Secretary reserves approval authority, the
States involved in a designated region assume the responsibility for
developing standards and an implementation plan which includes administrative
procedures for abatement and control.
The basic objectives in the desi.gnation of an air quality control region
is that it be self-contained, i.e. that the transfer of air pollution out of
or into a region is minimized. This objective recognizes the fact that an
air quality control region cannot be delineated in a way to make it complete-
ly independent with respect to' the air pollution problem. Because air
pollutants can be carried long distances, the air over a region can be
subjected occasionally or even frequently to trace amounts of pollution
from other cities and individual sources located outside its boundaries.
-------
HEW designates
air quality
control regions.
HEW develops and
publishes air
quality criteria
based on scientific
evidence of air
pollution effects.
HEW prepares
and publishes
information on
available control
techniques.
States hold
hearings and
set air quality
standards in the
air quality
control regions.
'"
States establish plans for implementation,
considering factors such as:
. Existing pollutant levels in the region
. Number, location, and types of sources
. Meteorology
. Control technology
. Air pollution growth trends
Implementation plans would set forth
abatement procedures, outlining factors
such as:
. Emission standards for the categories of
sources in the region.
HEW
reviews
State
standards.
. How enforcement will be employed to
insure uniform and coordinated control
action involving State, local, and regional
authorities.
. Abatement schedules for the sources to
insure that air quality standards will be
achieved within a reasonable time.
HEW reviews
State implementation plans.
States act to control air
pOllution in accordance with
air quality standards and plans
for implementation.
Figure 1. Flow diagram for State .action to control air pollution on a regional basis.
-------
7
Under specific and episodic conditions such contributions. can even reach
significant quantities. The problem of a boundary designation is further
compounded
in that urban areas generally do not end abrupLly but are
surrounded by activities that can contribute to the pollution of the
urban area as well as be the recipients of its generated pollution.
Consideration of all these possibilities would result in regions sub-
stantially larger than is practical or even necessary to get to the brunt
of the problem. The primary question, therefore, becomes one of relative
magnitude and frequency.
The boundaries of regions, however, should encompass areas that
contain sources that add significantly to the pollution load of the air
as well as the areas that are significantly and continuously affected by
it. For this purpose, the delineation of regional boundaries is based on
evaluation of annual and seasonal air pollutant emissions and resultant
ambient concentrations rather than those based on short-term and specific
conditions.
The selection of regional boundaries should not be based solely on
today's conditions and needs but, perhaps more importantly, should give
consideration to future development and growth of the area. For this
purpose, extensive consideration should be given to prescribed metropolitan
plans as well as the forecasted growth. Such considerations should result
in the designation of regions that will contain the sources and receptors
of regional air pollution for a number of years to come. This is not to
say that the regional boundaries should remain stationary and unchanged
Periodic review of boundaries is desirable, and changes in the boundary
-------
8
should be considered if conditions warrant.
The delineation of region boundaries solely on the basis of source
locations and distributional patterns of ambient air pollution would
most likely result in regions that do not follow any existing governmental
boundaries, are difficult to define, and, more importantly, extremely
difficult if not impossible to administrate. It is for this purpose that
existing jurisdictional entities are reviewed and wherein practical the
boundary lines of a region should include that combination of whole
jurisdictions that encompasses the problem area. There can be exceptions
to that philosophy, however. The presence of overly large jurisdictions,
marked topographical features (mountains), or notable differences in
development within a given jurisdiction may, in some cases, make it
desirable to include only portions of some jurisdictions.
A region, then, will represent a balance between the various objectives
discussed so far to the extent that any two of them lead to different
conclusions. The strength of some factors over others may lead to region
boundaries which exclude some sources of pollution that might affect the
air quality or part or all of the nearby region under certain conditions.
Even though the impact of such sources would probably be minimal, the
implementation plan required under the Air Quality Act for the region should
provide a mechanism for the control of point sources that are located just
beyond the region boundary. Such a provision would be consistent with the
basic objective of providing desirable air quality within an area being
designated as an air quality control region. .
-------
9
Figure 2 summarizes the procedure used by the National Air Pollution
Control Administration for .designating air quality control regions.
A preliminary delineation of the region is developed by bringing.
together two essentially separate studies--the "Evaluation of Engineering
Factors" and the "Evaluation of Urban Factors."
The study of "Engineering Factors" indicates the location of pollution
sources and the geographic extent of serious pollutant concentrations in
the ambient air. Pollution sources are located by an inventory of emissions
from automobiles, industrial activities, space heating, waste disposal,
and other pollution generators. Pollution concentrations in the ambient
air are estimated from air quality sampling data and from a theoretical
diffusion model. When it exists, air quality sampling data is more
reliable than the theoretical diffusion model results since the data is
directly recorded by pollution measuring instruments. Unfortunately, in
many cases extensive air quality sampling data is unavailable in the rural
areas surrounding an urban complex.
