AIR QUALITY IMPL
ATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT
                CRITICAL CALIFORNIA REGIONS
                       ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEN
                                   JULY 1973
                                   TRWk
         TRANSPORTATION*
        'ENVIRONMENTAL
        'OPERATIONS

-------
                                                             04120
       AIR QUALITY  IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT
            FOR  CRITICAL CALIFORNIA REGIONS:
                    SUMMARY REPORT
                      JULY 1973
                Contract No. 68-02-0048
                    Prepared by
TRANSPORTATION AND  ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATIONS OF TRW,  INC.
                   One Space Park
              Redonco Beach, California

                     for the
           Environmental Protection Agency

-------
     This report was furnished to the Environmental  Protection Agency
by TRW Transportation and Environmental  Operations in fulfillment of
Contract Number 68-02-0048.  The contents of this report are reproduced
herein as received from the contractor.   The opinions, findings,  and
conclusions are those of TRW and not necessarily those of the Environmental
Protection Agency.  Mention of company or product names does not  constitute
endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
     The results and conclusions developed herein are based, in part, on
the limited nature of present Air Quality Data and methodology used in
forecasting future air quality.  Due to the short time schedule and limited
budget assigned for carrying out this project, some of the political,
institutional, legal and socio-economic implications of the proposed
transportation control strategy have not been fully assessed.

-------
                         FOREWORD

     This report summarizes the results of several  in-depth
studies of air pollution and its control  in critical  California
air basins.  These reports, which appear under separate cover,
are entitled:
     t   Air Quality Implementation Plan Development  for
         Critical California Regions: San Francisco Bay
         Intrastate AQCR
     •   Air Quality Implementation Plan Development  for
         Critical California Regions: Sacramento Vailey~
         Intrastate AQCR
     •   Air Quality Implementation Plan Development  for
         Critical California Regions: San Joaquin Valley
         Intrastate AQCR
     The individual reports should be consulted for detailed
documentation of the results presented forthwith.  For purposes
of brevity, the limitations of the analyses, analytical
methodologies and working assumptions leading up to the results
are similarly omitted in this summary.
     The purpose of this report is to provide a brief overview
of the severity of air pollution within the regions studied and
an analysis of what control measures appear to be necessary for
attainment of established air quality goals.  Each of the
reports cited above is self-contained and the reader  is certainly
encouraged to refer to the individual reports for more details
regarding any region(s) of interest.
                              111

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0  INTRODUCTION 	  1
     1.1  California and the Clean Air Act of 1970 - A Dilemma  ....  2
     1.2  Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations  	  3
     1.3  Proposed Control Strategies   	  10
2.0  SUMMARY OF RESULTS	16
     2.1  The San Francisco Bay Air Quality Control Region ......  19
          2.1.1  Regional Description 	  ........ 19
          2.1.2  Problem Definition	 22
          2.1.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectivness .... 26
     2.2  The Sacramento Valley Air Quality Control Region  	 33
          2.2.1  Regional Description 	 33
          2.2.2  Problem Definition	37
          2.2.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectiveness  .  . 39
     2.3  The San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control Region 	 45
          2.3.1  Regional Description 	 45
          2.3.2  Problem Definition	49
          2.3.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectiveness  .  . 5Q
     2.4  The Southeast Desert Air Quality Control Region . 	 72
          2.4.1  The Transport Hypothesis	75
          2.4.2  Geographical  Pattern of Maximal Oxidant Time 	 77
          2.4.3  Typical Wind Patterns	82
          2.4.4  The Coachella Valley Air Quality Study by Pollution
                 Research and Control  Corporation  	  84
          2.4.5  Conclusion	87
3.0  SUMMARY OF IMPACTS	88
     3.1  Economic Impacts    	  88
     3.2  Social Impacts	88
          3.2.1  Stationary Source Measures and Vehicle-Oriented Mobile
                 Source Measures  	  90
          3.2.2  Impact on Mobility Patterns  	  91
                 3.2.2.1  Reducing Optional Trips                        91

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.0 (Continued)
          3.2.3  Impact on Accessibility    	93
          3.2.4  Impact on Mode Choice Decisions	93
          3.2.5  Summary of Social  Impacts  	 94
     3.3  Public Attitude Surveys 	 96
4.0  STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION	100
     4.1  Procedure and Time Schedule	100
     4.2  Agency Involvement	104
5.0  OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION	107
     5.1  Phase I Measures	107
          5.1.1  Stationary Source Control Measures	107
          5.1.2  Mobile Source Control Measures 	108
     5.2  Phase II Measures   	110
          5.2.1  Stationary Source Control Measures 	110
          5.2.2  Mobile Source Control Measures 	Ill

APPENDIX A -- Public Attitude Survey  	A-l
     A.I  The Questionaire	A-3
     A.2  Detailed Findings - Auto Air Pollution	A-8
     A.3  Detailed Findings - Transportation Usage  	A-22

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES
                                                                      Page
2-1   San Francisco Bay Intrastate AQCR    	20
2-2   Key Access Constraints Within the Bay Area   	 23
2-3   Trend of Average High-Hour Oxident Concentrations  	 25
2-4   Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for San Francisco  .  . 27
      Bay Area - Reactive Hydrocarbons
2-5   Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for San Francisco  .  . 28
      Bay Area - Carbon Monoxide
2-6   Sacramento Valley Intrastate AQCR  	 34
2-7   Population Density by Zone, Sacramento Regional Area 	 36
2-8   Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Sacramento .... 40
      Regional Area - Reactive Hydrocarbons
2-9   Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Sacramento .... 41
      Regional Area - Carbon Monoxide
2-10  San Joaquin Valley Intrastate AQCR   	47
2-11  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for San Joaquin  ... 52
      County - Reactive Hydrocarbons
2-12  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for San Joaquin  ... 53
      County - Carbon Monoxide
2-13  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Fresno 	 59
      County - Reactive Hydrocarbons
2-14  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Fresno 	 60
      County - Carbon Monoxide
2-15  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Kern 	 66
      County - Reactive Hydrocarbons
2-16  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for Kern 	 67
      County - Carbon Monoxide
2-17  Southeast Desert Intrastate AQCR 	 73
2-18  Geographical  Distribution of Average Time of Oxidant Peak  ... 78
2-19  Diurnal Oxidant Patterns for Monitoring Stations in the  .... 79
      Upper Southeast Desert and for Downtown Los.Angeles
2-20  Diurnal Oxidant Patterns for Monitoring Stations in the  .... 81
      Lower Southeast Desert and for Downtown Los Angeles
2-21  Air Flow Patterns - South Coast Air Basin	83
      (October 1200-1800 PST)
2-22  Trajectories of Air Arriving at 2000 and 2100 PST	86
       July 27, 1970

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES

                                                                       Page
2-1   BASE YEAR, ROLLBACK, AND ALLOWED EMISSIONS FOR CRITICAL           17
      CALIFORNIA REGIONS

2-2   SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CONTROL STRATEGIES   	 18

2-3   POPULATION AND LAND AREA, SANFRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN  .... 21

2-4   AIR POLLUTION IN THE BAY AREA (1971-1972)	24

2-5   SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AQCR BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY,	29
      1971,1975,1977,1980

2-6   SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AQCR EMISSION INVENTORY	 30
      AFTER PHASE I CONTROL MEASURES

2-7   REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES—   	 31
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (.1975-1980)

2-8   CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES—  	 32
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-9   SUMMARY OF AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY   .     38
      AIR BASIN (1970-1972)

2-10  ANNUAL N02 CONCENTRATIONS IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY 	 39

2-11  SACRAMENTO REGIONAL AREA BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY,   	 42
      1972, 1975, 1977, 1980

2-12  SACRAMENTO REGIONAL AREA EMISSION INVENT     	 43
      AFTER PHASE I CONTROL MEASURES

2-13  REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES	44
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS £1975-1980)

2-14  CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES	45
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-15  SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY,  	 54
      1971, 1975, 1977, 1980

2-16  SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I 	 55
      CONTROL MEASURES

2-17  REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES—   	 56
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-18  CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES--  .  . .	 57
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)
                                  vm

-------
                      LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
2-19  FRESNO COUNTY BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY,  	   61
      1970, 1975, 1977, 1980

2-20  FRESNO COUNTY EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I  	   62
      CONTROL MEASURES

2-21  REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES-  	   63
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980.)

2-22  CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES-   .  .'	   64
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-23  KERN COUNTY BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY	68
      1971, 1975, 1977, 1980

2-24  KERN COUNTY EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I  	   69
      CONTROL MEASURES

2-25  REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES—  	   70
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-26  CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES-   	   71
      PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)

2-27  AIR QUALITY LEVELS MONITORED IN THE SOUTHEAST DESERT AQCR ...   74
      (1970-1971)

2-28  PRINCIPAL AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS	74
      SOUTHEAST DESERT AQCR

2-29  COMPARATIVE STATISTICS FOR THE SOUTH COAST AND  ........   76
      SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASINS (1970)
3-1   ESTIMATED UNIT COSTS OF CONTROL MEASURES  	   88

3-2   ESTIMATED REGIONAL COSTS FOR EACH MEASURE 	   89

3-3   SUMMARY OF SOCIAL IMPACTS  .	    95

4-1   PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIME SCHEDULE  	   101

4-2   AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION        1Q5
                                    ix

-------
                              1.0  INTRODUCTION

     In response to the requirements of the Clean Air Act of 1970 ,  all
states are to submit implementation plans to the Environmental  Protection
Agency, describing how the promulgated National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) are to be achieved within their states by 1975, or,  at
the latest, 1977.  For certain critical Air Quality Control Regions  (AQCR's),
the development of definitive transportation control  strategies has  been
required to demonstrate attainment of the air quality standards by the
required dates.
     In an attempt to assist the states engaged in these planning activities,
the EPA Office of Land Use Planning has funded a series of transportation
control studies for the major metropolitan areas with acute air pollution
problems (14 Cities Study).  See, for example, Transportation Controls to
Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions in Major Metropolitan  Areas prepared  by
GCA Corporation (Technology Division) and TRW, Inc. (Transportation  and
Environmental Operations) for a summary of the results of these studies.
     In California, where air pollution is a problem  in numerous AQCR's,
only the Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate AQCR (South Coast  Air Basin)
was examined in some detail in the 14 Cities Study (Transportation Control
Strategy Development for the Metropolitan Los Angeles Region) prepared by
Transportation and Environmental Operations of TRW, Inc.  In an extension
of the work performed in the 14 Cities Study and, specifically, the  Los
Angeles study, it was necessary for the EPA to evaluate the severity of
air pollution in other California AQCR's and, if warranted, to  develop
transportation control strategies for these areas as  well.  This report
summarizes the results of control strategies developed for the
critical California AQCR's listed:
          •   San Francisco Bay Intrastate AQCR
          •   Sacramento Valley Intrastate AQCR
          •   San Joaquin Valley Intrastate AQCR
       Air Amendments of 1970 - P.L.91-604 (December 31,  1970)

-------
 In addition, a brief study of air pollution transport into the Southeast
 Desert Intrastate AQCR is presented.  It is generally conceded that air
 pollution into the desert areas east (i.e. downwind) of the Los Angeles
 region is mainly due to transport of the pollution from the South Coast
 Air Basin.  The analysis conducted concurs with this viewpoint and presents
 several sets of data to support the hypothesis.
     Another region in California which experiences severe air pollution is
 the San Diego Intrastate AQCR.  At the time of this study, this region was
 under analysis elsewhere.  Consequently, no mention of controls needed for
 this area are included in this report.
 1.1  California and The Clean Air Act of 1970 - A Dilemma
     The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is directly responsible
 for coordinating all air pollution control activities within the sitate.
 This has entailed cooperation of local air pollution control agencies,
 the state, and the Federal government -- primarily the Environmental
 Protection Agency.
     Under California law, local air pollution control districts have the
 main responsibility for stationary source pollution control while the CARB
 and EPA share the responsibility for motor vehicle emission control.
Overall,  the CARB has been,  and continues to be, a leader in the field of
air pollution control.   On January 30, 1972, the CARB submitted to EPA a
 comprehensive implementation plan for achieving the NAAQS in California
 as required by law.  Due to certain inadequacies of the plan, revisions
 were requested to be resubmitted with more substantial technical
 support by early 1973.
     The acceptability of the revised state implementation plans wi.ll
 be more critically evaluated than the original plans, due largely to  the
 decision of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in
 NRDC v. EPA, Case No. 72-1522 (January 31, 1973).  This decision holds
 that an adopted state implementation plan must contain measures which, if
 implemented, would achieve the air quality standards by May 31, 1975.
The question of whether or not two year extensions will be granted will be
 more strictly interpreted and based in part on a more detailed
 justification.

-------
     A basic requirement for any extension  is that a source(s) cannot
meet the emission limitation needed to reach the standard within three
years because of the absence of technology.  State requests for extension
must clearly demonstrate that technology is not or will  not be available.
They must prove either that there are no alternatives or that of possible
alternatives under consideration, none is realistically feasible.
     Should the above requirement for an extension be satisfied, the state
must also have considered and applied as part of its plan reasonably
available alternative means of attaining the standard, and justifiable con-
clusions why it cannot be done in three years.  This means that in addition
to providing that specific sources for which exemptions are being sought
cannot comply by 1975, the state must also show that assuming noncompliance
by these sources, there is no other regulatory strategy which would allow
attainment of the standard.
     It becomes clear from the above that the interpretation of what
constitutes an acceptable plan has changed dramatically since the reviews
of 1972.  Herein lies the dilemma which several regions face in California.
The probability of areas in California with acute air pollution attaining
the air quality standards by 1975 or even 1977 appears to be small.
     Very simply, numerous measures were evaluated for their effectiveness,
implementability, and impact on the region.  Control schemes which appear
to be implementable were largely ineffective or only moderately effective
at reducing air pollution.  More effective measures, however, were those
which appeared least likely to be implemented because of the adverse effect
associated with them.  A variety of issues -- technical, legal, institutional,
and socio-economic -- remain to be addressed in the short terra regarding
the optimal air pollution control strategy for each of the regions.
1.2  Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
     The following summarize the major findings, conclusions, and
recommendations that have emerged as a result of these studies.  While
there are encouraging signs that air pollution control efforts are
significantly improving air quality in critical California regions, there
is also concern that the pace with which the air quality is being
improved is very slow.  This is especially so given the tight time constraints

-------
mandated by the Clean Air Act of 1970.  Serious doubts exist regarding
the ability of large urban systems to make the necessary adjustments to
meet the promulgated air quality standards.  It is clear that technological
solutions are insufficient, in and of themselves, to bring about the
desired cleanup within this decade.  Only a significant change in lifestyles
(requiring individual sacrifices), coupled with technological remedies,
offer hope toward a rapid improvement in air quality and assurance that
these levels will be maintained.
Findings:
          t   Recent air quality data for photochemical oxidants
              indicate that oxidant concentrations are significantly
              above the National Ambient Air Quality Standard in all
              of the regions examined.  Violations of the oxidant
              standard are both widespread and frequent, especially
              during the summer months.
     Photochemical oxidants continue to  be the major air pollution problem
in the regions studied -- San Francisco, Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley,
and Southeast Desert.  It is unlikely in the foreseeable future that
attainment of this NAAQS will not be the limiting constraint for the
region's ability to achieve all of the NAAQS.   Air quality trends have
shown significant improvements at some monitoring stations, with a marked
worsening of air quality at other stations.  Overall, there is justifiable
concern over the present rate of air quality improvements witnessed in
various regions.
          •   The topography and climate of critical California
              regions are conducive to the formation and accumu-
              lation of high oxidant levels.
     Each of the critical California regions studied exhibited certain
geographical  and meteorological characteristics which contribute directly
to the severe air quality levels observed.  Generally, temperature inver-
sions accompanied by low wind speeds are typical; valley regions which
serve to funnel  and concentrate pollutants are also commonplace.  Finally,
the warm climate with intense solar radiation provides all the necessary
energy to initiate the photochemical reactions leading to oxidant
formation.

