REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
METROPOLITAN PORTLAND
INTRASTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
(MAINE)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
National Air Pollution Control Administration
May 1970
-------
950R7003
REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
METROPOLITAN PORTLAND
INTRASTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
(MAINE)
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
-------
CONTENTS
Preface . i
Introduction ii
Evaluation of Urban Factors I
Geography of the Region 1
Present Population and Economic Activity
Pattern of Region 7
Prospective Population and
Economic Growth 20
Probable Directions of Physical
Growth . 26
Evaluation of Technical Factors 33
The Emission Inventory 33
Air Quality Analysis
Regional Governmental Organization
Proposed Air Quality Control Region
-------
PREFACE
The Clean Air Act, as amended, directs the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare to designate "air quality
control regions" to provide a basis for the adoption of regional
air quality standards and the implementation of those standards.
The Act stipulates that the designation of a region shall be
preceded by consultation with appropriate State and local
authorities. This report is intended to provide the basic back-
ground information needed for the consultation. It proposes
boundaries for the Metropolitan Portland Intrastate Air Quality
Control Region and discusses the factors which are the basis of
the proposed boundaries.
The Region* boundaries proposed in this report remain
subject to revisions suggested during consultation with State
and local authorities. Formal designation of the Region will
be made only after a careful review of all opinions and sugges-
tions submitted during the consultation process.
The National Air Pollution Control Administration appre-
ciates assistance received from the State of Maine, and the local
governments and planning agencies in the area.
*Foir the purposes of this report, the word "region," when
capitalized, will refer to the Metropolitan Portland Intra-
state Air Quality Control Region.
-i-
-------
INTRODUCTION
THE REGIONAL APPROACH
Air pollution in the urban areas of the United States is
a regional problem which frequently extends across governmental
boundaries. Since air pollution problems are rarely confined to
any single municipality or county, and are often not confined
within a single State, successful control requires coordinated
planning, standard setting, and enforcement by the several
political jurisdictions which share a common problem. To date,
State and local governments across the Nation have only begun to
develop a regional approach to air pollution control,
The Clean Air Act, as amended, provides a regional approach
which depends upon coordination and cooperation among all levels
of government—municipal, county, State, and Federal. To set in
motion the machinery for regional air pollution control, the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare designates air
quality control regions (following consultation with State and
local officials), issues air quality criteria, and publishes
reports on control techniques. The designation of region bound-
aries indicates which State and local jurisdictions will be
involved in a regional air pollution control effort. The a-ir
quality criteria indicates the extent to which various concentra-
tions of air pollutants are harmful to health and damaging to
-ii-
-------
property. The reports on control techniques provide information
on the costs and effectiveness of various techniques for con-
trolling air pollutant emissions.
After the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare com-
pletes these initial steps, State governments develop air quality
standards and plans for implementation of such standards within
the boundaries of designated air quality control regions. An
air quality standard for a region defines the desired limit of
concentration of a pollutant in its ambient air. It represents
the level of air quality which the regional control program
will attempt to achieve. An implementation plan is a blueprint
of the steps which will be taken to attain chosen regional air
quality standards within a reasonable time. The Clean Air Act
requires that within 90 days after the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare has designated the region, State Governors
must submit letters indicating that they intend to set air quality
standards for those pollutants for which criteria and control
technology documents have been issued. They have an additional
180 days to set the standards. The procedure for setting standards
includes a public hearing which allows residents of a region to
express their views concerning the proposed standards. The
Governors are required to submit to the Secretary, within an
additional 180 days, plans for the implementation of the standards
which have been adopted.
-iii-
-------
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare reviews air
quality standards and implementation plans in order to ascertain
their consistency with the provisions of the Act.
When air quality standards and implementation plans are
approved, States proceed to prevent and control air pollution in
accordance with those standards and plans. This system for estab-
lishing a regional apptoach to air pollution control is outlined
in Figure 1.
DESIGNATION OF AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGIONS
Designation of an air quality control region is one of the
first steps in the regional approach to air pollution control.
Section 107 (a) (2) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, directs the
Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to make
such designations. The portions of the section relevant to this
discussion state:
"...The Secretary, after consultation with appropriate
State and local authorities shall..,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...revise the designation of such regions...The Secre-
tary shall immediately notify the Governor or Governors
of the affected State or States of such designation."
Procedure for Designation of Regions
Figure 2 illustrates the procedures used by the National Air
Pollution Control Administration (NAPCA) for designating air quality
-------
I
o
c
M
O
3
PO
m
oo
H-
O
3
• BO
Cd
CO
H-
H-
O
D-
fl>
rt
3"
n
o
n
M
(D
•XI
o
rt
H-
O
3
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
REPORTS ON
AVAILABLE CONTROL
TECHNIQUES
STATES INDICATE
THEIR INTENT
TO SET STANDARDS.
I 1E
\DA
o }
Ysy
(PUBLIC
HEARINGS)
STATES SET
AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS
FOR THE AIR
QUALITY CONTROL
REGIONS.
/ 1(
IDA
30 \
YS/
STATES ESTABLISH
COMPREHENSIVE PLANS
FOR IMPLEMENTING
AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS.
I
I
STATES SUBMIT
STANDARDS FOR
HEW REVIEW.
STATES SUBMIT
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
FOR HEW REVIEW.
STATES ACT TO CONTROL
AIR POLLUTION IN ACCORDANCE
WITH AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
AND PLANS FOR IMPLEMENTATION.
-------
H
*
O
W
1
<
fj.
**j
•1
5
3
13
30
r|
13
3
rh
O
rt
t
?"
O
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
• EMISSIONS INVENTORY
• TOPOGRAPHY
• METEOROLOGY
• AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
EXISTING AIR QUALITY DATA
DIFFUSION MODEL OUTPUT
1
r
PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION FQRMAL
^ DELINEATION tHHHMM WITH STATE AND LMBH^| DESIGNATION BY
H?
rt
0
P
O
rh
r)
O
c
M
H*
rt
«<
IIOOAM CA/-«-rr»qo CWAI "IATIOM
C/ I lL*A*ii v I mv/ I w no ^ V r\^\sr\ f I wi v
• JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES
• URBAN-INDUSTRIAL CONCENTRATIONS
• COOPERATIVE REGIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
• PATTERNS AND RATES OF GROWTH
• EXISTING STATE AND LOCAL AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL PROGRAMS & LEGISLATION
OF REGIONS LOCAL OFFICIALS SECRETARY-HEW
j
k
-------
control regions.
After evaluating relevant technical and urban factors in a
region, the National Air Pollution Control Administration pub-
lishes a proposed delineation of its boundaries. At the same
,'
time, NAPCA sets a time and place for a consultation meeting and
distributes to State and local authorities a report of the evalua-
tion study (such as this "Report for Consultation") which includes
the boundary proposal. At the consultation meeting State and
local authorities are encouraged to present fully their views and
suggestions concerning the proposed boundaries of the region.
Interested parties who do not have official status may submit
comments in written form for the record. After careful review of
all suggestions and opinions submitted for the record by interested
parties, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare makes a
formal designation of the region boundaries and notifies the
Governor(s) of the State (s) affected by the designation.
The Size of a Region
As stipulated in Section 107 (a) (2), the designation of
air quality control regions should be based on "jurisdictional
boundaries, urban-industrial concentrations and other factors
including atmospheric areas necessary to provide adequate
implementation of air quality standards." This language suggests
a number of objectives which are important in determining how
-vii-
-------
large an air quality control region should be. Basically,
these objectives can be divided into three separate categories.