The study of "Urban Factors" encompasses all non-engineering consid-
erations. It reviews existing governmental jurisdictions, current air
pollution control programs, present concentrations of population and
industry, and expected patterns of urban growth. Other non-engineering
factors are discussed when they are relevant. As a whole, the study of
urban factors indicates how large an air quality control region must be
in order to encompass expected growth of pollution sources in the future.
It also considers which group of governmental jurisdictions will most
effectively administer a strong regional air quality control program.
-------
,.....
o
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
. EMISSIONS INVENTORY
! . METEOROLOGY
.
! .AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
\ EXISTING AIR QUALITY DATA
,
j DIFFUSION MODEL OUTPUT I
'
~
~
1
i
! Preliminary Consultation Formal
;
~
Delineation ... with State ... Designation
of and Local by
I Regions Officials Secretary-HEW
URBAN FACTORS
. Jurisdictional Boundaries
I 8 Urban-Industrial Concentrations
8 Cooperative Regional Arrangements
. Pattern and Rate of Growth
. Existing State and Local Air
Pollution Control Legislation & Programs
Figure 2. Flow diagram for the designation of air quality control regions.
-------
11
The conclusions of the engineering study are combined with the
results of the urban factors study to form the basis of an initial
proposal for an air quality control region. As shown in Figure 2,. the
proposal is then submitted for consultation with State and local officials.
After reviewing the suggestions raised during the consultation, the
Secretary formally designates the region with a notice in the Federal
Register and notifies the governors of the States affected by the
designation.
The body of this report contains a proposal for the boundaries of
the Greater Metropolitan Cleveland Intrastate Air Quality Control Region
and supporting studies on engineering and urban factors. The report
itself is intended to serve as the background document for the formal
consultation with appropriate State and local authorities.
-------
12
EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING FACTORS
The engineering evaluation for the Cleveland area was based on a
study of pollutant emissions, meteorology, topography, estimated air
quality levels and available ambient air quality data.
The emission
inventory indicated the location of point and area sources, the quantity
of pollutants emitted from these sources, and the resulting emission
These data were subsequently used in a diffusion modell
densities.
to estimate air quality levels in the Cleveland area.
EMISSION INVENTORY
The National Air Pollution Control Administration* conducted an
inventory of air pollutant emissions for the Cleveland area.
Three
major pollutants--sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and suspended par-
ticulates--have been considered in previous studies by NAPCA to aid
in designating air quality control regions.
These three pollutants
provide some measure of the general geographic extent of the overall
problem.
Sulfur oxides pollution levels illustrate the impact of
fuel burning activities at stationary sources.
Levels of carbon monoxide
provide the best indication of the impact of gasoline-powered motor
vehicles on the regional air pollution pattern.
Particulate emissions
indicate primarily the extent of industrial, power, incineration, and
heating sources.
Results of the emission inventory are tabulated in
, Table 1.
*
Tpe Abatement Program of NAPCA
-------
TABLE I
POLLUTANT EMISSIONS BY SOURCE CATEGORY
AND POLITICAL JURISDICTIONS IN THE CLEVELAND STUDY AREA
(tons per year)
FUEL COMBUSTION SOURCES Ind. Trans. Refuse Tota 1
COUNTY Ind. Comm. & Resi- Power Tota I Process Disposal
Inst. dentia1 Plants Fuel
Lake 10,370 661 2,312 103,634 116,977 --- 553 23 117,553
'" Summit 132,728 2,447 4,572 14,052 153,799 - -- 1,508 66 155,373
OJ
"0 Portage 4,450 419 2,586 - -- 7,455 --- 306 10 7,771
'M
8 Lorain .79,988 1,061 2,052 91,053 174,154 181 978 28 175,341
Medina 2,842 354 1,289 - -- 4,485 --- 230 8 4,723
~
;:I Geauga 2,486 184 1,132 - -- 3,802 -- - 123 5 3,930
"-'
..... Cuyahoga 175,669 17,887 10,154 82,743 286,453 197 6,354 326 293,330
;:I
'" Stark 49,691 1,876 7,874 - -- 59,441 7 899 37 60,384
TOTAL 458,224 24,889 31,971 291,482 806,566 385 10,951 503 818,405
u
Lake 4,045 91 531 14,939 19,606 -- - 840 642 21,088
Summit 35,888 306 1,198 3,668 41,060 -- - 2,778 1,569 45,407
'"
OJ Portage 1,735 235 553 - -- 2,523 --- 536 338 3,397
'-'
C13 Lorain 14,709 135 529 12,731 28,104 33,062 1,250 716 63,132
.....