-------
          •   Mobile source emissions are and will  continue to
              be the major contributors to the air pollution problem;
              due to projected controls, however, their relative
              contribution to the problem is slowly decreasing.
     Presently, mobile source emissions, primarily from light-duty
vehicles, are the major source of emissions in the regions studied.  However,
with currently projected Federal and state motor vehicle control  programs,
the relative percentage contribution of these sources decreases.   Even with
a host of control devices, though, light duty vehicles will continue to be
a large fraction of all emissions because of the sheer number of vehicles
i nvolved.
          •   Aircraft, motorcycle, and heavy duty vehicle
              emissions are significant, minor sources of
              pollution;  these sources become more significant
              as the target dates for compliance to air quality
              standards near.
     Presently, minor sources of air pollution which are largely uncontrolled
include aircraft, motorcycles, heavy duty gasoline and diesel  powered  vehicles.
As more and more sources are tightly controlled, the emissions from  these
uncontrolled sources become more important.  By 1975-77, these sources will
be very significant in the overall emission inventories.  Growth rates for
certain uncontrolled sources, e.g. motorcycles, aircraft, are projected to
be fairly rapid in the short term, placing additional importance on  these
emissions.
          t   Existing and projected transit services can
              handle modest increases in ridership over the
              short term.
     In their present modes of operation, efficient transit services must
operate at near capacity during peak periods.  To do otherwise,  would
probably mean operating losses.  Therefore, most transit services can  only
handle modest increases in ridership in the near term.  Larger increases
in ridership would necessitate acquiring additional buses or transit
service capability.  Both require large sums of additional funding which
may or may not be available.
          •   The present life styles of the San Francisco,
              Sacramento Valley, and San Joaquin Valley regions
              appear incompatible with the established air quality

-------
              goals; any foreseeable solution (if it exists),
              will have a major impact on the socio-economic
              fiber of the regions.
     With the exception of certain areas in the San Francisco region
(e.g. downtown, Oakland), all of the areas studied are largely automobile
dependent for satisfying personal transportation needs.  This is largely
due to the existing land use patterns -- typically sprawling low-density
development -- which have developed in the regions.  The development of
transportation systems dependent on an extensive grid of highways has
further accentuated this dependence on private auto use.  Finally, increased
affluence and the status accompanying automobile ownership have also directly
contributed to the almost complete reliance on autos for all trip making
purposes.
     These contributing factors — land use patterns, transportation
system development, and affluence, all represent the gradual evolution of
present life styles and patterns.  Air quality objectives are largely
incompatible with these life styles since they require substantial changes
in developed social patterns.  Solutions alleviating the severe
pollution experienced will  result in impacts on the regions' residents.
          •   A multiplicity of agencies and organizations
              would be involved and/or affected by attempts
              to implement certain control measures; it
              appears that funding and institutional constraints
              will be very significant for many of the measures
              evaluated.
     The control measures being contemplated for implementation will
directly or indirectly affect many local, regional, state, and Federal
agencies.  In fact, successful  implementation of these measures will
be dependent on close cooperation and assistance from many of these
groups.   It is uncertain at this time what problems are likely to be
encountered in soliciting such aid.  For certain measures, additional
funds not presently designated will be required to implement some of
the more costly controls.
     Numerous public and private interest groups are also likely to be
affected by the proposed controls.  In an attempt to anticipate and
minimize institutional  constraints, these groups should be involved in
the review and development of  proposed control  strategies.
                                     6

-------
          •   The required enabling legislation to allow for
              several high priority control measures (e.g.  mandatory
              inspection/maintenance and catalytic converter retrofit)
              will be difficult to obtain during the 1973 legislative
              session.
     One of the most formidable obstacles to implementing various control
measures in California has been the passage of key legislation.   For years,
despite the severity of air pollution and the public attention devoted
to it, legislation to enable instituting important control  measures has
been consistently and repeatedly defeated.  Again, this year, several bills
which would lead to additional  air pollution control have been introduced
for consideration.  As in years past, it appears most of the bills will die
in various committees for a variety of reasons -- technical, economic,
political.
Conclusions:
          •   Presently planned stationary and mobile source
              controls are inadequate for achieving the ambient
              air quality goals in the San Francisco, Sacramento,
              and San Joaquin Valley regions; therefore, additional
              control measures  are clearly indicated.
     The ongoing and proposed Federal and state motor vehicle control
programs will result in substantial emission reductions both over the long
and short terms.  In addition,  tightening of present controls on
stationary sources will result  in significant emission reductions.
However, due to the severity of air pollution in the critical California
regions studied, more controls  are necessary to attain the NAAQS.  Of the
regions plagued with severe air pollution, San Francisco appears to require
the most extensive set of control measures.
          •   In 1977, attainment of the air quality standards
              through additional light duty vehicle controls
              would almost require their complete elimination.
     Currently, light duty motor vehicles are the largest single con-
tributor to the overall pollution problem.  By 1977, with anticipated
new and used car controls, the  individual vehicular emissions will have
declined markedly.  Although these emissions will still be very  important,
the severe air pollution control requirements necessitate additional

-------
controls which in all probability cannot be met realistically by further
control of light duty vehicles alone.
          t   Controls on motorcycles, aircraft, and heavy duty
              vehicles could result in significant reductions by
              1975-77.
     As present and projected controls take their full effect, minor
sources such as motorcycles, aircraft, and heavy duty vehicles, which are
largely uncontrolled, become important sources of pollution.  A variety
of factors have contributed to these categories remaining relatively
uncontrolled, ranging from technological and economic considerations to
political and institutional constraints.  In view of the tight controls
being imposed on all other categories, equity considerations alone require
that controls for these sources be imposed where possible in the near
future.
          •   Annual inspection/maintenance is necessary to
              obtain the full benefit of Federal and state
              vehicle emission control programs.
     Numerous studies have indicated the emission reduction potential of
a mandatory inspection/maintenance program.  It will be more important as
vehicle emission control systems become more complex and prone to failure.
Several options are available for implementation with the major obstacle
presently being obtaining the required enabling legislation to institute
such a program.  Repeated attempts have been made to require such a
program in critical  California areas; to date, all have failed.  The
chances for passage of an inspection/maintenance law in this legislative
session appear promising but if passed, only the South Coast Air Basin
(i.e., Los Angeles region) will be affected.
          •   Catalytic converter retrofits offer major emission
              reduction potential.  However, questions regarding
              the availability of lead free fuel and the wide-
              spread applicability of the devices remain unanswered.
     It appears that most automobile manufacturers will be relying
heavily on oxidizing catalytic converters for meeting the stringent
1975-76 new car exhaust standards.  Concurrently, these devices have been
widely studied for use as a retrofit device on used cars.  Preliminary
data show large emission reductions are possible with these retrofits.

                                     8

-------
In addition to resolving some technical questions concerning the devices,
the relatively high cost of catalytic converters poses implementation
obstacles.
          •   Presently planned transportation improvement
              programs will result in very minor air quality
              improvements.
     Traditionally, transportation system improvements have centered on
increasing speed, mobility, and access.  As a result, many of these efforts
have resulted in increasing VMT.  While reducing carbon monoxide emissions
under certain conditions (e.g. congested CBD's), these programs do not
alleviate photochemical oxidant problems.  If anything, increased VMT
generally results in an aggravated oxidant problem.
          •   Control measures directed at reducing regional VMT
              appear to offer only modest gains towards the air
              quality objectives.
     Evaluation of numerous control measures for  reducing VMT revealed
several key points: a) motorists tend to show a high resistance to
disincentives to driving the car, whether they be in the form of time or
monetary penalties or outright restrictions, and b)  areas presently well
served by transit already have high ridership levels indicating only
modest VMT reductions are possible by even higher transit patronage.
          •   VMT reduction measures which offer the greatest
              potential generally affect areas utilizing public
              transit the most; therefore, issues of equity are
              raised.
     As stated above, incentives to discourage widespread auto usage
are generally most effective in areas which are well served by public
transit.  These areas are also the same regions which experience the
highest levels of transit usage.  Conversely, areas  which are spread
out and predominantly automobile dependent show the  least response to
incentives encouraging other modes of transportation.  This is, of
course, directly related to readily available alternative modes of
transportation.  Therefore, as measures are developed for reducing VMT,
it is necessary to be aware of the inequities which  result from placing
inordinate VMT reduction burdens on areas utilizing  public transit the
most.  It is these considerations which point out the need for better
land use controls.
                                    9

-------
Recommendations: (See Section 1.3)
     It is recommended that the Phase I control measures be implemented
as quickly as possible.  The continuation of the state's ongoing motor
vehicle control program plus these measures should result in a significant
improvement of the air quality by 1975-77.  The final  decision regarding
the implementation of the Phase II measures should be deferred until  a
careful analysis is made of the impact of such measures upon the residents
of the region.  Many issues noted in the report remain to be resolved.
One critical issue which must be resolved is the short term requirements
being imposed by the Clean Air Act of 1970.  If the San Francisco,
Sacramento, and San Joaquin Valley regions can be directed toward less
automobile dependence through long range planning in land use and trans-
portation, every effort should be made to allow for this smooth transition.
This implies that short term controls which may be counterproductive  to long
range goals should be carefully weighed before full implementation.
1.3  Proposed Control Strategies
     The following measures comprise control methods evaluated and
deemed applicable to some or all of the regions analyzed in the study.
The proposed control strategies fully recognize inadequacies in the data
analyzed; the information presented represents as accurate a portrayal as
possible of the air pollution situation given the limits and constraints
imposed upon the study.  Directionally, the implementation of many or all of
the controls will result in significantly improved air quality.  In a
technical sense, the proposed plan should allow for attainment of the air
quality standards by the 1977 target date.
     In general, implementation of Phase I measures can be justified  on
the basis of air quality improvements at reasonable costs and with minor
social  impacts.  The impact of implementing the Phase II control  measures
is staggering, both in terms of economic costs and societal  disruptions
which would result from their institution.  Also, it is not clear at  this
time whether some of these measures are technologically feasible and/or
effective.  Further evaluation and testing is clearly warranted for these
measures before they can be advocated on a wide-spread basis.
                                    10

-------
     The necessity for Phase II control measures results from insufficient
emission reductions being demonstrably achieved from the Phase I measures.
The choice of which additional controls will actually be implemented
remains to be decided.  The measures listed in this analysis were chosen
somewhat arbitrarily and are used more for illustrative purposes.  They
are intended to indicate the severity of additional controls which appear
to be necessary to achieve the NAAQS.  Other measures could easily have
been considered.  To some extent, Phase II control  measures were aimed at
controlling heretofore uncontrolled sources, e.g. motorcycles, heavy duty
vehicles.  The difficulty of achieving additional controls after the
Phase I measures can be briefly summarized:
          •   By 1975-77, no single source category predominates
              in the emission inventory; that is, all categories
              contribute a little to the overall problem.
          •   Major pollution sources, e.g. stationary sources,
              light duty vehicles, will be stringently controlled
              by 1975-77, and additional controls on these sources
              will be difficult to achieve.
          t   Minor pollution sources, e.g. motorcycles, heavy
              duty vehicles, although uncontrolled, continue to be
              a relatively small contributor to the problem;
              therefore, controls on these categories will have
              only minor impact.
     The control measures outlined are not new and  have been proposed
elsewhere; no "magic" solution was found and only incremental  improvements
can be expected from each control.  Over the short  term, large emission
reductions will result from presently planned programs at all  levels of
government -- Federal, state, and local.  By the years 1975-77, the
remaining uncontrolled emissions will come from many sources, the
majority of which are controlled.  At this point in time, incremental
air quality improvements become more difficult, expensive, disruptive,
and publicly unacceptable.  However, the severity of the air pollution
left few alternatives for measures which would be adequate to accomplish
the program requirements.
                                    11

-------
Phase I Measures (Recommended):
1.  Gasoline Evaporative Loss Controls - It is evident that as exhaust
hydrocarbon emissions are more stringently controlled, the percentage
contribution of hydrocarbon emissions from evaporative losses due to
normal gasoline handling and transfer operations will  increase signifi-
cantly.  Therefore, it is recommended that controls be required to either
prevent or capture these vapor losses before escaping  to the atmosphere.
Control systems for certain transfer operations are presently available
and should be installed as quickly as possible — bulk terminals, under-
ground storage tanks.
2.  Organic Surface Coating Substitution - Spurred in  part by their
contribution to the air pollution problem, the paint and varnish industry
has for some time been engaged in research and development of less pollut-
ing surface coating formulations.  Examples of new formulations entering
these markets are water-based or high solids content products.  It has
been estimated by representatives in the industry that significant inroads
can be achieved by 1975 and 1977 to substitute less reactive surface
coatings for certain applications.
3.  Dry Cleaning Vapor Control - Certain large dry cleaning plants
continue to use reactive petroleum solvents in their normal operations.
In these plants, it is possible to install activated carbon adsorption
systems to control solvent vapors.
4.  Degreaser Substitution - In areas with acute air pollution, substi-
tution of less reactive solvents for presently used degreaser solvents is
a control measure which can readily be implemented.
5.  Burning Regulation - Both current and proposed California Air Resources
Board regulations for backyard,  agricultural, and lumber industry incineration
practices are aimed at either restricting incineration or requiring more
efficient burning practices.  It is estimated that such regulation will result
in significant reductions in emissions in 1975 and 1977.
6.  Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance - In an attempt to derive the full
benefit from both new and used car emission controls,  it is recommended
that a mandatory annual inspection/maintenance program be established.
Initially, to minimize many of the administrative and  technical problems

                                    12

-------
associated with instituting such a program, it is recommended that an
idle emissions test only be required at the state owned and operated test
facilities.  After the program has been operative for several  years and
most of the administrative details adequately worked out, it is recommended
that a loaded emissions testing program be instituted by upgrading the
testing facilities with the necessary additional  equipment and personnel.
7.  Oxidizing Catalytic Converters - The California Air Resources Board
has been and is currently evaluating catalytic converters as a retrofit
for pre-1974 vehicles.  Preliminary data indicate that large emission
reductions are possible with these devices.  The CARS has proposed wide-
spread use of this retrofit as a measure for meeting the NAAQS, even
though questions relating to the availability of lead free fuel and the
overall applicability of the devices for all pre-1974 vehicles remain
unresolved.  Catalysts developed to date require the use of lead-free
gasoline to prevent poisoning of the catalytic element.  It remains to
be seen what percentage of the older vehicles can operate satisfactorily
on lead-free gasoline.
8.  Pre-1966 Retrofit Device - The California Air Resources Board has
accredited two devices for reducing hydrocarbon and oxides of nitrogen
emissions from 1955-1965 vehicles.  These devices have thus far been
required-only in the South Coast, San Diego, and San Francisco Air Basins.
The devices are essentially a vacuum spark advance disconnect (VSAD) with
a thermal override switch to prevent overheating, or an electronic
ignition system.
9.  Aircraft Emission Controls - Current industry attempts to reduce
smoke and particulate emissions from certain aircraft classes will also
result in reductions of other air pollutants.  These reductions have been
estimated and incorporated into the aircraft emission inventory baseline.
In addition, it appears that additional reductions can be achieved by
modifying presently practiced ground operation procedures.  This control
is most applicable to major airport activity centers for which it is
proposed.
10.  Mass Transit - The level of mass transit available presently is
totally inadequate to handle any substantial increases in ridership.
Improving mass transit both in terms of frequency and efficiency of
                                    13

-------
service and breadth of coverage in areas served, is a necessary first
step to attract additional riders.  It is also needed for making any
measures which discourage private auto use more effective.  Finally,
should the Phase II measures be implemented, it is imperative as an
alternative mode of transportation.  A much closer examination should be
given to establishing express bus and carpool  lanes on certain freeways.
Park-and-ride facilities, as well as bicycling, should be encouraged in
more areas of the basin.
Phase II Measures (If Demonstrably Warranted):
1.  Additional Organic Solvent Use Controls -  Application of the Phase I
control measures on organic solvent uses will  result in significant
hydrocarbon emission reductions.  However, if  warranted, it appears that
additional reductions may be achievable.  These additional reductions will
be increasingly difficult to obtain since the  remaining emissions are
either under tight control already, or the sources are very minor and
diffuse, making them difficult to bring under  control.  Examples of this
latter category are organic solvent uses in printing operations, pharmaceu-
tical uses, insecticide/pesticide applications, rubber tire manufacturing,
plastic and putty manufacturing, etc.  Individually, the sources are minor;
in their composite they are presently a significant uncontrolled source
category.  As an alternative, it is certainly  recommended that a closer
examination be made of these minor polluters.
2.  Eliminating Motorcycle Use During Smog Season - As shown previously,
uncontrolled motorcycle emissions are projected to be among the highest
of any motor vehicle type on a grams per mile  basis.  Their overall
contribution to the pollution problem has been minor due to the relatively
small number of vehicles and annual mileages accumulated.  However, as the
number of motorcycles increases (uncontrolled) and as more controls are
imposed on light and heavy duty vehicles, their emission contribution
will become significant.  Two-stroke motorcycles, especially, are
notoriously high emitters.  In view of the projected importance of this
source category, a ban on motorcycles during the summer months when smog
is most intense, is a possible control measure.  Part of the rationale
for this control is that motorcycles are used  primarily for recreational
purposes, rather than for essential trip-making.
                                    ?4