First, a region should be self-contained with respect to
air pollution sources and receptors. Unfortunately, since air
pollutants can travel long distances, it is impractical if not
impossible to delineate regions which are completely self-
contained. The air over a region will usually have at least
trace amounts of pollutants from external sources. During
episodic conditions, such contributions from external sources
may even reach significant levels. Conversely, air pollutiSfi
generated within a region and transported out of it can affect
external receptors to some degree. It would be impractical
and inefficient to make all air quality control regions large
enough to encompass these low-level trace effects. The geo-
graphic extent of trace effects overestimates the true problem
area which should be the focus of air pollution control efforts.
Thus, the first objective, that a region be self-contained,
becomes a question of relative magnitude and frequency. The
dividing line between "important influence" and "trace effect"
will be a matter of judgment. The judgment should be based on
estimates of the impact a source has upon a region, and the
, level of pollution to which receptors are subjected. In this
respect, annual and seasonal data on pollutant emissions and
ambient air concentrations are a better measure of relative
-------
influence than short term data on episodic conditions. In
summary, a region should include most of the important sources
in the area as well as most of the people and property affected
by those sources.
The second general objective requires that regional bound-
aries be designed to meet not only present conditions but also
future conditions. In other words, the region should include
areas where industrial and residential expansion are likely to
create air pollution problems in the foreseeable future. This
objective requires careful consideration of existing metropolitan
development plans, expected population growth, and projected
industrial expansion. Such considerations should result in the
designation of regions which will contain the sources and recep-
tors of regional air pollution for a number of years to come.
Of course, regional boundaries need not be permanently fixed,
once designated. Boundaries should be reviewed periodically
and altered when changing conditions warrant readjustment.
The third objective is that regional boundaries should be
compatible with and even foster unified and cooperative govern-
mental administration of the air resource throughout the region.
Because air pollution usually extends across governmental bound-
aries, the cooperation of several governmental bodies is required
for the solution of a common set of air pollution problems.
In this regard, the established patterns of governmental coopera-
-ix-
-------
tion on a range of urban problems is an important consideration,
and the pattern of cooperation among existing air pollution con-
trol programs is a particularly relevant factor. In general,
administrative considerations would argue against the division
of governmental jurisdictions. Although it would be impractical
to preserve State jurisdictions undivided, usually it is possible
to preserve the unity of county governments by including or
excluding them in their entirety. Occasionally, even this would
be impractical due to a county's large size, wide variation in
level of development, or striking topographical features.
To the extent that any two of the above three objectives
lead to incompatible conclusions concerning region boundaries,
the region must represent a reasonable compromise. A region
should represent the best way of satisfying the three objectives
simultaneously.
As noted above, the evaluations of relevant technical,
urban, and governmental factors form the basis of the boundary
proposals published by NAPCA. The technical factors study takes
account of the location of pollution sources and the geographic
extent of serious pollutant concentrations in the ambient air.
Pollution sources are identified through an inventory of emissions
from power generation, industrial operations, space heating,
waste disposal, and other pollution-causing activities. The
transport and distribution of pollutants in the ambient air are
-x-
-------
analyzed on the basis of measured air quality data, the location
of .-emissions,' meteorological data, and topographic information.
A mathematical diffusion model which predicts ambient pollution
concentrations from information on emissions and meteorology can
be used in areas where irregular topographical features would not
invalidate the theoretical model. As a whole, the technical
factors study indicates how large the air quality control region
should be in order to encompass most pollution sources and most
people and property affected by those sources.
The study of urban factors takes account of a different set
of considerations. It discusses the location of urban and
industrial concentrations and expected patterns of urban growth.
As a whole, the urban factors study indicates how large a region
should be in order to encompass expected regional growth.
The evaluation of the regional governmental organizations
discusses the planning agencies, councils of government, and
state and local air pollution control programs. This study
attempts to define the combination of counties which, through
cooperative regional arrangements, would best work together
towards achieving clean air in the region.
The body of this report contains a proposal for the boun-
daries of the Metropolitan Portland Intrastate Air Quality
Control Region, following evaluation of technical, urban, and
governmental factors. The report is intended to serve as the
-xi-
-------
background document for the formal Consultation between the
National Air Pollution Control Administration and the appropriate
State and local authorities.
-------
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS
Factors of major importance in considering boundaries for
an air quality control region are those which have to do with
the size, shape, nature, and dynamics of urbanization within
the region. It is the concentration of population and work in
urban centers that creates many sources of air pollution and
exposes large numbers of people and valuable property to their
effects.
In this discussion of the Metropolitan Portland area, the
geography of the region is reviewed since its locational and
physical characteristics can affect both the scale and direction
of urban growth. Also considered are the area's population and
economic activity patterns, both at present and as they appear
likely to be in the future. Future growth and its implications
for the physical cpnfiguration of the urban area are of parti-
cular importance in determining the size of the air quality
control region.
GEOGRAPHY OF THE REGION
The Metropolitan Portland-area selected for study includes
five counties in the State of Maine: Cumberland, Androscoggin,
York, Oxford, and Sagadahoc (Figure 3). Within the study
area are two Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSA's)—
-------
FIGURE 3 «• Metropolitan Portland, Maine> Intrastate Study Area
-------
the Portland SMSA in Cumberland County, and the Lewiston-
Auburn SMSA in Androscoggin County. The Portland SMSA
includes the cities and towns of Portland, South Portland,
Westbrook, Cape Elizabeth, Cumberland, Falmouth, Gorham,
Scarborough, and Yarmouth. The Lewiston-Auburn SMSA, located
. thirty-five miles north of the City of Portland, includes the
town of Lisbon in addition to Lewiston and Auburn. Neither SMSA
includes the entire area of the county in which it is located
(Figure A).
The study area is at the southern extremity of the state,
bordering New Hampshire on the west and on the south, and the
Atlantic Ocean on the east. The terrain of the area varies from
coastal wetlands (tidal flats and salt marshes) and rock and
sandy beaches to hilly uplands and mountainous plateaus. The
coastline is very irregular, with many harbors and bays. The
principal city, Portland, is located in the eastern portion of
the study area on a peninsula less than a mile wide.
Maximum elevations range from 4,200 feet above sea level in
the mountains of northern Oxford County and 170 feet above sea
level in the City of Portland to sea level on the coast. Flowing
southward in a steady flow down steep gradients are the area's
principal rivers — Saco, Androscoggin, Presumpscot, and
Kennebec.
-------
Lewiston-Auburri SMSA
fgj Portland SMSA
County boundaries
FIGURE 4
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas in
Metropolitan Portland, Maine, Study Area
-------
Among the important resources of the area are forests and
commercial timber stands of white pine, red pine, and yellow
birch. In York County, over 74 percent of the land is in commer-
cial forest, and in Cumberland County, 89 percent. Marshes,
lakes, rivers, and forests of the area harbor a rich variety of
marine life and wildlife. The offshore ocean waters contain
lobster, shrimp, and whiting, while the coastal wetlands abound
with clams and other shellfish. Major types of game and fish
found in the area include deer, pheasants, partridge, snowshoe
rabbits, waterfowl, lake and brown trout, pickerel, perch, and
bass.
The settlement and early economic development of the area
were based on these resources. The principal early industries
were lumbering, fur trading, and fishing. The growth of lumber-
ing in turn led to a shipbuilding industry, beginning in the
1630's at Richmond Island southwest of the City of Portland, and
in 1762, at Bath.
The establishment of shipbuilding in Portland was followed
by its development as a port. International trade began with
the export of lumber to the West Indies and the import of molasses,
By the early 1820's fish had been added to lumber as a major
export of the port.
-------
Diversification of this pattern of activity began after
1807, when an embargo on British shipping shut off manufactures
from overseas sources of supply. In 1809, the first cotton
textile weaving mill in Maine was built at Brunswick. Ten years
later, a mill for finished cloth was operating in Lewiston. The
availability of waterfalls for power generation as well as a
plentiful supply of fresh water needed by the textile industry
led to its subsequent expansion. By 1920, textiles had become
the mainstay of the economy in Maine. The first shoe factory
began operation in West Auburn in 1835, but major growth in thi§
industry took place in the late 1940's following the migration
of shoe manufacturers from other nearby areas, such as Northern
Massachusetts.