;:I Medina 1,124 36 268 --- 1,428 --- 421 247 2,096
u
'M Geauga ; 991 101 275 - -- 1,367 --- 226 230 1,823
'-' I
~ Cuyahoga 32,796 3,982 2,904 8,535 48,217 54,192 I 8,764 4,921 116,094
C13 Ii
P-< Stark ,, 26,882 1,028 r 1,729 --- 29,639 -~~ 1,660 969 50,560
I, '.- -~--
----
TOTAL I 118,170 5,914 7,987 39,873 171,944 105,546 16,475 9,632 303,597
I
Lake 267 29 811 453 1,560 --- 7 1,784 2,158 75,502
OJ
"0 Summit 910 103 1,828 11 2,857 -- - 234,709 5,422 242,988
'M I
~ Portage 114 155 1,053 - -- 1,322 -- - 49,685 1,162 52,169
o
t:: Lorain 652 30 I 817 387 1,886 --- 98,704 2,370 102,960
o
;:;:: Medina 74 15 523 - -- 612 --- 36,591 838 38,041
t:: Geauga 66 72 498 -- - 636 --- 20,241 810 21,687
Ii Cuyahoga 1,642 657 4,282 363 6,944 3,000 653,580 13 ,331 676,855
Stark 1,040 625 3,340 --- 5,005 25,000 140,948 3,220 174; 173
TOTAL 4,765 1,691 13,152 1,214 20,822 28,000 1,306,242 29,311 1,384,375
.....
w
-------
14
The Cleveland study included estimates for the counties of
Lorain, Cuyahoga, Lake, Geauga, Portage, Summit, Medina; and Stark.
The area was divided into the grid coordinate system shown in Figure 3.
The estimated annual emissions of each of the three pollutants by grid
zone were converted to average daily emissions for average annual, winter,
and summer days2.
Average annual emission densities for each of the three
pollutants in tons/square mile/day were determined by relating the total
quantity of pollutants emitted in each of the grid zones to the land
area of each zone.*
The resulting emission densities are shown graphically
in Figures 4, 5, and 6.
The general pattern of emission densities for
each of the three pollutants is closely related to the pattern of
urbanization in the Cleveland study area.
Major point sources contributing to the air pollution problem are
shown in Figure 7.
AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
The geographical distribution of pollutant sources illustrates
the core of the problem area.
It does not, however, elucidate the extent
of the influence of pollution sources on the people and property located
outside the highly urbanized portion of the Cleveland area.
A study
of air quality levels known or estimated to occur is useful in determining
the area affected by the pollution sources and thus subject to inclusion
in the Air Quality Control Region.
Such analysis can be based directly
on air sampling data in those instances where the sampling program
covers a large enough area and has been in existance long enough to
* In those cases where a grid zone extends out of the study area and
into another county (for example, grids 60-63), only that portion of
the county within the study area was used to determine emissions and
land area.
-------
LAKE
ER IE
I
2
I
I
LAKE (OUN
,--
I 6-
1
1/
I~
If
4/J
2()
GLAUGA CQUNTY -
PORTAGE COUNTY
14/
I
4.1 r- J -13
44
4-8
~ 5'/ 52 ~9
to f91
r MEDINA CO NTY
---
WAYNE CO TY
&.'8 ""
~O ~2 ~g \
(,1 Allian
7+
11
I
-------
t50L -
Ji.
I
-_J
81 82
8
Figure 3.
Grid system for Cleveland study area.
-------
16
LAKE
ER IE
I
I-~ 1 I
I LORAIN I I I
~O_UNTY i J
11- MEDIN!, COU~~ - ~ L ~ [STARK COUNr-v- - *'
WAYNE COUNTY / /
. I Alliance
1_/ - ~ --1 I I I I I
! i ~ C::r~ 1/ I. i
! i. ~-~
L______- -L___n___j
111>10
~ 1M. 2
~ 1~10 Particulate Density--Tons/Day 1.
m 0.1-1
D
-------
LAKE
ER IE
I
I
r---i
I I
LAKE COUNTL-J I
rJ- i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
----.9~AUGA CQUNTY -
PORTAGE COUNTY
.>10
~ 5-10
m 1--5
D<1
CO Density--Tons/Day/Mi.2
Figure 5 .
Carbon Monoxide Emission Density by Study Area Zone, Summer Average
-------
18
LAKE ERIE
.>10
~ 1-10 SOX Density--Tons/Day/Mi. 2
~ 0.1--1
0<0.1
Figure 6. Sulfur Oxides Emission Density by Study Area Zone, Winter Average
-------
I
I
i--i
I I
LAKE COUNTL-J' I
r- -
I
~r~ i
I i
~ . U - _I ------9LAUGA CQUNTY
-, /SUMMIT T PORTAGE COUNTY
I \ COUNTY
i- b.Yl-HOGA- CTNLd i
r--J I I
I-~ I
I LORAIN I I
~O_UNTY -/ I 'Iron I
~ MEDINA COUNTY l ~ ----~J
I - WAYNE COUNTY- - - ;. iSTARK COUNTY ,J
I 1----_-.1 AII;Oi
I j ~~. i
I I I
I I j_----1
~------- -L--_n_-_J
Emission Rate--Tons/Day
. lO-lOO} of any
single
A> lOO pollutant
19
LAKE
ER IE
I
I
I
I
I
\
Figure 7 .
Major Point Sources
-------
20
provide reliable patterns of air qualtiy throughout the region under
study.