-------
3.  Heavy Duty Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance, Catalytic Converter
    and Evaporative Retrofit - For essentially the same reasons outlined
under light duty vehicles, mandatory inspection/maintenance for heavy duty
vehicles can be an effective control measure.  Limited test data is avail-
able and has demonstrated its feasibility and effectiveness as a control
measure.
     Heavy Duty Catalytic Converter and Evaporative Retrofit - Again,
a limited amount of data exists demonstrating the effectiveness and
feasibility of heavy duty catalytic converter and evaporative retrofits
as potential control measures.  More extensive field testing is necessary,
however, before widespread implementation of these measures can be
warranted.
4.  Light Duty Vehicle Evaporative Retrofit - Still another retrofit
being considered for light duty vehicles (pre-1970) is an evaporative
control device.  The CARB is currently investigating the feasibility of
this type of device and if demonstrated effective, they may advocate its
use.  Others have pointed to the need for such controls but actual working
prototypes and field testing data are limited at this time.  The technical
obstacles appear to be impeding widespread application of this control
measure.  Also, since the device is to be used on pre-1970 vehicles, its
effectiveness decreases with time due to normal attrition of vehicles
which can be retrofitted with such devices.
5.  VMT Reduction through Gasoline Rationing - As a last resort,
or after implementation of all Phase I measures, additional
reductions can be achieved by a program to reduce vehicle miles travelled
(VMT) through gasoline rationing.  In light of recent publicity declaring
gasoline shortages and/or the energy crises, the  public appears to be
ready to accept a modest level of fuel rationing.  Rationing should be
viewed strictly as an interim control to achieve modest reductions.
Attempts to impose large scale rationing upon the public will result in
numerous undesirable consequences.  The effectiveness of gasoline rationing
decreases as vehicular exhaust emission characteristics decrease.  In fact,
if massive rationing is contemplated, the value of extensive retrofit
programs becomes somewhat questionable.
                                    15

-------
                       2.0    SUMMARY OF RESULTS

     This chapter summarizes the impacts of the proposed control
strategies for the San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Joaquin Valley
regions.  In San Francisco, the control strategy is to be applied over
the entire Air Quality Control Region, as designated by the California
Air Resources Board.  In the Sacramento Valley, the control measures
are recommended for a five county sub-regional portion of the air basin.
Similarly in the San Joaquin Valley, control  strategies were developed
for only portions of the basin, namely, Kern, Fresno, and San Joaquin
counties.
     Table 2.1 shows the data used to determine the required emission
reduction for each area, based on a straight percentage rollback  technique.
The base year listed is the year in which the highest pollutant measurement
during or after 1970 was recorded.  Table 2-2 summarizes the control
measures assessed during the study for each of the regions examined.
Although not readily apparent from the table, there are significant
differences in each individual region's current control programs.  For
example, San Francisco has an existing set of regulations for control of
organic solvent usage (i.e. similar to Los Angeles County's "Rule 66").
Counties in the San Joaquin Valley are just now in the process of imple-
menting similar regulations (due to take effect beginning January, 1974).
Similarly, certain motor vehicle retrofit programs which are in effect or
due to be in effect for various California air basins have different time
schedules for implementation.  This was done to allow for trial programs
in the most acutely polluted regions first in order to ensure the effective-
ness and workability of the programs (e.g. 1966-70 retrofit and 1955-65
retrofit programs).
                                    16

-------
   TABLE 2-1.  BASE YEAR, ROLLBACK REQUIRED, AND
ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS FOR CRITICAL CALIFORNIA REGIONS





Base
Region Year
San Francisco 1971
Bay AQCR
Sacramento 1972
Regional Area
(5 Counties)
Kern 1971
County
Fresno 1970
County
San Joaquin 1971
County

Air Quality
In Base Year
Maximum
Maximum '8-Hour
One-Hour Carbon
Oxidant Monoxide
(ppm) (ppm)
.36 17

.28 10


.22 14

.21 11

.20 17



Federal
Standards

Maximum
One-Hour
Oxidant
(ppm)
.08

.08


.08

.08

.08

Maximum
8-Hour
Carbon
Monoxide
(ppm)
9

9


9

9

9

Rollback
Required From
Base Year


Reactive
Hydro-
Carbons
78%

71*


64%

62%

60%




Carbon
Monoxide
47%

10%


36%

18%

47%


Base Year
Emissions


Reactive
Hydro- Car bo
Carbons Monox
567 2573

119 690


.Allowable
Emissions
(tons/day)


Reactive
n Hydro-
ide Carbons
125

34.5


47.5 383 17.1

52.2 331


19.8

38.9 213 15.6





Carbon
Monoxide
1364

621


245

271

113


-------
TABLE 2-2.  SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CONTROL STRATEGIES
Control Measure San
Phase I Measures (Recommended)
Gasoline marketing controls
Organic surface coating substitution
Dry cleaning vapor control
Degreaser substitution
Burning regulations
Aircraft controls
Inspection/maintenance
Catalytic converter retrofit
1966-70 retrofit
Mass transit improvements
Phase II Measures (If demonstrably
warranted)
Additional organic solvent use
controls
Motorcycle ban during smog season
Heavy-duty vehicle I/M and retrofits
Light-duty vehicle evap. retrofit
Gasoline rationing
Francisco

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
Sacramento

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
San Joaquin

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X
                          18

-------
2.1  San Francisco Bay Intrastate AQCR
     The San Francisco Bay Intrastate AQCR, also known as the San  Francisco
Bay Area Air Basin, consists of all  of seven counties —  namely, Alameda,
Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco,  San Mateo, Santa Clara,  and Napa  --
and portions of two others — southwestern Solano and southern
Sonoma.

2.1.1  Regional Description
     Topographically, it resembles a shallow bowl with a  low central
bay area, rimlike mountains, and connecting valleys.  The region covers
more than 5,000 square miles and includes some 4.6 million people  and
2.7 million motor vehicles.  Figure  2-1 presents a map of the region  and
illustrates its location within California.
     Table 2-3 and Figure 2-1 illustrate the vast differences in intensity
of human activity over the nine county region.  San Francisco County  holds
more than 15 percent of the region's population in less than one percent of
its land area, while included portions of Napa, Sonoma and Solano  Counties
together hold less than nine percent of the region's population in 32 per-
cent of its land area.  A narrow bayside plain extends for a distance of
100 miles along the central and southern portions of the  Bay, containing
almost uninterrupted urban development.  This strip, comprising only  some
ten percent of the region's land area, holds 80 percent of the regional
population and some 90 percent of its employment.  The lineal pattern
of development has helped maintain a strong regional focus on the  San
Francisco CBD with a surrounding concentration of higher  density develop-
ment in the remainder of San Francisco, Daly City, and older low-lying
sections of Oakland and Berkeley. The remainder of the Bay Area is of
lower density, and highly auto-oriented, not unlike development in other
cities in the Western United States.  In 1980 about three-quarters of Bay
Area residents are expected to live  in what the Bay Area  Transportation
Study termed low density areas -- zones with less than ten dwelling units
per net residential area.
                                    19

-------
                                                             Regional Focus  -
                                                             San Francisco CBD
                                          Location  Of
                                              Basin
     SantaJLosa
                                                             Higher Density --
                                                             San Francisco,
                                                             Daly City,
                                                             Berkeley,
                                                             Oakland
                                                              Lower Density —
                                                              Remainder
                                                              Urban Area
                                                              Steep Topography
           SAN
           FRANCIS
Source:  Association of Bay Area Governments
                Figure 2-1   San  Francisco Bay Intrastate AQCR
                                   20

-------
                                TABLE  2-3.  POPULATION AND  LAND  AREA
                                  SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AIR BASIN
County
ATameda
Contra Costa
Marin
Napa
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Solano
Sonoma
County's
Population
In Basin - 1970
1,063,800
558,100
203,300
79,400
699,200
556,000
1,070,000
124,500
178,900
4,533,200
% of Basin's
Population
23.5
12.3
44.5
1.8
15.4
12.3
23.6
2.7
3.9
100.0
% of County's
Population
In Basin
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
79.
87.2
Area in 9
Basin (Mr)
733
733
520
787
45
447
1300
358
620
5,543
% of Basin's
Land Area
13.2
13.2
9.4
14.2
0.8
8.1
23.4
6.5
11.2
100.0
Population
Density 7
(Persons/Mi*)
1451
761
391
101
15,338
447
823
348
289
818
Source:  California Air Resources  Board

-------
     The region's urban corridors are linked together by a limited
number of bridges, tunnels, and freeway facilities.  Often only one
critical link exists across a topographic barrier, forming a natural
constriction on vehicular flow (Figure 2-2), a factor which contributes
to relatively high transit usage in commuting.  About 55 percent of the
commuting to the San Francisco CBD is by transit, while roughly 20 per-
cent of all Bay area employees traveling over ten miles prefer bus or
rail over the automobile.  The climate of the San Francisco Bay Area is
typical of California coastal zones.  Late fall and winter are cool and
windy and experience the greatest part of the region's moderate rainfall.
Spring weather is variable.  Most summer days are dry and sunny.
     Wind patterns in the basin vary as a function of location and as
a function of both time of day and season.  The most frequent daylight
pattern is a moderate sea breeze radiating from the coast and Central Bay
area.  In the evenings, the wind direction frequently reverses to a land
breeze.   Air movement and stability are usually dominated by the Pacific
high pressure zone and the associated subsidence temperature inversion.
The inversion is strongest during the summer and early fall, varying daily
from 1,000 to 3,000 feet.
     Winds normally provide adequate ventilation to the Bay Area.  However,
during the summer and early fall, the persistent temperature inversion is
sometimes accompanied by nearly stagnant wind conditions.   This situation
leads to excessive accumulation of pollutants.   Since such days are
associated with moderate to high temperature and solar radiation, a
photochemical  smog problem results.
2.1.2  Problem Definition
     Air quality measurements taken in the San Francisco region reveal
air pollution to be a severe problem.  The severity of the air pollution
can be shown by several  indices -- the geographical  extent of the problem
and the number of days per year various standards are violated.  The
extent of the problem is summarized in Table 2-4, which displays the
highest readings and number of days certain levels were exceeded at various
sites throughout the basin.  As shown, maximum oxidant readings often exceed
the air quality standard by more than four-fold.  Due to moderately favorable
climatology, the frequency of violations at any given station is at most,
about one day in seven.

-------
                                                   San  Francisco
                                                    Access  Constraints
                                                   1. San  Francisco  -
                                                       Oakland  Bay Bridge
                                                     Golden  Gate Bridge
                                                     I 280
                                                     Bayshore  Freeway
                                                       (U.S.101)
                                                     Other Access
                                                       Constraints
                                                     Caldecott Tunnel
                                                       (CH  24)
                                                     Dublin  Canyon
                                                       (I  580)
                                                     San  Mateo Bridge
                                                     Dumbarton Bridge
                                                     Carquinez Bridge
                                                     Richmond-San Rafael
                                                       Bridge
Source:  Metropolitan Transportation Commission
        Figure 2-2.  Key Access Constraints Within the Bay Area
                                   23

-------
                                         TABLE  2-4.   AIR  POLLUTION  IN THE  BAY AREA
                                                        (1971-1972)
Location of
Stations
San Francisco
San Rafael
Richmond
Pittsburg
Walnut Creek
Oakland
San Leandro
Fremont
Li vermore
San Jose
Redwood City
Burl ingame
Petal uma
Napa
Vallejo
Fairfield
Los Gates
Mountain View
Santa Rosa
OXIDANT
1971
1 2
Haxitnuir Violations
.19 2
.13 9
.28 7
.20 23
.23 . 36
.31 10
.36 21
.33 45
.23 52
.15 14
.28 17
.17 5
.12 6
.14 9
.19 11
.10 12
-
-
"* ™
1972
Maximum Violations
.08 0
.17 5
.12 7
.19 25
.17 30
.12 1
.17 15
.34 44
.22 27
.20 19
.28 17
.14 8
.07 0
.18 20
.26 15
.13 4
.21 15
.19 10
"" '-, ""
CARBON MONOXIDE
1 9 1 1
3 4
Maximum Violations
11 3
8 0
13 1
6 0
_
11 2
-
9 0
8 0
17 * 12
7 0
10 1
-
9 0
13 6
-
_ _
_ _
'
1972
Maximum Violations
11.7 1
7.7 0
9.1 0
5.1 0

7.2 0

6.5 0
6.5 0
13.8 11
9.2 0
9.9 0

7.4 0
12.1 5


_
-
NITROGEN
DIOXIDE
1971
wnnua i
Averaae
.027
.024
.021
.022
_
.040

-
.025
.034
.030
-
.013

.018
—
_
_
.020
ro
       Highest hourly average  in ppm
       2
       Number of days one hour average of 0.10 ppm was exceeded

       Highest 12-hour average in ppm
       4
       Number of days 12-hour  average of 10 ppm was exceeded


       Source:  Bay Area Air Pollution Control  District

-------
          .30T
           .25
        ^.20 +
         1.
         o.
           .15-
        X
        o
rsj
01
           .10
           .05
                                     San Francisco     x	
                                     San Rafael        O	
                                     San Leandro       •	
                                     San Jose         %
                                     Redwood City      A	
                                     Walnut Creek      D	
                                     Liver-more        A	
                                         Six-Station
                                         District Average
                                         (excluding Liver-more)
                       62
      63
64
65
                                                         66
67
                                                            YEAR
68
                                                          69
70
                                                             71
                                                                                                             72
            Figure 2-3.
Trend of Average  High-Hour Oxidant Concentrations for Days with  Comparable Temperature
and Inversion  Conditons (April through  October Photochemical  Oxidant Seasons, 1962-1971)
             Source:  Bay Area Air Pollution  Control  District

-------
     It is interesting to note that many of the Los Angeles regional
characteristics are also prevalent in the San Francisco Bay Area.   Overall,
the population density in the San Francisco Bay Area is less than  the Los
Angeles region.  Only San Francisco County has a high population density
(15,338 persons/square mile) compared to the region, i.e.  818 persons/
square mile).
     The severest air pollution does not occur in the most active  center
or highest density area, but rather downwind of these areas.  For  example,
in the South Coast Air Basin, the most critical problem areas are  places
like Riverside, Indio, and Banning -- areas east of downtown Los Angeles.
In the San Francisco region, severe problems exist in San  Leandro, Fremont,
and Livermore -.- all regions downwind of the more populous urban centers.
Even areas on the outskirts of the airshed experience pollution and it has
frequently been suggested that pollution from the Bay Area spills  over into
adjacent areas, e.g., the Sacramento Valley Air Basin.  This is analogous
to transport of pollutants in the Southeast Desert from the South  Coast Air
Basin.
     Overall, the recent trends for the Bay Area show a significant
improvement in air quality over the past few years.  The majority  of
monitoring stations have shown improvements with only a couple of  sites
experiencing more adverse conditions (Figure 2-3).
2.1.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectiveness
     The following figures and tables present both the baseline data
and effectiveness of the various control measures for reactive hydro-
carbons and carbon monoxide.  The effectiveness due to each measure can
be seen in relation to those allowable emissions which are necessary to
meet the standards.  The baseline curve illustrates the Federal, state,
and local controls which are already, or will be, in effect on all types
of sources.  The curve for motor vehicles shows the effect of reduction
due to the proposed Phase I control measures, which affect light duty
vehicles only.  Other curves show the reductions due to stationary source
controls, aircraft ground operation controls, and Phase II controls.
                                    26

-------
   600
       (1)  Baseline
       (2)  Stationary  Source  Controls
       (3)  Motor Vehicle  Controls
       (4)  Aircraft  Controls
        5)  Phase II  "Without" Gasoline Rationing
        6)  Phase LI  "With"  Gasoline Rationing
   500
   400
GO

o
   300
   200
   100
                 ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS

                   (125 Tons/Day)
         1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
                                       YEAR
           Figure  2-4.   Summary of Control  Strategy Effectiveness
              For  San Francisco Bay Area  -  Reactive Hydrocarbons
                                 (1970-1980)
                                       27

-------
   2500
   2000
   1500
oo
o
   1000
  ALLOWABLE _EMI_SSIONS

     (1364  TONS/DAY)
    500
(1)  Baseline
(2)  Motor Vehicle Controls
(3)  Aircraft Controls
                                   +
                            +
4-
          1970
         1972
1974        1976

      YEAR
           1978
1980
               Figure  2-5.   Summary of Control  Strategy Effectiveness
                    For San  Francisco  Bay Area  -  Carbon Monoxide
                                  (1972-1980)
                                       28

-------
              TABLE 2-5.  SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AQCR BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY,  1971,  1975,  1977,  1980
SOURCE
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Refining
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning
Oegreasing
Other
Chemical Industries
Incineration and
Agricultural Burning
Fuel Combustion:
Steam Power Plants
Residential, Commercial,
and Industrial
Other:
Mineral, Food, Lumber,
and Metallurgical
Subtotal -Stationary
Ai rcraf t
Motor Vehicles
Light Duty Motor Vehicles
Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1971
THC

54
126

210
24
46
80
21
8

1
2

17
589
34

362
23
9
13
1030
RHC

5
117

42
5
9
16
-
1

-
_

-
195
31

301
19
9
12
567
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
3
-

58
62

8
186
14

326
20
78
-
624
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
27
25

-
21

10
92
110

2137
131
54
49
2573
1975
THC

61
142

222
25
49
85
25
8

1
2

20
642
38

209
23
10
17
939
RHC

6
132

44
5
10
17

1

-
-

-
215
34

170
19
10
15
463
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
3
-

61
66

10
195
21

273
22
103
-
614
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
32
25

-
.