The decline in textile employment in Maine, as in most New
England states, began in the 1920's and has continued to the
present. While many segments of the textile industry continued
to modernize and expand their facilities, expansion occurred
mainly in the South. The combination of lower wage rates, tax
incentives, lower fuel costs, and the availability of land gave
Southern states, primarily the Carolinas and Georgia, an advan-
tage over New England states.
-------
PRESENT POPULATION AND ECONOMIC ACTIVITY PATTERN OF REGION
Table I summarizes the most recent available population
estimates for the Metropolitan Portland study area counties.
The Maine Department of Economic Development (MDED) estimates
the 1968 population of the five-county area as 454,000. Approxi-
mately 43 percent of the estimated total population—193,300
persons—is concentrated in Cumberland County. York and Andro-
scoggin Counties, with populations- of 102,200 and 89,900 respec-
tively, together account for another 43 percent of the total.
To determine the extent of urbanization of the present
population, the population densities of the five counties may be
examined. Considered in relation to total county area, the
population ranges from a density of 21 persons per square mile
in Oxford County to 220 in Cumberland County (Figure 5) . These
averages may conceal as much as reveal the degree of urbanization
of the area. For example, in 1966, the Portland SMSA had a density
of 491 persons per square mile while the Lewiston-Auburn SMSA had
an estimated density of 572 persons per square mile, substantially
higher than the 1968 densities of 220 in Cumberland County and 190
in Androscoggin County.
Another index of urbanization is the pereentage of land in
farms. By this measure, four of the counties appear predominantly
urban—Cumberland, Sagadahoc, York, and Oxford—with less than 23
percent of the total land area in each devoted to farming. The
agricultural uses of land include forestry and wood lots so infor-
mation on farms overlaps in part data given on forests and woodland,
-------
Table 1
Estimated Population of Metropolitan
Portland Area Counties, 1968
Counties (thousands of persons)
Cumberland 193.3
York 102.2
Androscoggin 89.9
Oxford 44.2
Sagadahoc 24.8
Study Area Total (454-4)
Source: Maine Department of Economic Development,
Planning, Research and Program Assistance
Division, Pocket Data Book: an Economic
Analysis, 1969.
-------
Lewiston-Auburn SMSA
572
Portland SMSA
491
FIGURE 5 - Population Per Square Mile of Metropolitan Portland Study Area
Counties, 1968, and Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 1966
-------
10
Only Androscoggin County has slightly more than one-third (34.6
percent) of its land in farms. Even this index can be deceptive
since the average size of farms has increased, and the number of
farms and persons operating farms has declined. For example,
from 1959 to 1964 the size of farms in the region increased from
about 121 acres to about 132 acres, but the number of farms
dropped from 1,200 to about 880 and the number of farm operators
from 1*145 to 840."
In fact, the Metropolitan Portland study area is at present
overwhelmingly urban in the sense that virtually all of its labor
force is engaged in occupations other than agriculture, fishing
or forestry (Table II). While information for Sagadahoc County
was incomplete because of data withheld to avoid disclosure of
operations of individual reporting units, there is no reason to
believe that its occupational character is substantially different
from the other four counties of the area.
Figure 6 shows the approximate locations and sizes of urban
population clusters outside the two SMSA's. In 1969, there were
five cities with estimated populations of over 10,000. The
largest of these cities was Biddeford in York County with an
estimated population of 18,800. Brunswick in Cumberland County
I/ Greater Portland Regional Planning Commission, Portland
Region Fact Book, 1969.
-------
11
Table'II
Total Land Area, Percent of Area in Farms, and Percent
Agricultural Employment, Including Fishery and Forestry
Activities, Metropolitan Portland, Area Counties
Total Land
Area
Counties (Sq. Mi.)
Percent,
Agricultural
Percent, Employment
Area in Including Fishery
Farms and Forestry
1964 Activities, 1967
Androscoggin 474
Cumberland 879
Oxford 2,082
Sagadahoc 257
York 1,001
34.6
20.6
13,8
22.6
20.8
0.2
0.4
0.2
*
0.2
Sources: Land Area data from U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
County and City Data Book, 1967;
agricultural employment percentages derived
from data in U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of Census' County Business Patterns
1967; Maine, April 1968
*Data withheld to avoid disclosure of operations of
individual reporting units.
-------
Biddeford
Brunswick
Sanford
Saco
Bath
18,800
13,000
10,800
10,700
10,200
FIGURE 6 - Population of Major Cities Outside of SMSA's. Metropolitan
Portland Study Area, 1969
-------
13
was next with 13,000 persons. Sanford and Saco in York County,
and Bath in Sagadahoc County had populations of 10,800, 10,700,
and 10,200 respectively. Except in the case of Bath, which has
some 40 percent of the population of Sagadahoc County, these
cities account for only a minor proportion of the total popula-
tion of their counties—most of the population being dispersed
among numerous smaller towns and communities.
The broad pattern of economic activity in the five-county
area is shown in the summary analysis of personal income in
Table III. Data on personal income by major sources for 1967
are presented for the two SMSA's in the area as compared with
similar information for all U. S. metropolitan areas. The rela-
tively higher proportion of the study area's income from transfer
payments—social security, unemployment compensation, welfare
assistance, etc.—reflects one aspect of the area's economic
profile today.
The remainder of the major sources of income show no marked
divergence of the study area's economy from U. S. averages. The
study area depends somewhat less on government earnings and some-
what more on trade than do all U. S. metropolitan areas. However,
the share of manufacturing is about the same as in all urban areas.
Cumberland, Androscoggin, and York Counties account for the
bulk of the area's employment, with Cumberland County alone
accounting for nearly half (Table IV). In the four counties for
-------
14
Table III
Sources of Personal Income in the
Portland and Lewiston-Aubutn SMSA's
and in all U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1967
(Percent of Total Personal Income)
Portland and .
Total Personal Income
Property Income
Lewiston-Auburn
SMSA's
100.0
13.4
Transfer Payments Less
Personal Contributions
for Social Insurance 6.4
Total Earnings 80.2
Farm Earnings 1.0
Total Nonfarm Earnings 79.2
Government Earnings 10.3
Total Federal 4.4
Federal Civilian 2.3
Military 2.1
State and Local 5.9
Private Nonfarm Earnings 68.9
Manufacturing 24.4
Mining 0.0
Contract Construction 5.6
Transportation, Communica-
tion, and Public Utilities 5.6
Wholesale and Retail Trade 16.4
Finance, Insurance, and
Real Estate 5.0
Services 11.6
Other .4
All U.S. Metro-
politan Areas
100.0
14.5
4.3
81
80.
12,
5.8
3.6
2.1
7.0
67.7
24.8
.5
5.0
6.1
14.1
4.8
12.3
.2
Source: Unpublished data obtained from
the U.S. Department of Commerce
-------
Table IV
Total employment
Agriculture, including forestry
and fisheries
Manufacturing
Contract construction
Wholesale and retail trade
Transportation and public
utilities
Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate
Services
All other nonagriculture
employment
Employment in Metropolitan Portland Study Area
Cumberland
67,940
irestry
240
18,670
3,150
e 17,200
4,870
4,760
9,960
9,090
of Commerce, Bureau
(Number of Employees)
Androscoggin York
28,120 21,010
70 50
15,290 12,580
1,280 810
5,540 3,970
830 470
920 640
4,150 2,440 .
40 50
.Counties, 1967
Oxford
10,940
20
7,450
180
1,480 '
260
250
1,250
50
of the Census, County Business Patterns,
Total,
4 Counties .
128,010
380
53,990
5,420
28,190
6,430
6,570
17,800
9,230
Maine, 1967.