Since such comprehensive air quality data rarely exists, it
becomes necessary to develop estimates of prevailing air quality.
Diffusion modeling is a technique by which such estimates can be made
based on the location and quantity of pollutant emissions and on
meteorological conditions.
Topography is reflected in the results of
the model, but only to the extent that it influences meteorological
conditions.
The diffusion model was applied for each of the three pollutants
for an average summer day, winter day, and annual day.
Figure 8 and
Table 2 show the meteorological data required to apply the model for
each of the three average days.
Figure 8 shows the percent frequency
of occurrence of wind direction from 1951 through 1960 in Cleveland for
summer, winter, and annual conditions.
The wind speed and direction data
used in the diffusion model were considered representative of the pre-
vailing wind patterns throughout the general Cleveland area.
Since
the Martin-Tikvart modell used in this study attempts to show long-term
rather than episodic air quality conditions, only average emissions and
long-term meteorology are considered.
If episodic data (i.e., data with
a very low frequency of occurence were used to aid in delineating a region
boundary, the region would be unnecessarily large.
Even the "smaller"
region defined on the basis of mean concentrations will undoubtedly
encompass the area of maximum concentration upon which a reduction plan
is
to be developed.
The mixing depthsfor the time periods are averages of the morning
and afternoon values as shown in Table 2; these data were obtained from
-------
~G
5.5
IN
8.1
jtJ-d
ANNUAL
/7./7
jIJ 4-
WINTER
(December, January,
February)
Ill,
Figure 8 .
o
II}.()
21
Percent frequency of
wind direction for
various averaging times,
based on 1951-1960 data.
PERCENT
Ii
III
/G
tl
//8
/!.(}
SUMMER
(June, July, August)
-------
22
Table 2. Average Mixing Depths for
Cleveland Area by Season
Mixing Depths, meters
Season Average Average Average, morn.
Morning Afternoon and afternoon
Winter 515 750 630
(Dec., Jan., Feb.)
Summer 315 1580 1010
(June, July, Aug.)
------- ---- 1---
Annual 428 1233 897 I
(4 seasons)
tabulations prepared by the National Weather Records Center (ESSA).
Combined with wind data, these data are used in the diffusion model to
assess the spatial distribution of concentrations of suspended
particulates, sulfur oxides, and carbon monoxide.
Suspended Particulates
The Ohio Air Sampling Network was designed to provide data on
suspended particul~tes from hi-vol samplers located throughout the
state.
In the Cleveland study area, stations are located in the cities
of Cleveland, Lorain, Akron, Painsville, and Canton.
Figure 9 shows a
. * f
comparison of annual average particulate concentrat10ns or these five
cities with the Ohio state average and the national average (291 stations).3
Three of these five cities had averages above the state and national
levels while Lorain ap.d Painsville had averages which were below.
*
These values range from two to four year averages depending upon
when and how long samplers from the state network were located in
each area.
-------
i::
o
OM
.w
cd
!-4
.w
i::
Q)
U
i::
o
U
Q)
.we"")
cd 8
...... .....
B ~: i
oM" :
.w , 7tJi
!-4 ; !
Q)
......
u
-
Q)
......
......
"M
i:: i:: :>
i:: 0 OM CJ)
o .w cd i::
!-4 i:: H OM
~ cd 0 cd
U .....:I P-t
Figure 9.
Comparison of suspended particulate concentrations
of five Ohio cities with the Ohio average and the
national average.
In the rural areas lying between and around these cities, however,
no pertinent hi-vol data exists.
A diffusion model analysis of suspended
particulate concentrations was made to estimate concentrations in these
areas.
Figure 10 shows the resulting concentration isopleths for the
summer months.* Plotted on the Same figure are summer averages of the
five cities for the summers of 1966 and 1967.
The model results and
the actual measurements tend to support one another except in the
Painsville area.
* Diffusion model contours were adjusted by a factor of 1.5 so that
values would correspond more closely to actual sampling data~
-------
24
Erie
Huron
~
~
/
/'" ---- ~
"
~ ./
\
P. ./'
~~~
,~
. /.
.-/
/
\
Ashtabula
w~
Trumbull
Yo ngst
n
Ashland
Mahoning
Columbiana
Richland
Wayne
Holmes
*Akron--1967 average only
16
t
Suspended
particulates-jPg/m3
do
I
30
Scale=miles
Figure 10. Theoretical summer suspended particulate
concentrations and actual concentrations for summers
summers, 1966 and 1967.
-------
25
The contours of Figure 10 were produced using emissions from the
study area only.
Had emissions from Youngstown and Steubenville been
included in model calculations~ such a rapid decrease in particulate
levels would not have occurred to the east of the Cleveland-Akron-Canton
corridor. In fact~ the 30;ug/m3 contour probably would not have shown at
3
all on this figure since it is below the value of 35-40~g/m generally
assumed to be background level of suspended particulates. The figure
does point out, however, that there are four major centers of high
particulate concentration in the study area, and all four should be
considered for inclusion in the Region.