12
78
152

1301
149
62
60
1802
1977
THC

64
150

229
26
51
88
27
8

1
2

22
670
38

154
22
10
19
913
RHC

6
140

46
5
10
18
-
1

-
_

-
225
34

123
18
10
17
428
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
4
-

63
68

11
201
25

213
21
96
-
556
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
34
25

-
_

13
81
177

933
154
56
69
1470
1980
THC

71
166

246
28
54
94
30
8

1
2

24
726
37

94
19
9
22
907
RHC

7
152

49
6
11
19
-
1

-
.

-
245
33

73
16
9
20
396
NOX

55
-

—
-
-
-
4
-

68
73

12
212
33

137
19
87
-
488
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
38
25

-
_

15
87
192

522
163
46
81
1091
ro
vo

-------
TABLE 2-6.  SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AQCR - EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I CONTROL MEASURES
Source
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Refining
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning
Degreasing
Other
Chemical Industries
Incineration and Agri-
cultural Burning
Fuel Combustion:
Steam Power Plants
Residential, Commer-
cial, and Industrial
Other:
Mineral, Food,
Lumber, and
Metallurgical
Subtotal — Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1971
THC

54
126

210
24
46
80
21
S

1
2

17
589
34 -

362
23
9
13
1030
RHC

5
117

42
5
9
16
-
1

-
-

.
195
31

301
19
9
12
567
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
3
-

58
62

8
186
14

326
20
78
-
624
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
27
25

-
21

10
92
no

2137
131
54
49
2573
1975
THC

61
36

155
3
49
85
25
3

1
2

20
440
22

159
23
10
17
671
RHC

. 6
33

31
1
-
17
-
-

-
.

.
88
20

128
19
10
15
272
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
3
-

61
66

10
195
21

270
22
103
-
611
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
32
12

-
-

12
65
130

989
149
62
60
1455
1977
THC

64
15

115
3
51
88
27
3

1
2

22
391
21

110
22
10
19
573
RHC

6
14

23
1
-
18
-
-

-
-

_
62
18

83
18
10
17
210
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
4
-

63
68

11
201
25

212
21
96
-
555
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
34
12

-
-

13
68
152

647
154
56
69
1146
1980
THC

71
16

123
3
54
94
30
3

1
2

24
421
25

68
19
9
22
564
RHC

7
15

25
1
-
19
-
-

-
-

—
67
22

49
16
9
20
183
NOX

55
-

-
-
-
-
4
-

68
73

12
212
33

136
19
87
• -
487
CO

9
-

-
-
-
-
38
12

-
-

15
74
166

363
163
46
81
893

-------
                                       TABLE 2-7.  REACTIVE HYDROCARBON  EMISSIONS  FROM MOTOR VEHICLES  -
                                          PROJECTED INVENTORY  AND ANTICIPATED  REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)
OJ

Baseline Emission Inventory3
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV VSAD (1955-65)
Inspecti on /Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Projected Reductions from
Additional Optimistic Measures
Eliminate Motorcycles
(during smog season)
LDMV Evaporative Retrofit0
HDMV Cat. Converter + Evap
+ 50 percent I/M*
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
San Francisco Bay Area
1971
Tons/day
301.0
19.0
9.0
12.0
341.0











1975
Tons /day
170.0
19.0
10.0
15.0
214.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-30.0
-3.8
-8.0
-41.8
172.2

-15.0
-21.0
-10.0
-87.8

Percent
14.0
1.8
3.7
19.5
80.5

7.0
9.8
4.7
41.0

1977
Tons/ day
123.0
18.0
10.0
17.0
168.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-23.0
-1.6
-15.0
-39.6
128.4

-17.0
-14.0
-9.0
-79.6
88.4
Percent
13.7
1.0
8.9
23.6
76.4

10.1
8.3
5.4
47.4
52.6
1980
Tons/day
73.0
16.0
9.0
20.0
118.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-14.5
-0.6
-8.8
-23.9
94.1

-20.0
-7.5
-7.6
-59.0
59.0
Percent
12.3
0.5
7.5
20.3
79.7

16.9
6.4
6.4
50.0
50.0
                             a  Based on presently proposed control programs
                             b  Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure 1n 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977 and 1980
                             c  83 percent effective, 65 percent of all nre-  1970 cars
                             d  50 percent THC effective, exhaust-64 percent  reactive, Evap. - 83 percent effective, 75 percent of all vehicles,
                               9 percent reduction in HC from I/M

                               Light Duty Motor Vehicles - (LDMV)
                               Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles - (HDMV)

-------
                                    TABLE 2-8.   CARBON MONOXIDE  EMISSIONS  FROM  MOTOR VEHICLES -
                                     PROJECTED  INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)
Co

Baseline Emission Inventory3
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV VSAD (1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
San Francisco Bay Area
1971
Tons/day
2137.0
131.0
54.0
49.0
2371.0




1975
Tons /day
1301.0
149.0
62.0
60.0
1572.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-275.0
-6.3
-31.0
-312.3
1260.0
Percent
17.5
0.4
1.9
19.9
80.2
1977
Tons/day
933.0
154.0
56.0
69.0
1212.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-196.0
-1.8
-88.0
-285.8
926.0
Percent
16.2
0.1
7.3
23.6
76.4
1980
Tons/day
522.0
163.0
46.0
81.0
812.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-109.0
-0.3
-50.0
-159.3
653.0
Percent
13.4
0.0
6.2
19.6
80.4
                           a Based on presently proposed control oroqrams
                           b Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977, 1980

                             Light Duty Motor Vehicle - {LDMV)
                             Heavy Duty Motor Vehicle - (HDMV)

-------
2.2  Sacramento Valley Intrastate AQCR
     The Sacramento Valley Air Basin is located in the northern portion
of the Great Valley and extends into the surrounding mountain slopes.   It
is characterized by valley floor elevations from 40 to 500 feet, surrounded
on three sides by mountains over 10,000 feet high.  The basin is bounded on
the west by the Coast Range, on the north and east by the Cascade Range
and the Sierra Nevada Range, and on the south by the San Joaquin Valley Air
Basin.  Figure 2-6 is a map showing the 15 counties which comprise the
air basin.
2.2.1  Regional Description
     Weather in the Sacramento Valley is characterized by hot, dry
summers and moderate to cold, wet winters.  Mean annual temperature is
62°F on the valley floor, with 15 inches annual precipitation.
     Air flow in the Sacramento Valley tends to be parallel to the valley's
axis.  Thus, wind directions are generally southerly or northerly.  A
characteristic summer daytime flow is from the south, particularly along
the east side of the valley, as the cool maritime air of the Pacific Ocean
enters the valley through the Carquinez Straits and through lesser channels
in the coastal mountain range and flows northward to replace rising air in
the valley.  On occasion, this south wind does not extend across the entire
valley floor, but instead, a light northerly counter-current may exist on
the west side of the valley.
     In winter, the wind directions are generally dependent upon the
passage of frontal systems through the valley.  Southerly winds generally
occur as a front approaches with a marked wind shift to the northwest or
north after the front has passed.  The strongest northerly winds occur
after the front has passed, decreasing in speed over a period of a few
days.
     After some winter frontal passages, an intense anti-cyclonic
circulation may develop over Oregon causing a large supply of cold
continental air from the Great Basin to spill over the Sierra into the
valley.
                                    33

-------
                                                                    Location Of
                                                                      Basin
                                                                           Lake Tahoe
                                                         Shading designates boundaries
                                                         of Sacramento regional area

                                                         Denotes location of primary
                                                         air quality monitoring stations
              Figure.2-6    Sacramento  Valley  Intrastate AQCR
Source;  California A1r  Resources Board

                                          34

-------
     Air movement may stagnate between storms in winter,  but the highest
frequency of stagnation occurs in autumn, during the period after the
characteristic summer flow ceases and before the season of winter storms
has commenced.  During any season, nighttime cold density flows may occur
in the absence of strong barometric pressure gradients.  These flows are
most pronounced in sloping mountain valleys and tend to follow water
drainage patterns.
     These density flows lead to a pooling of cold air with a temperature
inversion at the top of the pool; thus, any radiation inversion that might
occur independently on the valley floor may be augmented by cold air
flowing off of the sloping sides of the valley.
     In addition to these nighttime ground inversions, a subsidence
inversion frequently exists both day and night and at any season, but
particularly in summer.  The height of this subsidence inversion is not
well documented  but its existence is evident to people flying in the
valley or to people at a mountain location which affords an overview of
the valley.  This temperature inversion, while generally not sensibly
apparent from the valley floor, is well defined by the top of the smoke
and haze layer in the valley.
     While the entire Valley Basin appears to be equally susceptible to
the type of meteorology which augments adverse pollution levels, the
actual occurrence of smoggy days is noted most predominantly in the most
populated portions.  The area experiencing worst air quality centers around
Sacramento County in the south end of the basin.  The majority of population
in this area is concentrated in the Sacramento urban area as shown in
Figure 2-7.  This area and its surrounding counties was selected as the
control region for the development of transportation plans in the study
analysis.
     The region includes Sacramento County and the surrounding counties
of Yolo, Sutter, Yuba, Placer, and El Dorado.  It represents 30 percent
of the land in the basin, and contains 75 percent of the basin's population.
The region's boundaries correspond almost identically to those of the region
served by the Sacramento Regional Area Planning Commission (which has the
responsibility of planning in this area).

                                    35

-------
l_
                                                                                    LEGEND

                                                                                  Persons Per Acre
                                                                                     O- 1.49
                                                                                    1.50- 3.99
                                                                                    4.00-  UP
                                                                                    REGIONAL ANALYSIS DISTRICTS

                                                                                    MAJOR ANALYSIS ZONES

                                                                                   I MINOR ANALYSIS ZONES
          Figure 2-7   Population  Density by  Zone,  Sacramento  Regional  Area
                                               36

-------
     Three-fourths of all vehicular travel carried out in the region is
generated within the Sacramento urbanized area.  Through travel, although
heavy on major routes during weekends, is small compared to total vehicle
travel in the region (through trips were less than one percent of total
trips, and accounted for approximately four percent of all vehicle
mileage).
     Within the six-county area served by the Sacramento Regional Area
Planning Commission, only one concentration of population is of
sufficient size to need an extensive regional mass transportation system
at this time.  This concentration has as a nucleus the city of
Sacramento, the developed portions of Sacramento County north, northeast,
and south of the city limits, and a small developed portion of eastern
Yolo County adjacent to the city.   There are strong economic and travel
links from Sacramento County to the nearby communities of Davis, Woodland,
Folsom, and Roseville.   Within the study area the Sacramento Regional
Transit District serves some 20,000 passengers a day.   Other special  bus
services are provided by air bases and local schools.
2.2.2  Problem Definition
     Air quality in the Sacramento Basin is determined by continuous
monitoring of pollutants at a limited number of air quality monitoring
stations.  These stations are operated by the California Air Resources
Board, the Sacramento County Air Pollution Control  District, and the
Environmental Protection Agency.  The locations of these stations are
shown in Figure 2-6.
     During the period from 1970 to 1972, the basin air quality stations
have recorded several  occurrences  in which the Federal air quality
standards have been exceeded.  Table 2-9 summarizes these violation occur-
rences for carbon monoxide and oxidant.   Air quality data for nitrogen
levels in Sacramento County are shown in Table 2-10.
                                     37

-------
          TABLE 2-9   SUMMARY OF AIR QUALITY VIOLATIONS IN THE
                SACRAMENTO VALLEY AIR BASIN  (1970-1972)
Month/Year
Apri 1 ,
May,
June,
July,
Aug.,
Sept.,
Oct.,
Nov.,
Dec.,

Jan. ,
Feb.,
March,
April ,
May,
June,
July,
Aug.,
Sept.,
Oct.,
Nov. ,
Dec.,

Jan. ,
Feb.,
March,
Apri 1 ,
May,
June,
July,
Aug. ,
Sept.,
Oct.,
Nov.,
Dec.,

1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970
1970

1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971

1972
1972
,1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972

Carbon. Monoxide 2
Violations Maximum Level
__
—
—
—
--
—
1
2
—
3
__
--
—
1
--
—
--
--
—
12
11
3
27
2
1
--
—
--
--
--
—
--
—
—
	 m
3
«. _
—
--
—
—
—
10
10
—
10
__
—
—
9
—
--
--
—
—
10
34
10
34
10
9
--
—
—
—
—
--
—
—
—
	 H.
10
Oxidant
Violations Maximum Level3
<_ ••
9
10
13
12
11
8
—
--
63
__
--
3
7
9
12
29
29
15
14
1
—
119
__
—
4
5
15
25
31
22
20
15 '
1
••••__
138
— _
.24
.19
.21
.18
.17
.15
—
—
.24
._
—
.10
.12
.13
.11
.18
.19
.24
.18
.09
—
.24
_-
--
.20
.13
.14
.25
.28
.20
.17
.11
.09
' ' ""
.28
lumber of days per month the Federal  Air Quality  Standard was exceeded  in
 the Air Basin.
2Based on exceeding a 12-hour average   of 10 ppm p_r an  8-hour average of
 9 ppm; data compiled using both standards.
3Based on exceeding a 1-hour average of 0.08 ppm or 0.10  ppm; data
 compiled using both standards.
Source: California Air Resources Board
                                    38

-------
                TABLE 2-10.  ANNUAL N0? CONCENTRATIONS
                         IN SACRAMENTO COUNTY
                     (13th and J Street Station)

1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
NOg Average (ppm)
0.037
0.040
0.039
0.027
0.035
0.025
0.030
0.029
. 0.025
     Note:   The Federal air quality standard for N02 is an annual
             arithmetic mean of  .05 ppm.
     Source: Sacramento County Air Pollution Control District
     The monitoring station records clearly demonstrate that among those
pollutants which are subjects of this study (oxidant, carbon monoxide,
and nitrogen oxides), high levels of oxidant pose the most persistent air
pollution control problem in the basin.  Other pollutant measurements,
such as sulfur dioxide or particulate concentration, have on occasion
exceeded the Federal air standards, but to a far lesser degree than is
typical of oxidant violations.
2.2.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectiveness
     The following figures and tables present both the baseline data
and effectiveness of the various control measures for reactive hydro-
carbons and carbon monoxide.  The effectiveness due to each measure can
be seen in relation to those allowable emissions which are necessary to
meet the standards.  The baseline curve illustrates the Federal, state
and local  controls which are already, or will  be, in effect on all types
of sources.  The curve for motor vehicles shows the effect of reduction
due to the proposed Phase I control measures,  which affect light duty
vehicles only.   Other curves show the reductions due to stationary
source controls.
                                     39

-------
     120
     100
      80
I
to
z
p
      60
      40
               ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS

                 (34.5 TONS/DAY)
MLLUHMDLL. l-HlJOlUltO             /,.
      20
  1) Baseline
  2) Stationary Source Controls
  3) Mobile Source Controls
  4  Aircraft Controls
  5  Phase II Controls "Without" Gasoline Rationing
  6  Phase II Controls "With" Gasoline Rationing
           1970
        1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
                                        YEAR
           Figure 2-8.  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness for
                Sacramento Regional Area - Reactive Hydrocarbons
                                      (1970-1980)
                                          40

-------
700
600
                                      jALLOWABL EJMISSIONS.
                                         (621 Tons/Day)"
500
400
300
(1) Baseline
(2) Motor Vehicle Controls
(3) Aircraft Control
200
100
      1970
         1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
                                    YEAR
         Figure 2-9.  Summary of. Control Strategy Effectiveness
             for Sacramento Regional Area - Carbon Monoxide
                              (1970-1980)
                                   41

-------
TABLE "2-11.   SACRAMENTO REGIONAL AREA BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY, 1972, 1975, 1977, 1980
SOURCE
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning
Degreasing
Other
Incineration
LuHber Industry
Agriculture
Fuel Confcustion:
Residential. Commercial,
and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Mineral,
Metallurgical, and
Pet Production
Subtotal - Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
Light Duty Motor Vehicles
Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1972
THC

23.0

9.6
3.4
7.0
11.0
18.0
3.6
4.0

1.8

5.4
86.8
13.6

80.7
5.0
2.0
3.7
191.8
RHC

21.0

1.9
0.7
1.4
2.2
2.2
0.3
0.4

-

0.7
30.8
12.2

66.7
4.1
2.0
3.3
119.1
NOX

1.6

-
-
-
-
1.2
1.3
0.2

12.0

0.5
16.7
3.2

80.9
4.2
20.0
-
125.0
CO

-

-
-
-
-
29
20
6

9

1
65
65

506
29
12
14
691
1975
THC

28.0

10.1
3.6
8.5
12.0
19.0
4.0
4.4

1.9

7.0
98.5
9.7

55.9
5.2
2.3
5.3
176.9
RHC

26.0

2.0
0.7
1.7
2.4
2.3
0.3
0.4

-

0.9
36.7
8.7

46.0
4.3
2.3
4.8
102.8
NOX

2.0

- •-
-
-
-
1.3
1.5
0.2

13.0

0.7
18.7
3.3

66.1
4.6
23.0
-
115.7
. CO

-

' -
- •
-

30
21
7

9

2
69
62

345
34
14
20
544
1977
THC

31.0

10.8
3.8
9.7
12.0
20.0
4.3
4.6

2.0

8.3
108.5
9.7

41.2
4.9
2.1
6.6
173.0
RHC

. 29.0

2.2
0.8
1.9
2.4
2.4
0.4
0.5

-

i.o
40.6
8.7

33.4
4.0
2.1
5.9
94.7
NOX

2.2.

-
-
-
-
1.4
1.6
0.2

14.0

0.8
20.2
3.3

51.4
4.5
21.0
-
100.4
CO

-

-
-
-
-
32
23
7

10

2
74
62

251
35
12
24
458
1980
THC

35.0

11.6
4.1
11.6
13.0
22.0
4.7
5.0

2.1

10.0
119.1
9.7

25.3
4.5
2.0
8.2
168.8
RHC

33.0

2.3
0.8
2.3
2.6
2.6
0.4
0.5

-

1.3
45.8
8.7

19.9
3.7
2.0
7.4
87.5
NOX

2.5

-
-
-
-
1.5
1.8
0.3

15.0

1.0
22.1
3.5

33.9
4.2
20.0
-
83. 7
CO

-

-
-
-
-
34
25
3

10

2
79
63

143
38
11
31
365

-------
TABLE 2-12.  SACRAMENTO REGIONAL AREA EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I  CONTROL MEASURES
Source
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning
Degreasing
Other
Incineration
Lumber Industry
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commer-
cial, and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Mineral ,
Metallurgical, and
Petroleum Production
Subtotal - Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1972
THC

23

9.6
3.4
7.0
11
18
3.6
4.0

1.8

5.4
86.8
13.6

80.7
5.0
2.0
3.7
191.8
RHC

21

1.9
0.7
1.4
2.2
2.2
0.3
0.4

.

0.7
30.8
12.2

66.7
4.1
2.0
3.3
119.1
NOX

1.6

-
-
-
-
1.2
1.2
0.2

12

0.5
16.7
3.2

80.9
4.2
20.0
-
125.0
CO

-

-
-
-
-
29
19
6

9

1
64
65

506
29
12
14
690
1975
THC

7.0

7.1
0.4
8.5
12
9.5
1.6
3.5

1.9

7.0
58.5
5.8

43.5
5.2
2.3
5.3
120.6
RHC

6.5

1.4
0.1
-
2.4
1.2
0.1
0.4

-

0.9
13.0
5.2

34.5
4.3
2.3
4.8
64.1
NOX

2.0

-
-
-
-
0.7
1.5
0.2

13

0.7
18.1
3.3

64.8
4.6
23.0
-
113.8
CO

-


-
-
-
15
8
6

9

2
40
58.3

261
34
14
20
427.3
1977
THC

3.1

5.4
0.4
9.7
12
10
1.7
3.7

2.0

8.3
56.3
5.9

30.0
4.9
2.1
6.6
105.8
RHC

2.9

1.1
0.1
-
2.4
1.2
0.2
0.4

-

1.0
9.3
5.3

24.8
4.0
2.1
5.9
49.7
NOX

2.2

-
-
-
-
0.7
1.6
0.2

14

0.8
19.5
3.3

50.6
4.5
21.0
-
98.9
CO

-

-
-
-
-
16
9
6

10

2
43
58.3

173
35
12
24
345.3
1980
THC

3.5

5.8
0.4
11.6
13
11
1.9
4.0

2.1

10.0
63.3
6.5

19.6
4.5
2.0
8.2
101.7
RHC

3.3

1.2
0.1
-
2.6
1.3
0.2
0.4

-

1.3
10.4
5.8

15.6
3.7
2.0
7.4
43.0
NOX

2.5

-
-
-
-
0.8
1.8
0.2

15

1.0
21.3
3.5

33.5
4.2
20.0
-
825
CO

-

-
-
-
-
17
10
7

10

2
46
59.6

99
38
11
31
284.6

-------
         TABLE  2-13.   REACTIVE HYDROCARBON  EMISSIONS  FROM MOTOR  VEHICLES  -
             PROJECTED INVENTORY  AND  ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)

Baseline Emission Inventory3.
LDHV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV VSAD (1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Projected Reductions from
Additional Optimistic Measures
Eliminate Motorcycles
(during smog season)
LDMV Evaporate Retrofit0
HDMV Cat. Converter + Evap
+ 50 percent 1/M*
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Sacramento Regional Area
1972
Tons/day
66.7
4.1
2.0
3.3
76.1









1975
Tons/day
46.0
4.3
2.3
4.8
57.4
Reductions
Tons /day
-7.9
-1.6
-2.2
-11.7
45.7

-4.8
-6.1
-2.2
-24.8
32.6
Percent
13.8
2.8
3.8
20.4
79.6

8.4
10.6
3.8
43.2
56.8
1977
Tons/day
.33.4
4.0
2.1
5.9
45.4
Reductions
Tons /day
-5.2
-1.0
-4.7
-10.9
34.5

-5.9
-4.0
-2.0
-22.8
22.6
Percent
11.5
2.2
10.4
24.1
76.0

13.0
8.8
4.4
50.3
49.8
1980
Tons/day
19.9
3.7
2.0
7.4
33.0 •
Reductions
Tons /day
-3.3
-0.5
-2.4
-6.2
26.8

-7.4
-2.1
-1.8
-17.5
15.5
Percent
10.0
1.5
7.3
18.8
81.2

2.2
6.4
5.5
32.9
47.0
a Based on presently proposed control programs
b Based on 10 percent Idle Test  Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977 and 1980
c 83 percent effective, 65 percent of all pre- 1970 cars
d 50 percent THC effective, exhaust-64 percent reactive, Evap. - 83 percent effective, 75 percent of all vehicles,
  9 percent reduction in HC from I/M

  Light Duty Motor Vehicles - (LDMV)
  Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles - (HDMV)

-------
         TABLE 2-14.   CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS  FROM MOTOR  VEHICLES  -
          PROJECTED  INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED  REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)

Baseline Emission Inventory
LDMV
HOMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV VSAD (1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Sacramento Reqional Area
1972
Tons/day
506.0
29.0
12.0
14.0
561.0




1975
Tons/day
345.0
34.0
14.0
20.0
413.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-73.0
-2.6
-8.2
-83.8
329.0
Percent
17.7
0.6
2.0
20.3
79.7
1977
Tons/day
251.0
35.0
12.0
24.0
322.0
Reductions
Tons /day
-53.0
-1.1
-24.0
-78.1
244.0
Percent
16.5
0.3
7.5
24.3
75.8
1980
Tons, 'day
143.0
38.0
11.0
31.0
223.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-30.0
-0.3
-14.0
-44.3
179.0
Percent
13.5
0.1
6.3
20.0
80.3
a Based on presently proposed control nroqrams
b Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 nercent Loaded Test Failure in 1977, 1980

  Liqht Duty-Motor Vehicles - (LDMV)
  Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles - (HDMV)

-------
 2.3  San Joaquin Valley Intrastate AQCR
     The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin consists of all of the counties
 of Amador, Calaveras, Fresno, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, San
 Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare and Tuolumne and the western portion of
 Kern County.  The air basin lies in the southern portion of the Great
 Valley and extends into the neighboring mountain slopes.  It is bounded
 on the west by the Coastal Range, on the east by the Sierra Nevada
 Mountains, on the south by the Tehachapi Mountains,  and on the north
 by the Sacramento Valley Air Basin.  A map of the basin is shown in
 Figure 2-10.
     2.3.1  Regional Description
     Due to the temperature contrast during much of the year between the
 valley and the Pacific waters, air from, the coast enters the valley,
 primarily through the gap at San Francisco Bay, and undergoes rapid
 modification in temperature and relative humidity.  Part of the flow
 turns northward into the Sacramento Valley and part southward into the
 San Joaquin Valley.   A wind divergence zone is created by the splitting
 of the airflow through the Coast Range.   The mean summer position of this
 divergent zone lies  at about the Sacramento-San Joaquin and the Amador-
 El Dorado County borders.
     The basin includes 30,200 square miles of land surface and had a
 population over 1.6  million people in 1970, which is a 16 percent increase
 since 1960.   Although the  basin contains  19 percent of the state's land
 area, only eight percent of its people reside within the basin.
     A network of railroads, air routes,  and highways interconnect the
 three major urban centers  in the San Joaquin Valley, Stockton, Fresno,
 and Bakersfield, and provide access for major recreational  areas  of
Yosemite, Kings Canyon and Sequoia National Parks located in  the  eastern
 portion of the valley.   Port facilities for water transportation  are
 available only in Stockton; hence, waterways are not a significant part
of the circulation of people and goods within the valley.
     The railroad system within the valley  is principally limited to the
 shipment of industrial, agricultural, and commercial  freight.   Passenger
services which are being offered nationally by the newly created  national
 railway system, AMTRAK, has not been extended to the study area.
                                  46

-------
                                                                  Location of
                                                                     Basin
         (AMADOR -^o^
Jackson 4-1. 2^  ,
                                ^Visalia

                          HanfoT-
                 Figure 2-10  San Joaquin Valley Intrastate AQCR
                                     47

-------
     Each of the three major urban centers have airports which are served
by the intrastate airways and have facilities for both private and public
airlines.  The public need for air freight and travel by air within the
valley is adequately served by these airports.
     The valley highway network is the primary constituent of the
transportation system.  Freeways and highways interconnect the major
urban centers in the valley and provide access to major recreational
facilities for residents of the valley as well as residents of other
portions of California and the Uiited States, while arterials, collectors,
and locals provide for circulation of motor vehicles within the urban
centers.  At present few freeways exist for local circulation in the
three major urban areas.
     Of the existing freeways in the study area, Route 99 is the backbone
of the entire region.  Most of the urban, industrial and agricultural
development within the valley is located along this facility which has
historically served as a primary north-south transportation facility for
trucked commodities and motor vehicle passengers with origins and
destinations not only within the valley but other major urban centers in
California as well.
     In recognition of the demand for a north-south "through route" a
new major freeway has recently been completed within the San Joaquin
Valley.  The new Interstate 5 (1-5) generally parallels Route 99 to the
west and bypasses almost all existing communities within the valley.
Ultimately 1-5 will extend along the west coast of the United States from
the border of Canada to Mexico.
     Intercity bus companies provide passenger services within the valley;
however, among the variety of different modes of transportation available
the private automobile is by far the dominant mode.  It was previously
established that the primary air pollution problem is a result of an
excess of reactive hydrocarbons, a large fraction of which are emitted by
automobiles.  The quantity of hydrocarbon emissions from automobiles is
directly related to the vehicle miles of travel (VMT) within the region.
Consequently, air pollution control strategies directed at reducing the
dominance of the automobile in the transportation system of the San Joaquin
Valley will result in a reduction of the air pollution problem.
                                    48

-------
2.3.2  Problem Definition
     National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been exceeded
in seven cities in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.  These cities are:
Stockton, Fresno, Bakersfield, Modesto, Visalia, Parlier, and Five
Points.  Each of the areas surrounding the cities have unique charac-
teristics with regard to air quality, meteorology, stationary sources,
population distribution, and transportation.  An adequate transportation
strategy must therefore consider each area individually in order that the
peculiarities of each area be considered and efficiently dealt with.  Some
of the control measures which will be considered in this study can only be
effectively applied locally; others, because of legal and
procedural constraints, may not be reasonable unless applied to a larger
area; the air basin or the state.  An example of the first type of.
measure would be parking restrictions in the central business district
of a city; an example of the second type would be a vehicle retrofit
program.
     Three counties in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin have been
selected for study: San Joaquin County, Fresno County, and Kern County.
San Joaquin County contains the city of Stockton; Fresno County contains
the cities of Fresno, Parlier, and Five Points; Kern County contains
Bakersfield.   The air pollution problems of Modesto and Visalia are not
directly dealt with in this study; it is hoped that the general  analytical
results, ideas, and methodologies may be of benefit to these areas in
local planning.  (Basin-wide and state-wide control measures, of course,
will  be of direct benefit to these areas.)   Approximately 65 percent of
the total  population lives within these three counties.  .The extremely
high potential  for growth in both population and travel  in these three
counties increases the need to concentrate  this particular study on them
and treat them as relatively independent entities.
                                    49

-------
2.3.3  Proposed Control Measures and Their Effectiveness
     The following figures and tables present the baseline emission
inventory data and the effectiveness of the various control  measures
examined.  The effectiveness due to each measure can be seen in
relation to those allowable emissions which are necessary to meet the
standards.  The baseline curve illustrates the Federal, state and local
controls which are already, or will be, in effect on all types of
sources.  The curve for motor vehicles shows the effect of reduction due
to the proposed Phase I control measures, which affect light duty vehicles
only.  Other curves show the reductions due to stationary source
controls.
                                    50

-------
SAN  JOAQUIN  COUNTY
         si

-------
       40
       30
OO

o
       20
      10
 ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS

"Tl5.FTonT7pay)        "


 (1)  Baseline
 (2)  Stationary Source Controls
 (3)  Motor Vehicle Controls
 (4)  Phase II Controls
           1970
       1972
1974
1976
1978
                                     YEAR
1980
        Figure  2-11.   Summary of  Control  Strategy Effectiveness for
                   San Joaquin County  -  Reactive Hydrocarbons
                                      52

-------
 300
200
TOO
                  (1) Baseline
                  (2) Motor Vehicle Controls
            ALLOWABLE  EMISSIONS
(113 TONS/DAY)
     1970        1972        1974        1976        1978        1980

                                 YEAR
    Figure  2-12.   Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness
               for San Joaquin County - Carbon Monoxide
                                 53

-------
                TABLE 2-15.   SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY  BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY, 1971, 1975, 1977, 1980
SOURCE
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commer-
cial , and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Metallurgi-
cal, Mineral, Lumber,
and Petroleum Prod.
Subtotal - Stationary
Ai rcraf t
Motor Vehicles
Light Duty Motor Vehicles
Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1971
THC