I
Sagadahoc a/
5J150
*/
a/
180
680
190
100
660
a/
a/ - data withheld to avoid disclosure of operations of individual reporting units.
-------
16
which information on major categories of employment is available--
Cumberland, Androscoggin, York, and Oxford—manufacturing accounts
for some 40 percent Of all employment.
Da'ta provided in the 1968 Census of Maine Manufacturers
indicate that the leatherj transportation equipment, and textile
and apparel industries were dominant sources of manufacturing
21
employment, with employment of 16^420., 9,570,— and 6,210,
respectively (Table V). Other major industries were food pro-
ducts, electrical machinery, lumber and wood, and rubber and
plastics.
V1 '
The Maine Buyers' Guide and Directory of Maine Manufacturers
for 1968-69 provides additional information regarding the nature
of the area's industry. Each of the five study area counties
contains at least one plant, or plant complex, employing over
1,500 persons. The largest single employer in the area is a two-
plant complex in Sagadahoc County. This facility, employing
over 3,000 persons, is engaged in machinery production and Naval
ship construction. Three plants in the study area employ over
V
2,500 persons—a paper plant and a ship machinery factory in
Cumberland County, and a paper plant in Oxford County. In Andro-
scoggin, there is a two-plant complex employing 1,800 persons in
the manufacture of bedspreads, tablecloths, and combed cotton
2J Figure includes employment in the Kittery, Maine-
Portsmouth, New Hampshire shipyard complex.
-------
17
Table V
Major Sources of Manufacturing
Employment in the Metropolitan
Portland Study Area, 1968
Industry Number of Persons Employed
Leather 16,420
Transportation Equipment 9,570
Textile and Apparel 6,210
Food Products 4,420
Electrical Machinery 3,860
Paper 3,480
Lumber and Wood 3,430
Rubber and Plastic 3,160
All other 8,600
Total 59,150
Source: Department of Labor and Industry, Division of
Research and Statistics, Census of Maine
Manufacturers, 1968.
-------
18
piece gopds. Two other plants employ over 1,500 persons—a
Cumberland County plant producing transistors, and a York County
sheet and blanket mill. _a
The labor-intensive shoe, textile, and apparel industry
plants are located throughout the five-county area. While many
of these plants are small in scale, six of the shoe factories
employ over 500 persons each; eleven employ more than 300
workers each. These large shoe factories are found primarily in
Androscoggin, Cumberland, and York Counties.
Apparel and textile plants are generally smaller in scale than
shoe factories. Only one textile mill in Androscoggin County, pro-
t
ducing wool and synthetic fiber fabrics, employs over 350 persons.
Major mills of smaller scale exist in Androscoggin, Cumberland*,
Oxford and York Counties. Four mills whose products include
children's apparel, woolen cloth and blankets employ over 200
persons each. Another seven textile and related products mills
employ over 100 persons each.
The outward movement of the textile industry from the 'study
area was followed by an intensive effort to attract more diversi-
fied industry. One result has been an expansion of the electrical
and electronic equipment and components industry in the area:
According to the manufacturers' directory, the^re are at present
17 plants manufacturing products like cartridge heaters, elec-
!
tronic machine and missile components, heat transfer products,
amplifiers, insulated electrical wire, and radio and microwave
-------
19
components. One plant ih York County, producing ordnance material,
automotive parts, textile machinery parts, and parabolic antennas,
employs over 1,000 workers. Two other plants—one located in York
County and manufacturing ceramic and tantalum capacitors, and the
other located in Androscoggin County and producing silicon transis-
tors and ferrite memory cores—employ over 400 and 300 persons,
respectively.
The pulp, paper, and paper products industry is generally
confined to Androscoggin and Cumberland Counties, with the
exception of the previously noted very large paper mill in
northern Oxford County and one large plant (employing over 400
persons) in Sagadahoc County. The wood and wood products indus-
try, on the other hand, is spread throughout the five-county
area. In Oxford County, eleven plants manufacture dowels and
dowel pins. Other wood products produced in the area include
cabinets, burial cases, boxes, yardsticks, lobster traps, pallets,
handles, and clothespins.
The food products industry includes seafood plants as well
as bakeries and dairies. Cumberland County contains 14 seafood
processing plants. In addition, two of the largest food products
plants are located in Cumberland County—a bakery and a baked
bean plant, employing over 400 and 300 persons, respectively.
Two other aspects of the area's present economy deserve
mention: the economic impact of the Port and the tourist and
recreation industry.
-------
20
The Port of Portland is the second largest oil port
along the Atlantic Coast. Because it has the northernmost
ice-free deep water harbor, the Port is an economical trans-
fer point for tanker-carried crude oil originating in the
Carribean for transshipment by pipeline to Canadian refineries.
In 1968, the Port handled .26,251,300 tons of imported oil, but
imports other than oil amounted to a mere 49,020 tons. The
3/
Port had virtually no exports in that year.—
Tourist and recreational activity in the area is a
'
I
somewhat brighter aspect of the area's present economy: The
magnitude of the tourist industry is implied in population
statistics for 1966 which show permanent and seasonal popula-
tion in the five-county area. In 1966, a seasonal population
of approximately 166,760 increased the size of the permanent
fiver-county area population about 37 percent (Table VI).
PROSPECTIVE POPULATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH
MDED estimates of 1968 population in the five-county area
of 454,400 reflect an average annual growth rate of 0.5 percent
since 1960 when the U.S. Census total for the area was 435,600.
Should this rate of annual growth continue through 1980, the
3/ Department of Economic Development, Pocket Data Book;
An Economic Analysis, 1969, August 1969.
-------
21
Table VI
1966 Estimated Seasonal and
Permanent Population in the
Metropolitan Portland Study Area
(Number of Persons)
County Permanent Seasonal
Androscoggin 86,800 9,690
Cumberland 192,230 59,070
Oxford 24,100 8,620
Sagadahoc 43,960 19,200
York 109,550 70,180
Source: Department of Economic Development,
Planning, Research and Program
Assistance Division, "Population 1960
and 1966," June 1968
456,640 166,760
-------
22
population of the study area would increase little more than 6
percent to a total of 482,600.
Estimates for the period 1965-75 by the U.S. Bureau of the
Census suggest annual changes in population, for the five-county
area, ranging from a decline of 0.1 percent to a growth of 0.6
4/ '
percent." If the Census' projection of an actual decrease in
population should prove to be the case and persist to 1980,' the
total population of the study area in 1980 would be 446,200, in-
stead of the 482,600 indicated above.
The actual population growth in the years ahead will depend
in large part on the area's economic growth since in-migration
responding to the pull of job opportunities accounts for a major
share of population increases in urban areas. Recently, economic
expansion, as measured by personal income gains, has been substan-
tially slower in the Portland and Lewiston-Auburn SMSA's than in
all U.S. metropolitan areas (Table VII).
In the future, the study area faces a number of uncertainties
and negative factors which could affect economic growth. The role
that the Port will play in the area's future is uncertain. The
Greater Portland Council of Governments (GPCOG) notes that "the
relative value of the port to the community has not kept pace with
general economic growth in the Greater Portland Region."
kj U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Projection
of the Population of Metropolitan Areas, 1975, Series P-25,
No. 415, January 31, 1969.
-------
Table VIJI
Growth in Personal Income and Per Capita Personal Income,
Portland and Lewiston-Auburn SMSA's, and All
Metropolitan Areas of the United States, 1959-67.
Personal Income
Per Capita Personal Income
All U.S. Metropolitan
Areas
Portland SMSA
Lewiston-Auburn SMSA
Maine
1959 1967 Percent
(millions of (millions of Increase
dollars) dollars) 1959-67
Percent
1959 1967 Increase
(dollars) (dollars) 1959-67
290,062
387
163
1,703
473,246
569
233
2,556
63.2
47.0
42.9
50.1
2.448
2,144
1,949
1,780
3.511
2,960
2,650
2,603
43.4
38.1
36.0
46'. 2
Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, "Metropolitan Area Income in 1967," Survey of Current
Business, May, 1969, Part 1, pp. 13 - 33, and "Total Per Capita Income by Regions
and States," Survey of Current Business, August, 1969, pp. 13-24.