Carbon Monoxide
Figure 11 shows annual theoretical relative contours of
carbon monoxide.
The peak lies in Cleveland corresponding to the
maximum traff1c density.
The contours are elongated in the direction of
Akron and Canton.
Since CO emissions from Youngstown were not
included in the diffusion model, the relative values of the isopleths
fall quite rapidly to the east of the Cleveland-Akron-Canton corridor.
Sulfur Oxides
Figure 12 shows diffusion model estimates of sulfur oxides concen-
trations.
Three centers of concentration are apparent from Figure 12--
Cleveland, Lorain and Akron.
These centers correspond to the emission
inventory which shows that Cuyahoga, Lorain, and Summit Counties,
respectively, have the highest SOX emissions in the study area.
Also shown on Figure 12 are the averages of SOX sampling data for
the first six months of 1968 in Cleveland, Akron, Lorain~ and Canton.
-------
26
//--.
/ "
"
./"
,
/'
-'
/
.-.-"- .
. ~-
. -_/~~_/~
_-::-~~.
\
\.
I'- --...
/ / --,
/ -~. ~// /
I ... ~~l,' -- ~.
y~/ .. /j~/ / .. . ~//1
,~ a,p ~// ;:;..
.' .,,~- ,.' /.
Erie
Wayne
Holmes
6'
$
l(~ d
s 0
cale=miles
36
\
Figure 11.
Theoretl"
- cal r 1
average), e ative CO
contours
(annual
-------
27
./
.~/-
--- ~/-
\
'.
Erie
w~
Hu ron'
J
Wayne
Holmes
6 $ 16 10 t
Scale= 'I 36 SOx--ppm
m1 es
Figure 12
. The
and oretical
actual SO annual SO
1968. X sampling d X concentr '
ata for f' at10n cont
1rst six ours
months of
-------
28
These data correspond quite closely to the theoretical diffusion model
contours.
Figure 12 shows SOX concentrations of 0.01 ppm or greater.
The
0.01 ppm SOX diffusion model isopleth has been used in previous region
designations as a guide in determining the size of the region since this
value is considered to be close to background levels.
Again, this
contour is presented as a theoretical value produced by using SOX
emissions from the eight-county study area only.
-------
29
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS
INTRODUCTION
A number of urban factors are relevant to the problem of defining
air quality control region boundaries.
First, the location of population
is an important consideration, since human activity is the ultimate
cause of air pollution, and humans are the ultimate victims.
The popu-
lation growth pattern is another important consideration,
since an air
quality control region should be designed not only for the present but
also for the future.
The location of industrial activity and the industrial
growth pattern are relevant considerations for similar reasons.
Political
and jurisdictional considerations are important also, since the 1967
Air Quality Act envisions regional air pollution programs based on
cooperative efforts among many political jurisdictions.
The following
discussion of urban factors will present these considerations as they
apply to the Cleveland area.
POPULATION
Figure 13 and Table 3 display present population and population
densities in Cleveland and the surrounding areas.
About 800,000 people
reside within the City of Cleveland, which represents about one quarter
of the population of the eight counties in the study area (Cuyahoga,
Lorain, Lake, Summit, Stark, Medina, Portage, and Geauga).
An approxi-
mately equal number of people reside in suburban areas outside of the
city limits but still within Cuyahoga County.
In other words, more than
half of the total , eight county population resides within the whole of
-------
30
/
//
-_/-
_/'
/
\
'.
/~
'L-'-- /"'
6
~
16
10
I
30
~
2
Residents per mi.
'IIIIJ > 1000
Scale=miles
Figure 13.
1968 Population Density
~
rJ
[J < 100
100--500
500--1000
-------
31
Table 3. Present and Future Population by Jurisdiction
-----"--- -~--- --------------.--- ------_.- ----
Area Population Population Expected Population Additional
County . 2 1968 Density Population Density Residents
ml.
1968 1980 1980 . 2
per ml.
residen~s/ resident~/ 1968-1980
mile mile
Ashland 418 42,400 101 50,200 120 19
Ashtabula 706 101,400 143 114,100 162 19
Carroll 388 21 , 900 56 22.800 59 3
Co1umbianal 535 109,800 205 118 , 800 222 17
Cuyahoga 456 1,700,000 3720 1,894,400 4150 430
Erie 264 79,900 302 98 , 100 372 70
Geauga \ 407 58,000 143 87,200 214 71
Holmes I 423 23,700 56 25 , 300 60 4
Huron 497 52,800 106 60,500 122 16
Lake 232 182,000 785 261 , 300 1125 340
Lorain 495 I 264,000 532 309,800 i 625 93
I
Mahoning I 419 305,000 729 331,200 I 791 62
Medina I 424 73,000 172 104,700 I 247 75
I
Portage 504 111 ,000 220 147,300 I 292 72
Rich1and 497 133,000 268 151,700 I 305 37
Stark 573 363,000 616 40,800 ll;~~ 112
Summit 413 550,000 1330 637,200 212
Trumbull 620 227,000 366 277 ,000 447 81
Tuscarawas 551 79,800 145 89,800 163 18
Wayne 551 88,300 160 99,500 181 21
----
-------
32
Cuyahoga County.