6.8

3.0
3.2
8.8
4.0
1.5

0.7

0.2
28.2
0.08

29.9
2.6
1.1
0.8
62.7
RHC

6.3

0.6
0.6
1.7
0.5
0.2

-


9.9
0.07

24.9
2.2
1.1
0.7
NOX

0.4

-
-
-
0.3
0.1

6.8


7.6
0.06

27.2
2.7
11.5

38.9 ! 49.1
CO

-

-
-
-
7
2

1

2
12
1.9

174
15
7
3
213
1975
THC

7.8

3.2
3.6
9.3
4.2
1.7

0.7

0.2
30.7
0.11

20.4
3.1
1.4
1.0
56.7
RHC

7.2

0.6
0.7
1.9
0.5
0.2

-

.
11.1
0.10

16.7
2.5
1.4
0.9
32.7
NOX

0.5

-
-
-
0.3
0.1

7.2

.
8.1
0.08

24.5
3.4
14.1
-
50.2
CO

-

-
-
-
7
3

1

2
12
2.5

124
19
9
4
171
1977
THC

8.3

3.3
3.8
9.6
4.4
1.8

0.8

0.2
32.2
0.13

15.8
3.1
1.5
1.1
53.8
RHC

7.7

0.7
0.8
1.9
0.5
0.2

-

.
11.8
0.12

12.7
2.5
1.5
1.0
28.7
NOX

0.5

-
-
-
0.3
0.1

7.4

.
8.3
0.09

19.7
3.4
14.5
-
46.0
CO

-

-
-
-
8
3

1

2
14
2.8

94
21
8
4
144
1980
THC

9.1

3.4
4.1
10.1
4.6
2.0

0.8

0.2
34.3
0.12

10.1
2.9
1.4
1.4
50.2
RHC

8.3

0.7
0.8
2.0
0.6
0.2

-

.
12.6
o.n

7.9
2.4
1.4
1.3
NOX

0.5

-
-
-
0.4
0.1

7.8

.
8.8
0.10

13.4
3.2
13.7
-
25.7 39.2
CO

-

-
-
-
8
3

1

2
14
2.9

57
24
7
5
110
cn

-------
          TABLE 2-16.  SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY EMISSION  INVENTORY AFTER  PHASE  I  CONTROL MEASURES

Source
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:

Surface Coating

Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commer-
cial , and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Metallurgi-
cal, Mineral, Lumber,
and Petroleum Prod.
Subtotal — Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total

THC

o.H


3.0


3.2
8.8
4.0
1.5


0.7



0.2
28.2
0.08

29.9
2.6
1.1
0.8
62.7
197
RHC

5.3
•'

0.6


0.6
1.7
0.5
0.2


-



-
9.9
0.07

24.9
2.2
1.1
0.7
38.9

NOX

0 . •'-


-


-
-
0.3
0.1


6.8



-
7.6
0.06

27.2
2.7
11.5
-
49.1

CO

-


-


-
-
7
2


1



2
12
1.9

174
T5
7
3
213

THC

1.9


2.2


2.4
9.3
1.4
1.4


0.7



0.2
19.5
0.11

15.8
3.1
1.4
1.0
40.9
197
RHC

1.8


0.4


-
1.9
n.2
0.1


-



-
4.4
0.10

12.6
2.5
1.4
0.9
21.9
5
NOX

0,5


-


-
-
0.1
0.1


7.2



-
7.9
0.08

24.0
3.4
14.1
-
49.5

CO

-


-


-
-
2
2


1



2
7
2.5

94
19
9
4
136

THC

0.8


1.6


2.5
9.6
1.5
1.5


0.8



0.2
18.5
0.13

11.4
3.1
1.5
1.1
35.7
19
RHC

0.8


0.3


-
1.9
0.2
0.2


-



-
3.4
0.12

8.9
2.5
1.5
1.0
17.4
'7
NOX

0.5


-


-
-
0.1
0.1


7.4



-
8.1
0.09

19.4
3.4
14.5
-
45.5

CO




-


-
-
3
2


1



2
8
2.8

65
21
8
4
109

THC

0.9


1.7


2.7
10.1
1.6
1.6


0.8



0.2
19.6
0.12

7.2
2.9
1.4
1.4
32.6
198C
RHC

0.8


0.3


-
2.0
0.2
0.2


-



-
3.5
0.11

5.6
2.4
1.4
1.3
14.3
i
;;ox

0.5


-


-
-
0.1
0.1


7.8



-
8.0
0.10

13.2
3.2
13.7
-
38.2

CO

-


-


-
-
3
3


1



2
9
2.9

40
24
7
5
88
171
tn

-------
                                       TABLE  2-17.    REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM  MOTOR  VEHICLES -
                                         PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED  REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)
Ol

Baseline Emission Inventory
LDMV
HOMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Phase I Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1956 Retrofit (1955-G5)
Inspecti on/Mai ntenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Projected Reductions from
Phase 11 Measures
Eliminate Motorcycles
(during smog season)
LDMV Evaporative Retrofit0
HDMV Cat. Converter + Evap
+ 50 percent I/Ma
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
San Joaquin County
1971
Tons /day
24.9
2.2
1.1
0.7
28.9

•









1975
Tons /day
16.7
2.5
1.4
0.9
21.5
Reductions
Tons/day
-2.7
-0.6
-0.8
-4.1
17.4

-0.9
-2.2
-1.3
-8.5
13.0
Percent
12.6
2.8
3.7
19.1
80.9

4.2
10.2
6.0
39.5
60.5
1977
Tons/day
12.7
2.5
1.5
1.0
17.7
Reductl ons
Tons /day
-1.9
-0.4
-1.5
-3.8
13.9

-1.0
-1.5
-1.3
-7.6
10.1
Percent
10.7
2.3
8.5
21.5
78.5

5.6
8.5
7.3
4.3
57.1
1980
Tons/day
7.9
2.4
1.4
1.3
13.0
Reductions
Tons /day
-1.2
-0.2
-0.9
-2.3
10.7

-1.3
-0.8
-1.2
-5.6
7.4
Percent
9.2
1.5
6.9
17.7
82.3

10.0
6.1
9.2
4.3
56.9
                                 a  Based on presently planned control programs
                                 b  Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977 and 1980
                                 c  83 percent effective, 65 percent of all pre- 1970 cars
                                 d  50 percent THC effectice, exhaust-64 percent reactive, Evap. -  83 percent effective, 75  percent of all vehicles,
                                    9 percent reduction in HC from I/M

                                    Light Duty Motor Vehicles -  (LDMV)
                                    Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles -  (HDMV)

-------
                                    TABLE  2-18.   CARBON  MONOXIDE  EMISSIONS  FROM MOTOR VEHICLES -
                                     PROJECTED INVENTORY AND  ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)
CJl

Baseline Emission Inventory8
LDMV
HDM'-,
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1966 Retrofit(1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaini nq Emissions
San Joaquin County
1971
Tons/day
174.0
15.0
7.0
3.0
199.0





1975
Tons/day
124.0
19.0
9.0
4.0
156.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-Z6.0
-1.0
-2.9
-29.9
126.0
Percent
-16.7
-0.6
-1.9
19.2
80.8
1977
Tons/day
94.0
21.0
8.0
4.0
127.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-20.0
-0.4
-8.8
-29.2
97.8
Percent
-15.7
-0.3
-6.9
23.0
77.0
1980
Tons /day
57.0
24.0
7.0
5.0
93.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-12.0
-0.1
-5.4
-17.5
75.5
Percent
-12.9
-0.1
-5.8
18.8
81.2
                          a  Based on presently planned control programs
                          b  Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977, 1980

                            Light Duty Motor Vehicles - (LDMV)
                            Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles - (HDMV)

-------
FRESNO  COUNTY
       58

-------
     50
     40
S
     30
     20
     10
AUpWABLEJMISSIflNS	
  (19.8 TONS/DAY)
 (1) Baseline
 (2) Stationary Source Controls
 (3) Mobile  Source Controls
 (4) Phase II Controls
          1970
         1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
                                      YEAR
            Figure 2-13.  Summary of  Control  Strategy Effectiveness
                  for Fresno County  -  Reactive Hydrocarbons
                                 (1970-1980)
                                     59

-------
300
                                        ALLpWABLE_EMISSIONS

                                           (271 TONS/DAY)

200
100
1);Baseline
2) Motor Vehicle Controls
                             •4-
                               4-
      1970
       1972
1974       1976

     YEAR
1978
1980
         Figure 2-14.  Summary  of Control Strategy  Effectiveness
                    for Fresno County - Carbon Monoxide
                             (1970-1980)
                                60

-------
TABLE 2-19.   FRESNO  COUNTY BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY, 1970, 1975,  1977, 1980
SOURCE
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Production
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
L unfcer Industry
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commercial,
and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Mineral,
and Metallurgical
Subtotal - Stationary
A1 rcraf t
Motor Vehicles
Light Duty Motor Vehicles
Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1970
THC

7.3
6.4

4.2
4.3
12.0
8.0
3.2
21.0

1.5

0.8
68.7
1.1

41.0
1.9
0.8
1.1
114.6
RHC

-
6.0

0.8
0.9
2.4
1.0
0.3
2.2

-

-
13.6
1.0

34.2
1.6
0.8
1.0
52.2
NOX

4.0
0.6

-
-
-
0.6
0.3
0.8

8.9

-
15.2
0.5

31.2
1.9
7.4
-
56.2
CO

-
-

-
_
-
14
22
34

3

-
73
8

231
10
5
4
331
1975
THC

5.1
7.2

4.4
4.7
13.0
8.5
2.9
25.0

1.6

1.2
73.6
1.2

21.9
2.4
1.1
1.7
101.9
RHC

-
6.8

0.9
0.9
2.6
1.0
0.3
2.5

-

-
15.0
1.1

17.7
2.0
1.1
1.5
38.4
NOX

2.8
0.7

-
.
-
0.6
0.3
1.0

9.4

-
14.8
0.6

26.0
2.6
10.4
-
54.4
CO

-
-

-
—
-
15
21
40

3

-
79
10

141
15
6
6
257
1977
THC

5.1
7.5

4.6
4.8
13.0
8.7
3.5
27.0

1.6

1.4
77.2
1.2

15.5
2.4
1.1
1.9
99.3
RHC

-
7.1

0.9
1.0
2.6
1.0
0.2
2.7

-

-
15.5
1.1

12.3
1.9
1.1
1.7
33.6
NOX

2.8
0.7

-
_
-
0.7
0.2
1.2

9.7

.
15.3
0.7

19.8
2.5
9.6
-
47.9
CO

-
-

-
_
-
15
24
43

3

_
85
11

97
16
6
7
222
1980
THC

5.1
8.2

4.8
5.2
14.0
9.1
3.8
30.0

1.7

1.7
83.6
1.2

9.4
2.3
1.0
2.0
99.5
RHC

-
. 7.7

1.0
1.0
2.8
1.1
0.3
3.0

-

_
16.9
1.1

7.3
1.9
1.0
1.8
30.0
NOX

2.8
0.8

-
_
-
0.7
0.3
1.5

10.2

_
16.3
0.8

11.9
2.4
10.2
-
41.6
CO

-
-

-
„
-
16
25
47

3

_
91
11

59
17
5
7
190

-------
                TABLE 2-20.  FRESNO COUNTY EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I CONTROL MEASURES
Source
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Refining and
Production
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
Lumber Industry
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Conmer-
cial, and Industrial
Other:
Chemical , Mineral,
and Metallurgical
Subtotal — Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
LOMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1970
THC

7.3
6.4

4.2
4.3
12
8.0
3.2
21

1.5

0.8
68.7
1.1

41.0
1.9
0.8
1.1
114.6
RHC

_
6.0

0.8
0.9
2.4
1.0
0.3
2.2

-

-
13.6
1.0

34.2
1.6
0.8
1.0
52.2
NOX

4.0
0.6

-
-
-
0.6
0.3
0.8

8.9

-
15.2
0.5

31.2
1.9
7.4
-
56.2
CO

.
-

-
-
-
14
22
34

3

.
73
8

231
10
5
4
331
1975
THC

5.1
1.8

3.0
3.3
13
3.0
0.9
2.0

1.6

1.2
34.9
1.2

17.2
2.4
1.1
1.7
58.5
RHC

.
1.7

0.6
-
2.6
0.4
0.1
0.2

-

.
5.6
1.1

13.5
2.0
1.1
1.5
24.8
NOX

2.8
0.7

-
-
-
0.2
0.1
0.1

9.4

.
13.3
0.6

25.5
2.6
10.4
-
52.4
CO

-
-

-
-
-
5
5
3

3

-
13
10

107
15
6
6
157
1977
THC

5.1
0.8

2.3
3.4
13
3.1
0.9
2.2

1.6

1.4
33.8
1.2

11.1
2.4
1.1
1.9
51.5
RHC

-
0.7

0.5
-
2.6
0.4
0.1
0.2

-

-
4.5
1.1

8.5
1.9
1.1
1.7
18.8
NOX

2.8
0.7

-
-
-
0.2
0.1
0.1

9.7

.
13.6
0.7

19.5
2.5
9.6
-
45.7
CO

-
-

-
-
-
5
6
4

3

-
18
11

67
16
6
7
125
1980
THC

5.1
0.9

2.4
3.6
14
3.2
0.9
2.4

1.7

1.7
35.9
1.2

6.7
2.3
1.0
2.0
49.1
RHC

-
0.8

0.5
-
2.8
0.4
0.1
0.2

-

-
4.8
1.1

5.0
1.9
1.0
1.8
15.6
NOX

2.8
0.8

-
-
-
0.2
0.1
0.2

10.2

-
14.3
0.8

11.8
2.4
10.2
-
39.5
CO

-
-

-
-
-
6
6
4

3

-
19
11

41
17
5
7
100
ro

-------
                                TABLE  2-21.    REACTIVE  HYDROCARBON  EMISSIONS  FROM MOTOR  VEHICLES -
                                  PROJECTED INVENTORY  AND ANTICIPATED  REDUCTIONS (1975-1980)
OJ

Baseline Emission Inventorya
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Phase I Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1966 Retrofit (1955-65)
Inspect! on /Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaininq Emissions
Projected Reductions from
Phase II Measures
Eliminate Motorcycles
(during smog season)
LDMV Evaporate Retrofit0
HDMV Cat. Converter + Evap
+ 50 percent I/Md
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Fresno County
1970
Tons/day
34.2
1.6
0.8
1.0
37.6









197E
Tons /day
17.7
2.0
1.1
1.5
22.3
Reductions
Tons /day
-2.8
-0.6
-0.8
-4.2
18.1

-1.5
-2.3
-1.0
-9.0
13.3
Percent
12.6
2.7
3.6
18.8
81.2

6.7
10.3
4.5
40.4
59.6
1977
Tons/day
12.3
1.9
1.1
1.7
17.0
Reductions
Tons /day
-1.9
-0.4
-1.5
-3.8
13.2

-1.7
-1.5
-1.0
-8.0
9.0
Percent
11.2
2.4
8.8
22.4
77.6

10.0 .
8.8
5.9
47.1
52.9
1980
Tons /day
7.3
1.9
1.0
1.8
12.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-1.2
-0.2
-0.9
-2.3
9.7

-1.8
-0.8
-0.9
-5.8
6.2
Percent
10.0
1.7
7.5
19.2.
80.8

15.0
6.7
7.5
48.3
51.7
                            a  Based on presently planned control programs
                            b  Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure  in 1977 and 1980
                            c  83 percent effective, 65 percent of all pre- 1970 cars
                            d  50 percent THC effectice, exhaust-64 percent reactive, Evap. - 83 percent effective, 75 percent of all vehicles,
                              9 percent reduction in HC from I/M

                              Light Duty Motor Vehicles -  (LDMV)
                              Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles -  (HDMV)

-------
               TABLE 2-22.   CARBON MONOXIDE  EMISSION  FROM  MOTOR VEHICLES  -
                PROJECTED INVENTORY AND ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)

Baseline Emission Inventory*
LDHV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Phase I Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1966 Retrofit (1955-65)
Inspect! on /Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Fresno County
1970
Tons/day
231.0
10.0
5.0
4.0
250.0




1975
Tons /day
141.0
15.0
6.0
6.0
168.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-30.0
-1.1
-3.3
-34.4
134.0
Percent
17.9
0.7
2.0
20.5
79.8
1977
Tons /day
97.0
16.0
6.0
7.0
126.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-20.0
-0.4
-9.2
-29.6
96.0
Percent
15.9
0.3
7.3
23.5
76.2
1980
Tons/day
59.0
17.0
5.0
7.0
88.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-12.0
-0.1
-5.6
-17.7
70.0
Percent
13.6
0.1
6.4
20.1
79.5
a Based on presently planned control programs
b Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977, 1980