NJ
-------
24
Another uncertain factor: in the outlook of the area's eco-
nomy is the vulnerability of employment in the defense-related
activities at Kittery and Bath.
Major expansion of the textile industry of Maine seems un-
likely in view of the comparative advantage of North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Georgia. The Middle Atlantic and Southern
States are strong competitors in the apparel industry. Shoe
manufacturing, still centered in New England, faces intense inter-
national competition.
The relatively high cost of fuel in the study area, as in
other areas of industrial New England, may be a negative factor
in the area's growth potential. In its Policy Plan for Regional
Development, the GPCOG notes that "the cost of purchased electric-
ity and petroleum for industrial use is somewhat higher in the
Greater Portland region than in most other northeastern cities..."
Power companies in Maine presently rely exclusively on imported
residual oil for fuel. In the future, however, nuclear fueled
plants could greatly reduce the fuel costs of power. A 700-
megawatt nuclear power plant located on the Sagadahoc County-
Lincoln County border is scheduled for operation in 1972.
The tourist and recreation-related industries are among the
more hopeful areas for economic expansion in the study area. The
National Park Service has predicted that between 1955 and the
year 2000, nationwide demand for .overnight vacation facilities
-------
25
will increase thirtyfold. rThe ability of persons from New York,
Boston, Montreal, and Quebec to drive to the Portland area in a
day suggests that, with the construction of appropriate facili-
ties , .the region could reap some of the economic benefits pre-
dicted by the National Park Service. In May, 1968, Kittery's
Town Council approved the concept of a recreational and commer-
cial complex. This $3 million, 400-acre complex would be part
of York County's project to make the gateway to Maine a tourist
attraction. —
Summer tourism alone would not, however, provide year-round
job opportunities. The development of winter vacation resorts
faces a disadvantage in the study area. Unlike the more moun-
tainous counties to the North, it has few locations with good
ski slopes. One exception is Mt. Agamenticus in southern York
County, where efforts are now underway to develop a ski center.
5/ York County Regional Planning Commission, Progress Report, 1968.
-------
26
PROBABLE DIRECTIONS OF FHYSICAL GROWTH
GPCOG anticipates that greatest growth will occur in the
communities suburban to Portland, including Cape Elizabeth,
Scarborough, and Falmouth (Figure 7). Recent development in .
Cape Elizabeth and Scarborough., south of Portland, and in Fal-
mouth, northeast of Portland, has been primarily residential.
GPCOG's policy plan for.regional development recommends indus-
trial development in the areas west and southwest of the Portland
core. Growth in Windham, Yarmouth, and Cumberland will create a
radial development pattern around the three core cities of Port-
land, South Portland, and Westbrook.
The Androscoggin Valley Regional Planning Commission (AVRPC)
foresees radial development outward from the cities of Lewiston
and Auburn (Figure 8). Development will extend southeastward
into Lisbon and to the west and north inevitably spilling beyond
the metropolitan area boundaries. Urban growth in Lisbon will
be primarily residential, while development westward will be
predominantly industrial.
If the anticipated expansion of the tourist industry is
realized, urban growth will occur along the coast northward
from Kittery in York County. The York County Regional Planning
Commission also foresees development around inland lakes. The
towns of Limerick and Waterboro in northern York County are
-------
27
. . .
"» ' YARMOUTH^
- •• "
: : : V. •;::'.
::::::::s
''''" ' SOUTH PORTLAND ; : : : ^
SCARBOROUGH ::::::::::::::::::::::N:::::L;::::jK::
.-^;;;ii;;i;;;;;;;;^^;;;;;*i
Community Centers
Industrial growth area
High and mixed density
Source: GPCOG, A Policy
Plan for Regional
Development.
FIGURE 7 - Growth Directions Forecast by the Greater Portland Council
of Governments, Portland SMSA
-------
28
/ V
\ •.•-•'
\ •.'•
\
s
.:/:::::::::::::::
:*::::::::::::::::::::::
•/
(:
/:::
\ LEWISTON, /
V /
LISBON
AUBURN
/ V
\ ,'
High and mixed density
4ft Industrial growth area
FIGURE 8 - Land Use Plan for the Lewiston-Auburn SMSA, 1985
Source: Comprehensive Transportation Planning Study Prepared for
the Maine State Highway Commission, 1966.
!!:•!
-------
29
expected to experience substantial growth as a result of the
recreational development of Lake Arrowhead (Figure 9).
In Sagadahoc County, industrial expansion and related
development is expected to center around Bath and spill over
into the neighboring city of Brunswick in Cumberland County.
Development in Oxford County will most likely be confined
to the present population centers of Norway and Rumford-Mexico.
Growth in Norway could extend that urbanized area southeastward
into Androscoggin County. Development in Rumford-Mexico, on
the other hand, is likely to be confined to the eastern
portion of Oxford County (Figure 9).
The area's major highways—the Maine Turnpike and Interstate
95—could also be important factors in determining the location
of future growth. The Turnpike begins at Kittery in York County
and terminates in Augusta in Kennebec. County. Exits within the
study area include Biddeford, Saco (York County), South Portland,
Portland-Westbrook, and Falmouth in Cumberland County, and Auburn-
Lewiston in Androscoggin County (Figure 10). Interstate 95
presently connects with the Maine Turnpike in Portland and extends
eastward into Sagadahoc County. A proposed segment would extend
1-95 northward from Brunswick (Cumberland County), through Saga-
dahoc County to the Turnpike at a point just south of Augusta
(Kennebec County).
-------
1.
2.
3.
A.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Rumford, Mexico
Paris, Norway
Limerick
Waterboro
Lewiston-Auburn Area
Bath, Brunswick
Portland Area
Kittery Area
12
miles
FIGURE 9 - Directions of Probable .Growth in the Metropolitan
Portland Study Area
-------
31
FIGURE 10 - Maine Turnpike and Interstate Highway System,
Metropolitan Portland Study Area
-------
32
If growth occurs where anticipated and encouraged by
regional planning commissions and the highway network, the
counties of York, Cumberland, Androscoggin, and Sagadahoc could
become blanketed with loosely connected urbanized areas. While
most of the development would proceed outward from the cities
of Portland, Lewiston and Auburn, some of the urbanization Would
also occur around smaller centers in the area.
-------
33
EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL FACTORS
The technical factors of importance in considering the
boundaries of a proposed air quality region are: the total
quantity of pollutants emitted, the geographic pattern of
emission sources, and patterns of pollutant dispersion.
In the Metropolitan Portland, Maine, study area, informa-
tion with respect to these factors was obtained from an emission
inventory conducted by the National Air Pollution Control Adminis-
tration (NAPCA), a theoretical diffusion model developed from the
inventory data, a New England Regional Commission study on pollu-
6/
tion control and management, and a University of Maine study of
7/
the air resources of the State of Maine. ~
THE EMISSION INVENTORY
The emission inventory includes estimates from a four-county
area consisting of Androscoggin, York, Cumberland, and Sagadahoc
Counties, all in the State of Maine. Summaries of the data
developed are included here.
Pollutant source types were classified as either "point" or
"area" sources for the purpose of estimating emissions and allo-
cating them geographically.
_6_/ Pollution Control and Management. A report prepared for the
New England Regional Commission by Charles River Associates,
Inc., Cambridge, Mass., October 1969.
2J Preliminary Study of the Air Resources of the State of Maine,
Douglas , Sproul, and Woodard, University of Maine, 1968.
-------
34 .
Point sources included electric power generating plants, industrial
plants, solid waste disposal sites, and airports. Area sources
included transportation, residential space heating, small indus-
trial plants, and generalized refuse burning.