As a result Cuyahoga County has by far the heaviest
population density of any county in the area with approximately 3700
residents per square mile.
The remaining portion of the eight-county
population consists of about 1,500,000 people.
Of these, about two-
thirds live in Summit, Lake, and Lorain counties, which have the next
highest population densities.
Except for Trumbull and Mahoning
Counties (which contain the Cities of Warren and Youngstown), the
counties adjacent to the eight-county area have relatively low popu1a-
tion densities.
Population growth4during the next decade is also represented in
Table 3 and in Figure 14.
The largest amount of absolute growth will
probably take place in Cuyahoga County, with about 430 additional
residents per square mile.
Lake County ranks second with about 340
additional residents per square mile, followed by Summit with 212.
Stark County will probable have over 100 additional residents per square
mile.
Thus, by 1980, Cuyahoga will have around 4150 residents per
square mile, Summit about 1500, Lake about 1100, and Lorain and Stark
between 650 and 750.
Adjacent counties except for Mahoning County will
probably have less than 500 residents per square mile.
The major portion
of growth will probably have occurred in Cuyahoga, Lake, Summit, and
Stark Counties.
INDUSTRY
Two methods are used to indicate the location of manufacturing
activity.
First, the land use map, Figure 15, displays industrial areas.
It demonstrates three spokes of industrial activity radiating outward
-------
33
/'
.~/~
/
-~----¥/
\
,
/~
()...
11
'L- .;- ",' .-\
_....-_I/''-~---/
..--:::;:.
Medina
Wayne
Holmes
Tuscarawas
6
~ 16 I :J.
o
Scale=miles
36
\
Additional R '
eSJ.dents
per square '1
mJ. e
Figure 14.
Populat'
J.on Growth F
1968 to 1980 rom
in Ab Expressed
solute T
erms
VIfIj> 100
~
f2
75-100
50 -----75
.---,
U< 50
-------
34
LAKE
ERIE
1 I
\
( "...,.r' I
I V- U " I --9tAUGA CQUNTY _I
L-- -, . r6MMIT T PORTAGE COUNTY
I \ -COUNTY
i_hY~"""A_TLY--3 i '
,-J I I I
1--1 I 1 II
. I 1 I
I lORAIN I
LS9_U ~ -I I Akron, I
l, MEDINA COUNTY l '~~----~J
I - WAYN-E COUNTY- - - -; [STARK COUNTY ~
I ~--_J Allionc
I I £1 L
i !~ i
I I 1
I t J. ~_---1
~---------L _n~__J
---
Figure 15.
Industrial Land Use
-------
35
from Cleveland to Lake County eastward, Lorain County westward, and
Summit and Stark Count~es southward.
Medina and Portage Counties, in
contrast, do not contain noticeable concentrations of ind~strial activity.
A second method for presenting the location of manufacturing activity. can
be based on the density of people employed in manufacturing firms.
According to 1963 data, Figure 166 shows that Cuyahoga County has by far
the highest density of manufacturing employees with 565 per square mile.
Summit County (with Akron) ranks second, with 204 manufacturing employees
per square mile.
Stark County ranks third, followed by Mahoning, Lake,
and Lorain Counties.
EXISTING AIR POLLUTION PROGRAMS
In the State of Ohio, responsibility for air pollution control rests
upon an Air Pollution Control Board located within the State Department
of Health.
In order to meet its responsibility, the Board is authorized
to prescribe ambient air quality standards for various sections of the
State, to enforce emission standards designed to meet the air quality
standards in those sections, and to issue variance permits for exceptional
circumstances.
The State program has an annual budget of approximately
$250,000.
Under existing law in Ohio, county governments can develop air
pollution control programs only as part of their health program.
County
regulations concerning air pollution control do not apply within
municipal boundaries if the city or incorporated area has its own regulations.
Due to this limitation on county jurisdiction, municipal government has
become the most usual unit in Ohio for administration of local air
-------
36
/'
/
-'
",--.
/'
.J ,/'~
---~'
, . (,;/' / ;:-~
. -- l. //r~'
/ ,--_/ //~, / }L'~'~I'f'
\ . / lj/ />/ C-J
\' ,/~/ 11 ~ ,'~0 Lak~
I-I ..'t~ . - ~,-~- .-~ -- - /~ I
---\\ \ "L-//' -,.- /~r~~~~~K
\\~',,-/,~j-;:~J I ""n;;"ZJl~~~ X
,~ /';; //T1 I x ~x'\)C
- , I ) ~ ~u~aho~~~ ~v Geauga
I :..i! Iif- A...~ ~)(' I'il
, I I~~YX "" x ~)C Portage
I' I IV'Y X V . ~ ~
1/ ]1J1 is~~~i ~
. --' ~~"K~
Lora~n I( ~ K. ~
III) "1~~~~~:
I Ashland Medina ~~~'K~'il')J.~
~~~V Stark
~
.-/-
Ashtabula
I I
~
I
I
~~
II I
Trumb¥l
I I tL';jj r
Mahonin~ I
I II i
Erie
-
Huron
Columbiana
c~
Richland
=.J Wayne [Carroll .~
Holmes i-- L
Tuscarawas
-
- l
L
6 '!
l(~ :1 0
Scale=miles
I
30
~
Manufacturing
Employees per
Square Mile
~ >100
rJDJ 50-100
Figure 16.