  Light Duty Motor Vehicle - (LDHV)
  Heavy Duty Motor Vehicle - (HDMV)

-------
KERN  COUNTY
      65

-------
<
a
to
     50
     40
     30
      20
     10
             ALLOWABLE EMISSIONS
               (17.1 TONS/DAY)
            (1) Baseline
            (2) Stationary Source  Controls
            (3) Motor Vehicle Controls
            (4) Phase II Controls
          1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
                                      YEAR
         Figure 2-15.  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness
            for Kern County  - Reactive Hydrocarbons (1970-1980)
                                     66

-------
     Figure 2-16  Summary of Control Strategy Effectiveness
                  for  Kern County - Carbon Monoxide
                  (1970 - 1980)
400
300
         _ ALLOWABLL_EM1SSIONS
               ( 45 TONS/DAY)
200
100
            (1) Baseline
            (2) Motor Vehicle Controls
                 H	1	1	h
                            -I	1	1	h
     1970
1972        1974        1976

                YEAR
1978
1980
       Figure 2-16.  Summary of Control  Strategy Effectiveness
           for Kern County  - Carbon Monoxide (1970-1980)
                                67

-------
               TABLE 2-23.  KERN COUNTY BASELINE EMISSION  INVENTORY,  1971,  1975,  1977 AND  1980
SOURCE
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Production and
Refining
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commercial,
and Industrial
Subtotal — Stationary
A1 rcraf t
Motor Vehicles
Light Duty Motor Vehicles
Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1971
THC

61.8
5.7

2.1
2.1
8.1
14.0
5.0

0.8
98.8
0.12

36.4
3.7
1.6
1.5
142.1
RHC

1.5
5.3

0.4
0.4
1.6
1.4
0.5

-
11.1
0.11

30.3
3.0
1.6
1.4
47.5
NOX

46.0
-

-
-
-
1.9
-

7.5
55.4
0.08

33.8
3.9
16.3
-
109.5
CO

102
-

-
-
-
29
6

1
139
3

209
20
10
12
383
1975
THC

66.0
6.5

2.2
2.3
8.4
15.0
5.3

0.8
106.5
0.14

22.9
4.0
1.9
2.5
137.9
RHC

1.6
6.0

0.4
0.5
1.7
1.5
0.5

-
12.2
0.13

18.7
3.3
1.9
2.3
38.5
NOX

46.0
-

-
-
-
2.0
-

7.9
55.9
O.K

28.5
4.4
19.2
-
108.1
CO

102
-

-
-
-
30
7

1
141
4

138
25
12
2
322
1977
THC
9
69.0
7.0

2.3
2.4
8.6
15.0
5.7

0.9
110.9
0.16

17.4
3.8
1.8
2.8
136.9
RHC

1.7
6.5

0.4
0.5
1.7
1.5
0.6

-
12.9
0.14

13.9
3.1
1.8
2.5
34.3
NOX

46.0
-

-
-
-
2.1
-

8.0
56.1
0.11

22.4
4.2
18.2
-
101.0
CO

102
-

-
-
-
31
7

1
142
4

103
26
11
3
279.1
1980
THC

76.0
7.6

2.3
2.6
8.9
16.0
6.1

0.9
120.4
0.17

10.6
3.5
1.7
3.1
139.5
RHC

1.9
7.0

0.5
0.5
1.8
1.6
0.6

-
13.9
0.15

8.3
2.8
1.7
2.8
29.7
NOX

46.0
-

-
-
-
2.1
-

8.3
56.4
0.13

14.4
3.9
16.6
-
91.4
CO

102
-

-
-
-
32
8

1
144
5

59
29
9
3
249
CO

-------
TABLE 2-24.  KERN COUNTY EMISSION INVENTORY AFTER PHASE I CONTROL MEASURES
Source
Stationary Sources
Petroleum Production and
Refining
Petroleum Marketing
Organic Solvents:
Surface Coating
Dry Cleaning (1/3)
and Degreasing (2/3)
Other
Incineration
Agriculture
Fuel Combustion:
Residential, Commer-
cial , and Industrial
Other:
Chemical, Mineral ,
Metallurgical , and
Lumber
Subtotal - Stationary
Aircraft
Motor Vehicles
LDMV
HOMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
Total
1971
THC

61
5.7

2.1
2.1
8.1
14
5.0

0.8


98.8
0.12

36.4
3.7
1.6
1.5
142.1
RHC

1.5
5.3

0.4
0.4
1.6
1.4
0.5

-


11.1
0.11

30.3
3.0'
1.6
1.4
47.5
NOX

46
-

-
-
-
1.9
-

7.5


55.4
0.08

33,8
3.9
16.3
-
109.5
CO

102
-

-
-
-
29
6

-

1
139.0
3

209
20
10
2
383
1975
THC

66
1.7

1.5
1.5
8.4
5.2
0.4

0.8


85.5
0.14

18.5
4.0
1.9
2.5
108.9
RHC

1.6
1.5

0.3
-
1.7
0.5
-

-


5.6
0.13

14.1
3.3
1.9
2.3
27.3
NOX

46
-

-
-
-
0.7
-

7.9


54.6
0.10

27.9
4.4
19.2
-
106.2
CO

102
-

'
-
-
10
1

1

1
115
4

105
25
12
2
263
1977
THC

69
0.7

1.1
1.6
8.6
5.3
0.4

0.9


87.6
0.16

12.6
3.8
1.8
2.8
108.8
RHC

1.7
0.7

0.2
-
1.7
0.5
-

-


4.8
0.14

9.7
3.1
1.8
2.5
22.0
NOX

46
-

-
-
-
0.7
-

8.0


54.4.
0.11

22.1
4.2
18.2
-
99.3
CO

102
-

-
-
-
11
1

1

1
116
4

71
26
11
3
231
1980
THC

76
0.8

1.2
1.7
8.9
5.6
0.5

0.9


95.6
0.17

7.5
3.5
1.7
3.1
111.6
RHC

1.9
0.7

0.3
-
1.8
0.6
0.1

-


5.4
0.15

5.8
2.8
1.7
2.8
18.7
NOX

46
-

-
-
-
0.7
-

8.3


55.0
0.13

14.2
3.9
16.6
-
89.8
CO

102
-

-
-
-
11
1

1

1
116
5

41
29
9
3
203

-------
TABLE  2-25.   REACTIVE HYDROCARBON  EMISSION FROM  MOTOR  VEHICLES -
    PROJECTED  INVENTORY  AND  ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)

Baseline Emission Inventory2
LDMV
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycles
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Phase I Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1966 Retrofit(1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Projected Reductions from
Phase II
Eliminate Motorcycles
(during smog season)
LDMV Evaporative Retrofit0
HDMV Cat. Converter + Evap
+ 50 percent I/Md
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Kern County
1971
Tons -'day
30.3
2.0
1.5
1.4
36.3





p



1975
Tons/day
18.7
3.3
1.9
2.3
26.2
Reductions
Tons/day
-3.0
-0.7
-0.9
-4.6
21.6

-2.3
-2.5
-1.7
-11.1
15.1
Percent
11.5
2.7
3.4
17.6
82.4

8.8
9.5
6.5
42.4
57.6
1977
Tons /day
13.9
3.1
1.8
2.5
21.3
Reductions
Tons /day
-2.1
-0.4
-1.7
-4.2
17.1
Percent
9.8
1.9
8.0
19.7
80.3
i
-2.5
-1.7
-1.6
-10.0
11.3
11.7
8.0
7.5
46.9
53.1
1980
Tons /day
8.3
2.8
1.7
2.8
15.6
Reductions
tons /day
-1.3
-0.2
-1.0
-2.5
13.1

-2.8
-0.9
-1.3
-7.5
8.5
Percent
8.3
1.3
6.4
16.0
84.0

1.8
5.8
8.3
48.1
54.5
a  Based on presently planned control programs
b  Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977 and 1980
c  83 percent effective, 65 percent of all pre- 1970 cars
d  50 percent THC effectice, exhaust-64 percent reactive, Evan. - 83 percent effective, 75 percent of all vehicles,
   9 percent reduction in HC from I/M

   Light Duty Motor Vehicles - (LDMV)
   Heavy Duty Motor Vehicles - (HDMV)

-------
         TABLE  2-26.   CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS  FROM  MOTOR VEHICLES  -
           PROJECTED  INVENTORY  AMD ANTICIPATED REDUCTIONS  (1975-1980)

Baseline Emission Inventory*
LDMV x
HDMV
Diesels
Motorcycl es
TOTAL
Projected Reductions from
Control Measures
LDMV Cat. Converter
LDMV Pre-1966 Retrofit (1955-65)
Inspection/Maintenance
Total Reductions
TOTAL Remaining Emissions
Kern County
1971
Tons /day
209.0
20.0
10.0
2.0
241.0




1975
Tons /day
138.0
25.0
12.0
2.0
177.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-29.0
-1.0
-3.2
-33.2
144.0
Percent
16.4
0.6
1.8
18.8
81.3
1977
Tons/day
103.0
26.0
11.0
3.0
143.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-22.0
-0.5
-10.0
-32.5
111.0
Percent
15.4
0.3
7.0
22.7
77.6
1980
Tons/day
59.0
29.0
9.0
3.0
100.0
Reductions
Tons/day
-12.0
-0.1
-5.6
-17.7
82.0
Percent
12.0
0.1
5.6
17.7
82.0
a Based on presently planned control oronrams
b Based on 10 percent Idle Test Failure in 1975, 50 percent Loaded Test Failure in 1977, 1980

  Light Duty Motor Vehicle - (LDMV)
  Heavy Duty Motor Vehicle - (HDMV)

-------
2.4  Southeast Desert Intrastate AQCR
     The Southeast Desert Intrastate AQCR, also known as the Southeast
Desert Air Basin is located in the southeast portion of California.  It
is comprised of all of Imperial County and the eastern portions of San
Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, Los Angeles, and San Diego Counties.   Geo-
graphically, this AQCR covers some 33,600 square miles and is separated
from the coastal regions by a series of mountain ranges.  These mountains
also serve as a climatalogical boundary.  Elevations within the region
vary from 235 feet below sea level at the Sal ton Sea to over 11,000 feet,
at the peak of Mount San Gorgonio.  Figure 2-17 presents a map of the
region and its location within the State.
     By and large, the region is of low population density with approxi-
mately 447,000 residents in 1970.  Motor vehicle registrations for 1970
numbered slightly more than 300,000 with the vehicles consuming some 400
million gallons of gasoline and 14 million gallons of diesel fuel.
     In recent years, the NAAQS have been exceeded in numerous sites
throughout this AQCR.  Table 2-27 lists  six  locations  in the  region and  the
maximum recorded levels of oxidant and carbon monoxide for 1970-1971.  The
available data indicate that the N02 standard has not been exceeded.  A
listing of the air monitoring stations pollutants which are monitored is
given in Table 2-28.
     Since the Southeast Desert is generally downwind of the South Coast
Air Basin (Los Angeles region) considerable amounts of pollutants  would
be transported into the region and added to the locally generated  pollu-
tion.  Explicitly finding what fraction of the Southeast Desert's  air
pollution is the result of transport and what portion results from acti-
vities within the Basin would require a major research effort.  Such a
study is beyond the scope of this analysis.   However, in an attempt to
better understand the problem, an analysis was undertaken to determine
the major source of the extremely high oxidant levels monitored within
the region.
                                    72

-------
   Lancaste
  LOS    '
ANlGELES
      SAN   BERNARDINO
•Victorvillc
                      • Banning
                            Palm Spring
                                  RIVERSIDE
                             AN  I    IMPERIAL
                           DIIEGO'           «EI  Centrp
 Son Bernardino •

    Riverside •
              Location  Of
                 Basin
        Source:  California Air Resources Board
       Figure 2-17. Southeast Desert Intrastate AQCR
                          73

-------
        TABLE 2-27.   AIR QUALITY LEVELS MONITORED IN  THE
           SOUTHEAST DESERT AQCR (1970-1971)

Location
Lancaster
Banning
Palm Springs
Indio
Bars tow
Victorville
ND - No recorded data
NM - Not monitored
Source: California Ai
Oxidant
1970
0.06
0.46
NM
NM
0.14
0.22


(1-Hr. Maximum)
1971
0.20
0.24
0.38
0.32
ND
0.14


CO
1970
12
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM


(8 Hr. Maximum)
1971
9
NM
14
17
NM
NM


r Resources Board
TABLE 2-28.
PRINCIPAL AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS
SOUTHEAST DESERT INTRASTATE AQCR

Location
Lancaster
Banning
Palm Springs
Indio
Bars tow
Victorville

OX
X
X
X
X
X
X
P 0
CO
X

X
X


Source: California
L L
NO
X
X
X
X


Air
U T A
N02
X
X
X
X


N
NO
X
X
X
X


Resources
T
X HC
X


X



Operator


Los Angeles County APCD
Riverside County APCD
Riverside County APCD
Riverside County APCD
San Bernardino County
San Bernardino County
Board



APCD
APCD

                            74

-------
2.4.1  The Transport Hypothesis
     Air quality monitoring stations in the Southeast Desert AQCR, in
particular those in the Coachella Valley, record photochemical oxidant
levels up to five times the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
Due to the severe air pollution in the South Coast Air Basin, it has
frequently been hypothesized that pollution in these desert regions is
the result of transport from the Los Angeles area; several arguments are
presented here in support of this hypothesis.
     A cursory examination of the oxidant problem in the Southeast Desert
Air Basin yields an intuitatively obvious answer that extreme oxidant
levels result basically from influx of South Coast Air Basin pollution
rather than from accumulation of local  emissions.  For one, it is well
documented that the Southeast Desert Air Bassin lies directly downstream
of the South Coast Air Basin during the photochemical smog season, i.e.
summer and fall.  During these periods, oxidant levels in the South Coast
region sometimes reach up to six or seven times the NAAQS.  The consistent
meteorological pattern during the Southern California smog season is a
relatively strong daytime sea breeze, typically 4-10 m.p.h., from 11  a.m.
to 9 p.m. PDT.l  During each day, this  wind pattern continuously carries
the air mass that has spent overnight and early morning in the South
Coast area, into the Southeast Desert.
     Second, the transport hypothesis seems plausible because of the
great difference in pollution potential between the South Coast and South-
east Desert regions.  Table 2-29 presents some comparative statistics for
the Los Angeles and desert regions, as  compiled by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).   In light of the strikingly different emission
densities for the two areas, it makes sense that much of the pollution
monitored in the desert areas originates from the South Coast Air Basin.
This pollution potential  argument should be viewed with caustion, how-
ever, since the emission sources in the Southeast Desert region are con-
centrated in certain areas, e.g. the Coachella Valley, while much of the
33,000 square miles of the region is barren.
1.  Neiburger, M. and Edinger, J., "Meteorology of the Los Angeles Basin,"
    Report No. 1 of the Air Pollution Foundation, Southern California Air
    Pollution Foundation, 1954.
                                    75

-------
         TABLE 2-29.  COMPARATIVE STATISTICS FOR THE SOUTH COAST AND
                      SOUTHEAST DESERT AIR BASINS (1970)

Population (10 )
2
Land area (10 sq. mi.)
Population density (persons/sq. mi.)
Motor Vehicles (106)
Motor vehicle density (vehicle/sq.mi .)
Daily emissions (Tons)
Reactive hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Oxides
Emission Density (Tons/1000 sq. mi.)
Reactive hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Oxides
South Coast Southeast Desert
Density Density
Factors Factors
9.7
8.68
>6


1790
1570




1120
^690




206
181
0.48
33.6
0.3


86
112




14
8.9




2.6
3.3
Source:  State of California, Air Resources Board,
         California Emission Inventory - 1970, July, 1972.