Five types of pollutants were inventoried: sulfur oxides,
particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides.
These main pollutants were estimated for five source categories:
transportation, fuel combustion, refuse disposal, industrial
processes, and evaporation. The total estimates for the study
area are summarized in Table VIII.
The summary table shows a typical distribution: Sulfur oxides
result primarily from fuel combustion—mainly from electric power
generation; nearly half of the particulates come from refuse burning;
carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons derive mainly from automobiles
(including evaporation of gasoline); and nitrogen oxides primarily
from fuel combustion and automobiles.
To determine the geographic distribution of these emissions,
the study area was divided into grid zones (Figure 11), and the
estimated point and area sources combined and apportioned to their
respective grid zones. The results of this apportionment for three
major pollutants (sulfur oxides, particulates, and carbon monoxide)
are shown .in Table IX.
The totals of the various grid zones have also been aggregated
by county, and Table X shows the three major pollutants distributed
by source within each of the four counties. Additionally, the
-------
35
relative percentage contribution of each county to the emissions
of the five inventoried pollutants is shown in Table XI.
Emissions of sulfur oxides were high in grid zones 29
(Sagadahoc County), 45 (Cumberland County), and 53 (Cumberland
County-Portland). The Wiscassett, Yarmouth, and South Portland
electric power generating plants are located in these respective
grid zones. The residual fuel oil used by the plants has a
sulfur content of 2.5 percent or more, so that combustion of the
fuel accounts for a major portion of the sulfur oxides emissions
in these grid zones.
Particulate emissions are greatest in grid zones 14, 20
(Lewiston-Auburn); 53,56 (South Portland); and 68 (York County),
where there are industrial plants and/or open burning of refuse.
Carbon monoxide emissions are high in grid zones 14 and 20
(Lewiston-Auburn); 27 and 28 (Sagadahoc County); 31 (Cumberland
County); 52, 53, 54, 55, and 56 (City of Portland); 60 and 61
(Cumberland County); 67 and 68 (York County), and to the south
in York County in grid zones 72, 76, 79, and 80. There appears to
be a high correlation between traffic densities and carbon monoxide
emissions, as well as a relationship to solid waste disposal.
The University of Maine study discusses an aspect of the
pollution problem not examined by the emission inventory, i.e., the
release of malodorous emissions of hydrogen sulfide and methyl
mercaptan along the Androscoggin River. Gases dissolved in
condensate water from kraft paper mills are released at waterfalls,
-------
36
Table VIII
Summary of Air Pollutant Emissions
in the Metropolitan Portland Study Area, 1968
(tons per year)
Source
transportation
Road Vehicles
Other Vehicles
Fuel Combustion
Industrial
Power Generation
Residential
Commercial and
Institutional
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning
Industrial Process
Losses
Evaporation Losses
Sulfur
Oxides
(1,177)
845
331
(29,583)
7,674
17,674
4,203
0
(379)
121
257
0
—
Partic-
ulates
(1,705)
1,361
343
(2,789)
1,029
794
961
4
(4,731)
609
4,121
(1,692)
—
Carbon
Monoxide
(194,300)
190,386
3,914
(1,749)
104
3
1,641
0
(24,580)
2,683
21,896
(149)
—
Hydro-
carbons
(15,980)
14,884
1,096
(854)
103
254
497
0
(7,776)
48
7,728
0
(10,347)
Nitrogen
Oxides
(11,443)
10,583
859
(13,138)
3,754
8,257
1,098
27
(3,016)
182
2,833
0
—
Total Emissions
31.110 10,918 220,780 34.959 27.598
-------
37
Figure 11 Grid coordinate system for Portland, Maine study area, 1969.
-------
38
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS,
tons/mi 2-day
< 0.01
0.01 - 0.05
:;:;::3 0.05 - 0.10
i3 0.10 - 0.20
0.20 - 0.50
> 0.50
Figure lla Particulate emission density map for Portland, Maine study area, 1969.
-------
39
CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS,
tons/mi 2.day
i t ^|» Btf *i
< I • ""m"1"" ^ ^ ^
Figure lib Carbon monoxide emission density map for Portland, Maine study area. 1969.
-------
40
SULFUR OXIDE EMISSIONS.
tons/mi^-doy
wJ 0.50 - 1.00
1.00 - 2.00
> 2.00
Figure lie Sulfur oxides emission density map for Portland, Maine study area, 1969.
-------
NITROGEN OXIDE EMISSIONS,
tons/mi^-doy
41
Ui .n ^J -*— i iV 'L»»—«^
' ' i ™ " > » f
Figure lid Nitrogen oxide emission density map for Portland, Maine study area, 1969.
-------
42
>00« HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS,
tons/mi^-day
'if ' .. .,- \ r
'- ' ' " " • • r
Figure
Hydrocarbon emission density map for Portland, Maine study area, 1969.
-------
Table IX 43
Grid
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Air Pollutant Emissions From All Sources
in the Metropolitan
Land Area
(Sq. Mi.)
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
154.4
38,6
38.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
9.6
38.6
154.4
38.6
38.6
38,6
38,6
154.4
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
38.6
154.4
38.6
38.6
38.6
9.6
Portland
(Annual
Sulfur
Oxides
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.8
0.1
0.1
0.0
3.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
2.2
20.3
0.1
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Study Area, 1968
Average Tons Per
Partic-
ulates
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
2.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
2.4
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.6
0.9
0.9
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
Day)
Carbon
Monoxide
4.4
2.9
1.9
1.1
0.5
1.0
3.9
1.6
7.0
3.3
3.2
4.2
0.9
38.2
5.4
4.8
7.8
2.5
8.3
18,9
6.7
5.0
1.2
8.1
1.4
8.5
20.7
15.2
1.1
7.6
11.3
9.7
5.9
4.6
2.4
0.3
1.1
3.6
2.6
3.9
7.4
4.2
-------
Table IX (continued)
44
Air Pollutant Emissions from All Sources
in the Metropolitan Portland Study Area, 1968
(Annual Average Tons Per Day)
Land Area ' Sulfur Partic- Carbon
Grid (Sq. Mi.) Oxides ' ulates Monoxide
43 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.8
44 9.6 0.1 0.1 5.0
45 9.6 26.0 1.2 1.0
46 9.6 0.1 0.2 6.9
47 9.6 0.0 0.1 4.4
48 9.6 0.1 0.1 5.7
49 154.4 0.1 0.1 3.4
50 38.6 0.1 0.0 1.0
51 38.6 0.1 0.1 2.8
52 38.6 0.3 0.4 11.8
53 9.6 10.8 5.8 12.8
54 9.6 2.9 1.1 27.4
55 9.6 0.6 0.4 22.0
56 9.6 6.5 2.1 45.5
57 9.6 1.3 0.4 6.6
58 38.6 0.1 0.1 2.4
59 38.6 0.1 0.1 3.1
60 38^6 0.3 0.3 17.9
61 38.6 0.4 0.3 14.6
62 9.6 0.1 0.2 2.4
63 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.8
64 38.6 0.0 0.0 0.9
65 38.6 0.4 0.3 7.6
66 38.6 0.1 0.1 3.5
67 38.6 0.2 0.3 10.7
68 38.6 1.2 1.7 28.2
69 38.6 , 0.1 0.1 2.2
70 38.6 0.4 0.6 9.3
71 38.6 0.1 0.1 2.6
72 38.6 0.2 0.2 13.6
73 38.6 0.1 0.2 3.2
74 38.6 0.1 0.0 1.7
75 38.6 0.1 0.2 5.4
76 38.6 0.2 0.2 11.4
77 38.6 0.0 0.0 3.0
78 38.6 0,2 0.2 4.7
79 38.6 0.2 0.3 13.8
80 38.6 1.5 0.9 21.3
81 38.6 0.2 0.1 9.1
-------
Table x
Air Pollutant Emissions in the Metropolitan Portland Study Area,
by Emissions Sources and by County, 1968
(tons per year)
Fuel Combustion
County
, Androscoggin
O to
•H CD
Jj to
a H
0, 3
Cumberland
Sagadahoc
York
Androscoggin
t" 01
a
-------
46
Table XI
Percentage Contribution of Each
County to Total Air Pollutant Emissions
Sulfur Partic- Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
County
Androscoggin
Cumberland
Sagadahoc
York
Oxides ulates Monoxide
6
60
27
7
21
50
9
20
18
47
6
29
carbons
23
44
6
27
Oxides
14
51
17
18
-------
47
as well as directly from the mills themselves.