Manufacturing Employees, 1963
0<50
-------
37
pollution control programs.
For example, in the Cleveland area local
control programs are operated by the City of Cleveland, the Cities of
Akron and Barbertown, the City of Canton, and the City of Lorain.
County programs in the area are either very small, or nonexistent.
Table 4 gives the budget levels of the four city programs.
Their
annual operating budgets range from about 400,000 dollars for Cleveland's
program to about 33,000 dollars for Lorain's program.
Except for
Cleveland, all of the programs were established during 1965 or later.
The program budgets have been rising rapidly during the last few
years in every case.
Table 4.
Annual Operation Budgets
Cleveland
Akron-Barbertown
Canton
Lorain
/V$400,000
/V$130,000
/V$ 70,000
~$ 33,000
The jurisdiction of these four city programs does not extend past
municipal boundaries.
Therefore, none of the separate jurisdictions
share a common boundary.
Due to this and other factors, no provisions
for cooperative activities have been established between these programs.
The various functions of data collection, emission inventory study,
setting of regulations, enforcement of regulations, and program planning
are carried out independently by the four programs.
At the pre$ent time,
there is no mechanism which provides regional coordination in air pollution
control activities.
REGIONAL PLANNING IN THE CLEVELAND AREA
Although no institution presently conducts regional planning of
air pollution control in the Cleveland area, other regional planning
-------
38
~~nctions are being carried out by two multi-county agencies.
First,
the Seven County Transportation Land Use Commission covers a planning
jurisdiction including part or all of Cuyahoga, Summit, Lake, Lorain,
Medina, Portage, and Geauga Counties.
Its activities have been related
to transportation planning and the preparation of land use plans
predominately.
Second, the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission
includes Medina, Summit, and Portage Counties.
Regional planning on a
county-wide basis is performed in Stark County by the County Regional
Planning Commission.
-------
39
THE PROPOSED REGION
Subject to the scheduled consultation, the Secretary, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, proposes to designate an air
quality control region for the Cleveland area, consisting of the
following jurisdictions:
Cuyahoga County
Geauga County
Lake County
Lorain County
Medina County
Portage County
Stark County
Summit County
As so proposed, the Metropolitan Cleveland Intrastate Air Quality
Control Region would consist of the territorial area encompassed by
the outermost boundaries of the proposed counties.
The proposed
region is illustrated in Figure 17.
Figure 18 locates the region
in relation to the rest of Ohio and the surrounding states.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL
To be successful, an air quality control region should meet
three basic conditions.
First, its boundaries should encompass
most pollution sources as well as most people and property affected
by those sources.
Second, the boundaries should encompass those
locations where industrial and residential development will create
significant air pollution problems in the future.
Third, the
-------
40
--
/'
/"
6
$
Ib
Scale=miles
10
Figure 17.
I
30
~
Proposed Greater Metropolitan Cleveland
Intrastate Air Quality Control Region
-------
VJ
/ \ tS:--------j)
\ \ I ,~
-- ---i) /1./ :/
, Michigan (/ A"""
'\ / '~1:\.e .,.....,tV" L--
I -.,........L- - - - I-- - - - -k.~'......... -./ 'l-a.'r-e /" I
i ! '~- I
I Proposed I
I /MetroPolitan Cleve- I
land Intrastate Air \
I I Quality Control Region I'
I Indiana ! - - I !
j ! OhiO) L-i- ,./~-I'-~- ---
.~ ~\ ,l~/. V ~/'v' '')
/ ,,,,--~ "'J~~1. ( I L
(/ I' ,J. '( We" Virginia j"--' "
" &-'S-'..J' '"'- '...,J \, ('"
(Vi rginia
\ r-J ''71 ~.,..;
\ I /\ '\--;
"'.('-J Kentucky s""""" ..........'"
- j - ~
"'" r' --"*" ~ - --- - -
1-----. - - ------ -./"- ------- - ----
New York
---- -
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Figure 18.
Relationship of Proposed Metropolitan Cleveland
Intrastate Air Quality Control Region to
Surrounding Areas.
..,..
,.....
-------
42
boundaries should be chosen in a way which is compatible with and"
even fosters unified and cooperative governmental administration of
the air resources throughout the region.
The "Evaluation of Engineering
Factors" (discussion beginning with Pagel2) discussed the first of
these conditions, and the "Evaluation of Urban Factors" (Page29),
the second and third.
Within the proposed Air Quality Control Region, aT-shaped
group of five counties (Lorain, Cuyahoga, Lake, Summit, and Stark)
form what might be called the core of the region.