The study also identified as specific air pollution sources
a kraft mill, a rendering plant, a rock crushing plant, and the
power generating station in Portland; and industrial burning of
— -li , ' •:.
coal and wood slabs in the Auburn-Lewis ton area.
't
i . •- • -i
AIR Q&A'tlTY ANALYSIS '
- - '••'
geographical distribution of pollutant sources illustrates
^ * •'!,-»*"
,;> • - •".••,. ^v ,.-•„"
tnie core of the problem area. It does not, however, elucidate the
' " V • ic..
• i'' v> i V , ' •''
efxtent of the influence of pollution sources on the people and
"• ;, . . ^
v '•''•'; ;; - ' .
property, located 'outside the highly urbanized portion of the Portland
• .''&.'•'•.,
' r j ' " ' ' ..: : i?
metropolitan"; area. A% study of air quality levels known or estimated
"; ''.-:•> M>- • •
to occur is useful in determining the area affected by the pollution
sources and thus subject to inclusion in the 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
existence long enough to provide reliable patterns of air quality
throughout a region.
Since only limited data were available for the study area, a
diffusion modeling technique for estimating air quality was utilized.
This model, based on mathematical treatment of pollutant emissions
and meteorological factors (wind speeds, direction, and mixing
depths) has generated the theoretical dispersion maps shown in
Figures 12, 13, and 14. Although the model has certain inherent
limitations, it is a reliable indicator of probable relative
concentrations within the study area. Topography is reflected in
-------
48
KENNEBEC
CUMBERLAND
\G
FIGURE 12 - Relative Annual Concentrations of Sulfur Oxides
-------
KENNEBEC
LINCOLN
SAGIDAHO
FIGURE 13 - Relative Annual Concentrations of Particulates
-------
50
KENNEBEC
FIGURE 14 - Relative Annual Concentrations of Carbon Monoxide
-------
51
the results of the model, but only to the extent that it influences
meteorological conditions.
Relative concentration contours were drawn for three types
of pollutants. These were sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and
particulates. Even though other types of pollution are encountered
in the study area, the contours drawn for these pollutants will
give a reasonable estimate of the areas affected for most types.
-------
52
Meteorology
The movement of air within and through the study area is,
of course, an important consideration in the'determination of
appropriate regional boundaries.
The study area, located along the coast in southern Maine,
enjoys pleasant summers but has severe winters which- begin late and
extend late into the normal springtime. Winds' are generally &Lght
with the highest velocities usually in< March and November.. Even
during these months the occasional northeasterly gale has usually
lost much of it's severity before reaching the Maine coast. Average
wind velocities of 8 to 10 miles per hour are northwesterly in the
winter, southwesterly in the summer (Figure 15).- Average mixing
depths in the Portland area are shown in Table XII. 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.
Table XII
Air Mixing Depths, Metropolitan
Morning
Afternoon
Average
Portland
Winter
480
880
680
Study_Area
(meters)
Summer
435
1,415
925
Annual
460
1,19:0
825
Source: National Air Pollution Control Administration
-------
SUMMER
53
ANNUAL
(Includes All Four Averaging Periods)
PERCENT FREQUENCY
10 15
FIGURE 15- Wind Direction Percent Frequency of Occurrence
for Various Averaging Times
-------
54
An analysis made by the University of Maine shows that
atmospheric inversions, the cause of increased levels of trapped
* ;
pollutants, occurring within 200 feet of the ground are not
uncommon in the study area. In general, these inversions occur
often during fall and winter, at times when greater air pollution
loads are expected because of increased use of fuels (Table XIII).
Table XIII
Number of Atmospheric Inversions Within
Season
Winter
Spring
Summer
Fall
200 Feet of Ground,
2 Days 3
37
15
26
29
Portland ,
(Duration
Days
18
12
13
17
Maine, 1958-67
of Inversions) .
4 Days, More than 4 Days
6 10
2 3
3 ,4
8 25
The University of Maine study notes that inversions lasting longer
than four days occurred about 2.5 times per year during fall months.
This is important because over a long duration, shallow inversions
can result, in a high concentration of pollutants.
Air Quality Sampling
The field sampling program of the University of Maine study
included both the Lewiston-Auburn area and the Portland area. It
should be noted that the sampling was brief and can only be con-
sidered an initial survey to be followed up with a more continuous
-------
55
sampling program. The results of this brief sampling are shown
in Tables XIV (Portland) and XV (Auburn).
. ,- - , ; l
The National Air Sampling Network (NASN) has summarized sampling
data taken over two periods from 1957 to 1961, and from 1962 to
1966 -. The earlier period showed a suspended particulate geometric
- .• r •'. .*...
• mean of 86.3 ug/rn-^. During the 1962-66 period the mean had dropped
*^ ' ' " '
to 70.7 ug/m ., with no change in the standard deviation. This is
significant, but can't be misconstrued as a reduction in emissions.
Urbanization can result in a decrease in inner-city pollution while
the area affected grows much larger.
-------
56
Table XIV
Results to'f Air Pollution Sampling
Portland. Maine, 1968
Pollutant Date Concentration
(micrograms per cubic meter)
Suspended
particulates Jul 15-16 117
" 16-17 89
" 17-18 118
Aug 26-27 93
" 27-28 138
" 28-29 142
Sulfur dioxide Jul 15-16 26.5
" 16-17 18.6
" 17-18 41.1
Aug 26-27 i39
" 27-28 9,43
" 28-29 19.1
Carbon monoxide (spot sample)
Jul 16 23
" 17 34
Aug 27 57
" 29 40
Source: Air Resources of Maine...A Preliminary .Study, University
of Maine, 1968. (Sampling station located at Portland
Fire Department Building.)
-------
57
Table XV
Results of Air Pollution Sampling
Auburn, Maine, 1968
Pollutant
Suspended
particulates
Date Concentration
(micrpgrams per cubic meter)
Jul 29-30 23.4
Jul 30-31 29.6
Jul 31-Aug 1 30.5
Sep 3-Sep 5 30.7
Sep 5-Sep 6 28.6
Sulfur dioxide
Jul 29-30
Jul .30-31
Jul 31-Aug 1
Sep 3-Sep 4
Sep 4-Sep 5
Sep 5-Sep 6
19.8
22.3
17.3
0.0
13.9
13.4
Carbon monoxide
(spot sample)
Jul 29
11 30
" 31
Aug 1
Sep 3
" 4
40.0
52.0
115.0
0.0
115.0
34.0
11.0
Source: Air Resources of Maine...A Preliminary Study, University
of Maine, 1968. (Sampling station located at Auburn
Savings Bank, downtown.)
-------
58
REGIONAL GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Regional Planning Bodies
There Is one council of governments (COG) and three regional
planning bodies in the five-county study area.
Greater Portland Council of Governments (GPCOG) . Established
in 1968, GPCOG has areawide planning responsibility for the nine
cities and towns comprising the Portland SMSA and the town of
Windham (see Figure 16) .
GPCOG has completed a plan for regional development, and
is engaged on plans and studies of highways, sewers, mass
transit, housing, and solid waste disposal.
Androscoggin Valley Regional Planning Commission (AVRPC).
AVRPC is a voluntary planning body in which many, but not
all, cities and towns in Androscoggin, Cumberland, Franklin,
and Oxford Counties are presently members (Figure 16). AVRPC
proposes extension of its planning jurisdiction to include the
entire area of Androscoggin and Franklin Counties, most of
Oxford County, and small areas of Cumberland and Somerset
Counties.
AVRPC has completed studies of land use, water and sewer
systems, and housing. A feasibility study of coordinated
-------
59
pollution abatement management for the entire Androscoggin
River Valley Basin is in the initial stages.
York County Regional Planning Commission (YCRPC). YCRPC,
formed in 1965, has areawide planning responsibility for York
County (Figure 16)• It has conducted planning studies on
>
water and sewer systems, open space, inter-town coordination,
and blight control and beautification.
•V, • Bath-Brunswick Regional Planning Commission (BBRPCj. The
area for which the BBRPC has planning responsibility at present
includes nine cities and towns in Sagadahoc, Lincoln, and
. Cumberland Counties (Figure 16). Though established in 1967,
BBRPC has only recently initiated studies on regional trans-
portation facilities, water and sewer systems, pollution
abatement problems, and housing.
Metropolitan Clearinghouses
In accordance with the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act
of 1968, the Greater Portland Council of Governments and the
Androscoggin Valley Regional Planning Commission have been
designated as metropolitan clearinghouses. Through the clear-
inghouses, Federal development assistance is coordinated with
State, regional, and local comprehensive planning. As clearing-
houses, GPCQG and AVRPC are responsible for review of project
proposals and applications for Federal assistance submitted by
localities within their respective planning jurisdictions.
-------
KENNEBEC
York County Regional
Planning Commission
Maine. Study Area
Androscoggin Valley Regional
Planning Commission
Greater Portland Council
Bath-Brunswick Regional
Planning Commission
FIGURE 16 -
-------
61
Resource Conservation and Development Districts
The Department of Agriculture makes grants to local govern-
ments for resource conservation and development planning. In
the Metropolitan Portland study area, there is one funded
resource conservation and development project area—the Thresh-
hold of Maine—and one area awaiting funding—Time and Tide.
The Threshhold of Maine project consists of the preparation of
a functional plan for resource development for Cumberland, York,
and Oxford Counties. The Time and Tide project proposes to study
changing land uses in four counties—Androscoggin and Sagadahoc
Counties in the study area plus Lincoln and Knox Counties out-
side of the study area.
Proposed Sub-state Regional Planning Districts
The State Planning Office has proposed the establishment
of sub-state regional planning districts that would blanket
the State. The proposed districts are shown in Figure 17 .
Since consultations between State and local officials are still
in process, no definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding
the State-proposed district boundaries.
Air Pollution Control Agencies
In Maine, the State agency responsible for air pollution
control is the Water and Air Environmental Commission. The
-------
RANGE
4
REGIONA!
PLANNING
DISTRICT
UMBERLAND
GIONAL PLANNI
ISTRICT
YORK REGIONAL
PLANNING DISTRICT
KENNEBEC REGIONAL PLANNING
DISTRICT
TAL REGIONAL PLANNING
DISTRICT
Sub-state Regional Planning
District Border
County border
FIGURE 17 - Proposed Sub-state Regional Planning Districts in the
Metropolitan Portland Study Area
-------
63
•'Commission's fiscal 1970 budget for its air pollution control
^program is $71,000, consisting of $36,000 in Federal funds and
$35,000 in State funds. The State share is projected to increase
to $45,000 in fiscal year 1971, with no increase in the Federal
contribution. At present, there are two full-time persons
administering the program.
The Commission has the following air pollution control
authority:
1. To establish air quality regions within the State
for purposes of conducting air quality studies
and establishing reasonable ambient air quality
standards and emission standards.
2. To establish ambient air quality standards.
3. To establish emission standards.
4. To license any person operating or maintaining
any additional air contamination source or emitting
any additional air contaminants.
5. To issue orders aimed at ending any violations of
/
established standards.
The enabling legislation establishing the Commission does
not deprive municipalities of their right to issue and to
enforce air pollution ordinances, provided that the ordinances
-------
64
are riot less stringent' than those which may be adopted by the
Commission. While" two* municipalities in the State have pollution
control programs,- neither of these ar£ in the" study area.
-------
65
PROPOSED AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
Subject to the scheduled Consultation, the Secretary,
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, proposes to
designate an Air Quality Control Region consisting of the
following counties (Figure 18):
Cumberland
Androscoggin
Sagadahoc
York
Discussion
An air quality control region should meet three basic
criteria:
1, It should encompass most pollution sources as well
as most people and property affected by the sources.
2. It should include those areas where industrial and
residential growth may create significant future
problems.
3. It should be consistent with unified and cooperative
administration of the region's air resources.
A. It should promote enhancement and protection of the
area's future environment.
The proposed four-county Region for the Metropolitan Portland
area would:satisfy the broad requirements of these criteria.
The discussions in preceding sections of technical, urban,
and governmental factors relevant to a determination of the
-------
'. /
66
Xewistbn
Auburn •
ANDROSCOGGIN
FIGURE 18 - Proposed Air Quality
Control Region
-------
67
Region's boundaries lead to the following conclusions:
1. Sulfur oxide pollution sources are concentrated
in Cumberland and Sagadahoc Counties where oil-burning electric
power plants are located. Particulate emissions, primarily
from industrial plants or open dumps, are highest in volume in
Cumberland County (South Portland), Androscoggin County (Lewiston-
Auburn), and York County. Carbon monoxide emissions are highest
in volume in areas of high traffic density and at solid waste
disposal sites in Androscoggin, Sagadahoc, Cumberland, and York
Counties. The four counties include most of the people and
property affected by dispersion.of pollutants from principal
sources. Oxford County does not contain major population or
industrial clusters which would add significantly to the volume
of pollution or to the numbers of those affected by pollution.
Those sources within Oxford County are not adjacent to the pro-
posed four county Region.
A serious air pollution problem of the area is the release
of malodorous hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan gases from
kraft paper mills and from waste waters discharged by the mills
into streams and rivers.
2. Population and industrial growth in the area is expected
to proceed at a modest pace, outward-from the present population
centers—the Portland SMSA and the city of Brunswick in Cumberland
County; the Lewiston-Auburn SMSA in Androscoggin County; the cities
of Biddeford and Saco in York County; and the city of Bath in
-------
68
Sagadahoc .County. As outward growth takes place, these cities,
already linked in a "-common pattern of manufacturing and other
economic activity, will also tend to share closer physical
links. They are connected by the existing and planned interstate
highway system,'which starts at Kittery,', on the southern New
Hampshire border and proceeds on an arc along the coastal areas
of York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc and Androscoggin Counties. As
this highway system assists in accelerating urban development
along its course, air pollution problems can be expected to
"intensify. With respect to the future, the area is fortunate in
that the major planned addition to electric generating capacity
is a nuclear-fueled plant.
3. Unified and cooperative administration of the proposed
four-county Region's air resources is assured since it is entirely
within the State of Maine, and the State Water and Air Environ-
mental Commission is authorized to establish air quality control
regions. While the proposed four-county Region would cover a
wider area than is included in any existing or proposed regional
governmental organization, the experience of such bodies on
matters affecting smaller areas would provide a valuable basis
for necessary interlocal cooperation in a broad air quality control
region.
-------
69
4. In April, 1970, thirty-four additional interstate
air quality control regions were named by NAPCA. One of these
was the Berlin, New Hampshire-Rumford, Maine area. It is felt
that the major air pollution problems in Oxford County are
identified more closely with this area than with the Portland
region. After considering this and other factors earlier
described, it was decided that Oxford County does not warrant
inclusion in the Region.
------- |