The center of the
core, of course, is Cuyahoga County, where more than one half of the
eight county study area's population resides.
Over 92 percent of
the eight county population live in the five-county T-shaped core.
A study of the emission density maps (Figures 4, 5, and 6) and the
point source location map (Figure 7) supports the same conclusion.
Diffusion model estimates of pollutant concentrations show peaks in
the cities of Cleveland, Lorain, Akron, and Canton; actual sampling
data substantiate these estimates.
Stark County, located at the southern tip of the T-shaped core
area, is less directly linked to Cleveland than any of the other core
counties.
Canton, the center of Stark County, lies less than 20
miles from Akron, about forty-five miles from Youngstown, and about
50 miles from Cleveland.
The question arises whether or not Stark
County should be associated in a region ~h Youngstown rather than
In a recent publicationS entitled "A Survey of Air
Cleveland.
Pollution Emissions in Stark County, Ohio", relevant points were made
concerning interaction between Stark and surrounding counties.
According to Steiner, the possible air pollution interaction between
-------
43
Canton and Akron is greater than that between Canton and Youngstown.
During certain adverse meteorological conditions~ emissions from
Canton can cause significant concentrations of SOX to occur in Akron~
and visa versa.
It was also concluded that even during the winter
months when emissions are greatest in Youngstown~ it is unlikely
that Canton is affected by them.
Steiner sums up his comments:
"Because of its distance from the study area
LStark Counti7~ low frequency of pertinent
winds~ and its topographic features~ Youngs-
town does not exchange pollutants to a
significant degree with Stark County. Inter-
actions between Akron and the Canton-Massi lIon
area are most common with the resultant trans-
port of pollutants being from Stark County
toward Akrpn due to the higher frequency of
winds favorable for such transport. ,,5
The diffusion model maps presented in this report suggest some
fnteraction between Cleveland~ Akron and Canton insofar as the isopleths
are generally elongated in a NNW-SSE direction.
Thus ~ all things
considered~ Canton appears to be more closely linked to Akron and
Cleveland than to Youngstown.
The inclusion of Stark County in the
Cleveland Region is therefore recommended.
The other three counties proposed for inclusion in the Region--
Medina~ Geauga~ and Portage--lie on the fringe of the core area.
Diffusion model estimates of SOX concentrations indicate that more
than half of all three counties are affected by SOX concentrations of
0.01 ppm or more and above background levels of suspended particulates.
All three counties are part of the Seven County Transportation Land Use
Commission.
And Medina and Portage are part of the Tri~County Regional
Planning Commission with Summit County.
Inclusion of the three
counties will provide a buffer zone along two sides of the Cleveland-
-------
44
Akron-Canton corridor which provides room for the core area to expand
within the Air Quality Control Region in the future.
As is true of most efforts to draw boundaries around an area to
differentiate it from its sur~oundings, there is always a likelihood
of boundary conditions existing or developing.
In the case of air
quality control regions, such a boundary condition would exist where
. sources of pollution on one side of the region boundary affect in
some real way air quality on the other side of the boundary.
Relocating the boundary would only rarely provide relief from this
condition.
The solution is to be found in the way in which control
efforts are implemented following the designation of an air quality
control region.
Consonant with the basic objective of providing
desirable air quality within the problem area being designated as
an air quality control region, the implementation plan that follows
the designation should have provisions for the control of sources
located close to but beyond the region boundaries.
The level of
control for such sources should be a function of, among other factors,
the degree to which emissions from sources cause air qualtiy levels
to exceed the standards chosen for application within the Air Quality
Control Region.
In summary, the Region proposed is considered on the whole to be
the most cohesive and yet inclusive area within which an effective
regional effort can be mounted to prevent and control air pollution in
the Cleveland area.
-------
45
REFERENCES
1.
"General Atmospheric Diffusion Model for Estimating
the Effects on Air Quality of One of More Sources,"
Martin, D. and Tikvart, J., Paper No. 68-148, 61st
Annual Meeting, APCA, St. Paul, Minnesota, June, 1968.
2.
"Rapid Survey Technique for Estimating Community Air
Pollution Emissions," PHS Publication No. 999-AP-29,
Environmental Health Series, USDHEW, NCAPC, Cincinnati,
Ohio, October, 1966. .
3.
"Ohio Air Sampling Network Data 1965-1967," Clyde R.
Watkins, Division of Engineering, Air Pollution Unit,
Ohio Department of Health, Columbus, Ohio. .
4.
"Ohio Population Forecasts," Economic Research Division,
Development Department, Columbus, Ohio.
5.
"A Survey of Air Pollution Emissions in Stark COUlil.ty,
Ohio," Bruce A. Steiner, Jr., Master of Science
Dissertation, University of Cincinnati, 1968. .
6.
Commercial Atlas and Marketing Guide, Ninety-ninth
edition, 1968, Rand MCNally and Company.
'" u. s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1969 3b4-842 (SOlO)
------- |