        Third, the transport hypothesis is supported by the opinions of local
   APCD workers who are familiar with the problem.  Walter Hamming (L.A.
   County APCD), Mel Zeldin (San Bernardino County APCD), and Tony Hernandez
                                             s
   (Riverside County APCD) all  concur that the Southeast Desert oxidant
   problem basically results from spillover from the South Coast Air Basin.
        However, air pollution control decisions for the Southeast Desert
   Air Basin should not be based on a cursory examination of probable source.
   It is possible, although not very probable, that the sources in the South-
   east Desert are concentrated enough and that the local meteorological  dis-
   persive conditions are weak enough to allow local sources to play a great
   part in producing extreme oxidant values.
                                       76

-------
     To really ascertain what part of the oxidant problem in the South-
east Desert is local and what part is transported would require a physio-
chemical diffusion model which could calculate oxidant levels produced
from any distribution of emission sources and any meteorology.  Unfor-
tunately, no accurate models of this type are available.  In lieu of such
a model, an examination of past air monitoring and meteorological data
will be made here to check the transport hypothesis.
     Basically, several short analyses will be made:
     t   The geographical pattern of time of maximal oxidant, as compiled
         from local APCD monitoring data, will be examined and inferences
         drawn.
     •   Typical wind patterns will be presented and checked for consis-
         tency with the transport hypothesis.
                                               2
     •   The Coachella Valley Air Quality Study  by Pollution Research
         and Control Corporation will be briefly reviewed.  This study
         was also undertaken to address the air pollution transport
         phenomena.
2.4.2  Geographical Pattern of Maximal Oxidant Time
     Figure 2-18 presents the geographical  distribution of maximal  oxidant
times for the South Coast and Southeast Desert Air Basins during the early
1970s.   The average time of maximal oxidant, for days with maximal oxidant
exceeding 10 pphm, is given for various air monitoring stations.  The
data used for the calculations are basically for the months June through
September, the photochemical smog season in Southern California.  Persis-
tent temperature inversions, high temperatures, and intense solar radia-
tion during these months lead to higher oxidant readings than those
typically found in other months.
     The most significant feature of Figure 2-18 is the increase in peak
oxidant time with increasing distance inland.  In the region within twenty
miles of the coast, i.e., Reseda, Burbank,  Los Angeles, West Los Angeles,
Anaheim, and Long Beach, average oxidant peak times are all prior to 1:30
p.m., PDT.  Slightly further inland, at the Newhall, Pasadena, El Monte,
La Habre, and Pomona stations, average peak times vary from 1:30 to 2:30
p.m., PDT.  In the western portion of the South Coast Air Basin, namely
2.  Kauper, E.  K.,  Coachella Valley  Air Quality Study. Pollution Research
    and Control Corporation, Glendale, California, September 30, 1971.
3.  Acknowledgement is due to Mel Zeldin of the San Bernardino
    County APCD for providing the basic idea and some of the
    data for this  illustration.
                                77

-------
                                                                                                   Barstow
oo
                                                        Lancaster (a)
                                                          •4:30
                                                                                        VictorvUle (d)
                                                                                         • 6:10
                                                                                                            ^llf'r'}tf/s
                                                          SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS
                         t a^V>^:>^;>-so u r^x^^
                         " ' »  tr»~*rt^*i*>•"". 'i « /*— . .u ^?. ,An/^r\ "•._*s.
                                                                                                                    Palm Springs  (c)
                                                                                                                     •  7:40
                                                                                                                            Indlo  (c)
                  X^X,, \_ ^ x A ^  XJ^\ ^ ">» ""^ *™\ ^ *^\ ^*>.»-v^v*\_l. A  \ •» >  -*^\^\—s--.-^.--^'-*^.>-i-.«, x_\_v > * •« A •»--%—*—,—.— — -

                  Figures-is.   Geographical  Distribution of Average Time of Oxidant  Peak  (pm/PDT)

-------
                                   (Averages are for the  five days of highest
                                    maximal oxldant at each station in 1971
                                    and 1972)
    32


    28



~  24
S"
Q.
~  20
§   16
X
o
UJ
13   10
UJ
                                                                                                      - VICTORVILLE
                                                                                                        LANCASTER

                                                                                                        DOWNTOWN L.A.
                                               10      12       2
                                                      NOON

                                                 TIME OF DAY (POT)
10
12
 Figure 2-19.   Diurnal Oxidant  Patterns for  Monitoring  Stations in  the Upper Southeast Desert
                                    and for Downtown Los  Angeles

-------
San Bernardino and Riverside, average oxidant peak times occur between
3:00 and 4:00 p.m.  Further inland still,  as the Southeast Desert is
reached, the average oxidant times varied  from 4:30 at Lancaster to 9:00
at Indio.
     This geographic oxidant peak pattern  is indicative of pollution trans-
port.  Areas toward the west apparently have earlier oxidant peaks be-
cause these areas are the first to have the polluted air of the central
South Coast Basin replaced by the cleaner  marine air of the daily sea
breeze.  Areas toward the eastern part of  the South Coast Air Basin
have later oxidant peaks because they receive much of the most polluted
air later in the day; that is, air which has been nearer the coast during
the night and early morning and which has  moved across the South Coast
Air Basin during the day.  In the Southeast Desert, peak oxidants occur
extremely late (4:30 to 9:00 p.m.) and are evidently associated with
influx of the most polluted South Coast Basin air.  These late peak times
attest to transport  of oxidant pollution  rathern than local formation
because they occur after solar radiation intensity, which powers the
photochemical reactions, has waned.
     To further substantiate that the oxidant problem in the Southeast
Desert basically results from influx from  the South Coast Basin, it should
be shown that the oxidant peaks are significantly higher than oxidant
levels at other times during the day.  Figures 2-19 and 2-20 give the
diurnal oxidant pattern at five continuous monitoring stations in the
Southeast Desert, and for comparison, at downtown Los Angeles.  For each
station, the diurnal pattern is averaged over the five highest oxidant
days for that station during the years 1971 and 1972.
     All five desert stations show a very  significant peak in the late
afternoon or evening.  This corresponds to the expected arrival time of
air parcels from the South Coast Basin moved by the daily sea breeze at
about 6-7 miles per hour.  These peaks are significantly higher than levels
late in the morning which result from irradiation of the air mass that has
spent overnight in the area and might be more indicative of local pollu-
tion.  However, it should be noted that even the overnight air would have
                                   80

-------
                                  (Averages are for the five days of highest
                                   maximal oxidant at each station in 1971

                                   and 1972)
CO
       o.
       0.
32



28




24




20
       X   ,,
       o   16
           12



           8




           4
                                                                                                               INDIO
                                                                                                              PALM SPRINGS
                                                                                                   BANNING
                                                                                                            DOWNTOWN L.A.
                                                     10       12       2

                                                             NOON


                                                       TIME OF DAY (PDT)
                                                                                            10
12
        Figure 2-20.
             Diurnal  Oxidant  Patterns for  Monitoring Stations in  the Lower Southeast Desert
                                 and for  Downtown Los Angeles

-------
 spent the previous day in  the South Coast Air Basin  and could  have  resi-
 dual  oxidant precursors originating from the South Coast region  as  well
 as new precursors from the local  area.   The   marked  intensity  of the
 evening peak attests  to the most  significant portion of the  Southeast
 Desert oxidant being  the result of transport from the South  Coast Air
 Basin.
      A striking contrast exists between  the  patterns for oxidant buildup
 in Los Angeles and the Southeast  Desert.   Los Angeles,  with  high accumu-
 lation of local  emissions  overnight,  starts  to reach significant oxidant
 levels in the later morning as solar  radiation becomes  intense.   An oxi-
 dant  peak is attained at about noon.  The sea breeze then brings in rela-
 tively clean marine air and during the afternoon  oxidant levels  decline.
 After the sun sets, oxidant levels are suppressed to below the natural
 background (about 3-5 pphm)  by accumulation of NO emissions which
 immediately react with ozone.
      In  the Southeast Desert, oxidant starts toward  a peak as the sun
 sets!   The peak  is reached, on the average,  between  4:30 (at Lancaster)
 and 9:00 (at Indio).   However, on  some nights,  the peak  has occurred as
 late  as  midnight at Indio.   Local  NO emissions  are not  great enough to
 consume  much oxidant  during the night, and considerable  oxidant  levels
 persist  during the early morning  hours, especially in the  Coachella
 Valley.   A slight rise occurs with the onset of sunlight each morning.
 However,  this  rise soon levels off, and it is  not until  late afternoon
 or early  evening that oxidant pollution will  again reach extreme  values.
 2.4.3  Typical Wind Patterns
     The  sea  breeze dominates the  typical daylight wind  pattern  in  Southern
 California  during the summer and early fall.  Winds, flowing from the west,
 sweep  across  the South  Coast Basin  in an  easterly or northeasterly  direc-
 tion and  enter the  Southeast Desert after transversing the mountain passes.
 Figure X-5  illustrates  this consistent meteorological pattern.
     Assuming  that  a  typical South Coast  Basin  air parcel  stagnates over-
 night  and  during  the  early  morning and then  is  carried inland by a  7 mph

4.  U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Air Quality
    Criteria for Photochemical Oxidants.  March, 1970.
                                    82

-------
09
                                                                                                   JS
        Source:  State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board, The State of Caliform'a
                Implementation Plan for Achieving and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards,
                January 30, 1972.

                    Figure2-21.  Air Flow Patterns - South Coast Air Basin (October 1200-1800 PST)

-------
sea breeze starting at 11:00, and further assuming that the air flows in
the general direction shown in Figure 2-21, the following possibilities
arise.  The air in Lancaster at 4:30, the time of average oxidant peak,
could have stagnated overnight in the San Fernando Valley.  With a
slightly higher wind speed, it could have arrived from the Ventura-0
Oxnard area.  The air in Victorville at 6:10 probably originated from
somewhere in the central SCAB, with origins in all four counties -- Los
Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside -- being possible.  The
air in Banning at 6:20, Palm Springs at 7:40, or Indio at 9:00 most likely
also came from somewhere in the central South Coast Air Basin; again,
origins in all four counties are possible.
     Thus, the mechanism certainly exists for transporting South Coast
Air Basin oxidant pollution to the Southeast Desert.   In fact, the typical
wind pattern during the photochemical smog season is  such that the South-
east Desert lies directly downstream of the South Coast Basin during the
day and early evening.   This wind pattern is entirely consistent with
the findings presented previously, that maximum oxidant occurs late in
the afternoon or early in the evening in the Southeast Desert and that
this oxidant is transported, rather than locally formed.
2.4.4  The Coachella Valley Air Quality Study by Pollution Research
       and Control  Corporation	
     From July 1970 to July 1971, Pollution Research  and Control Corporation
(PRCC) performed an air quality monitoring project in the Coachella Valley
of the Southeast Desert under contract to the Riverside County APCD and
with partial funding by the U. S. Public Health Service.  The main objec-
tive of this project was to determine the source of high oxidant pollu-
tion in the Coachella Valley.   As noted above  (see Table 2-27) the three
continuous monitoring stations in the Coachella Valley record maximal
1-hour oxidant levels several  times the NAAQS and almost twice as high
as levels found at the other two continuous stations  (Lancaster and
Victorville) in the Southeast Desert.
                                    84

-------
     The project consisted of a series of simultaneous measurements of

meteorological factors and air quality.  Weather parameters were measured

at ground stations, during aircraft flights, and with balloon soundings.

Ground stations and aircraft flight also provided the air pollution data.

The data were analyzed by constructing pollution and weather frequency

distributions, wind roses, backward air trajectories, and atmospheric

cross sections.

     The analysis led to the conclusion that the source of high oxidant

levels in the Coachella Valley is apparently emissions from the South

Coast Air Basin.  Of the 18 air parcels which showed maximum oxidant

greater than or equal to .12 ppm and for which reliable trajectories

were constructed, 17 had arrived in the Coachella Valley through the San

Gorgonio Pass from the South Coast Air B sin.  The one other trajectory

arrived from the northerly direction, although before coming from the

north, it too likely transversed the South Coast Air Basin.  Trajectories

typical of those associated with high oxidant levels are shown in Figure

2-22.

     With regard to the transport phenomena, the following pertinent

exerpts have been taken from the PRCC study:

          "With respect to the photochemical air pollution problem,
     it is apparent that the Coachella Valley is subject to intrusion
     of the aged photochemical pollution cloud from the coastal area
     of Southern California.  The local automotive traffic source
     does not appear to be of sufficient strength to explain the
     measured values, especially since the levels of oxides of nitrogen
     recorded in the Valley are low."

          "Characteristically, the high oxidant was found associated
     with the appearance of northwesterly winds in the Coachella
     Valley.  This condition usually occurs in the late afternoon or
     evening, both at the upper and lower Coachella sampling stations;
     the time of arrival being earlier at the upper station.  The
     trajectories associated with this situation showed that the
     pollutants moved across the mountain boundary separating the
     Coachella Valley from the coastal valleys to the west."
                                     85

-------
00
       COACH6.LLA
       o  «  1  »  *
      Numbers at dot locations refer to the time parcel was at indicated
      location:  1900 = 1900 PST.  Maximum oxidant  (ppm) indicated at
      sampling  station location.
                    Figure 2-22. Trajectories of Air Arriving at 2000 and 2100 PST,  July 27, 1970

-------
          "The intrusion of the oxidant pollution cloud from the north-
     west is typical of the state of the atmosphere in the Coachella
     Valley during late afternoon in the summer.  The polluted air
     moves down from San Gorgonio Pass with the low level northwesterly
     wind.  The air mass over the desert is relatively unstable.  The
     edge of the polluted mass is sharply defined, presenting almost
     a vertical front as it moves across the Valley."

2.4.5  Conclusion

     Based on the available information cited, several conclusions can

be drawn with regard to the origins of high oxidant concentrations in
the Southeast Desert region.  Although several of the arguments presented
are based on inferences, rather than actual scientific evidence, there
is significant data which supports the hypothesis that air pollution in
the South Coast Air Basin is transported and contributes substantially
to high oxidant levels in the desert areas east of Los Angeles.  A
summary of this support evidence is given below:

     •   The difference in the pollutant emission densities for the
         two regions would suggest much lower oxidant readings for the
         Southeast Desert than actually experienced.  Given similar
         meteorological conditions (e.g., temperature inversions,
         intense solar radiation, wind conditions), only a spillover
         of pollutants from the South Coast area into the Southeast
         Desert adequately explains the high oxidant values.

     •   Typical wind patterns observed are consistent with the timing
         of maximal oxidant levels in the Southeast Desert.  The time
         of maximum oxidant peaks occurs too late to be accounted for
         by locally, generated emissions since the solar radiation
         required to trigger the photochemical reactions has either
         diminished greatly or disappeared.

      t   The  difference  in  timing  of  observed  maximum oxidant  levels
          between  the  South  Coast  and  Southeast Desert Air  Basins  is
          consistent with  the  typical  wind  patterns;  oxidant levels
          peak around  noon or  the  early  afternoon in  the South  Coast
          areas and  late  afternoon  or  evening  in  the  Southeast  Desert.

      •   Other studies,  including  The Coachella Valley Air Quality
          Study, have  similarly concluded that  air pollution is trans-
          ported into  the  Southeast Desert  from the South Coast Air
          Bas in.

      •   The  local  air pollution  control  personnel  contacted all  agreed
          that pollution  problems  in the desert regions were largely
          attributable to  transport phenomena.
                                    87

-------
                      3.0  SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
 3.1   Economic  Impacts
     The estimated costs of controls which require hardware and/or
 services are summarized in this section.  Table 3-1 is a summary of
 estimated unit costs in each control category.  Table 3-2 contains the
 estimated costs to each region due to the various control strategies.

          TABLE 3-1.  ESTIMATED UNIT COSTS OF CONTROL MEASURES
Control Measure
Bulk terminal vapor recovery
system
Gasoline Marketing
Vapor Recovery System
Inspection/maintenance
Idle test (1975)
Loaded test (1977)
VSAD/LIAF retrofit
for pre-'66 LDV
Catalytic converter retrofit
Unit
Bulk loading
termi nal
Service Station
Automobile
n
Automobile
Automobile
Cost
Initial
$200,000 $
6,300
1.21
1.98
35.00
175.00
Annual
0
30.00
5.12
10.23
0
0
3.2  Social Impacts
     Social impacts are non-monetary costs attributable to the imposition
of a set of constraints.  These impacts are generally measured by the loss
of time, opportunity, and/or inconvenience.  The magnitude of the impacts
is primarily a function of age, race, and income level.  Measures which
are intended to influence, control, or restrict the ownership and use of
motor vehicles will, in general, result in social  impacts.  In a similar
and related manner, measures which affect personal  mobility,  mode choice
decisions, and regional access also induce social  costs.   To  date, due to
the very nature of social  impacts, it has been difficult  to quantitatively
evaluate them.  For example, only a limited amount of research has been
devoted to estimating lost-opportunity costs with  respect to  not making a
trip.  However, several studies involving Los Angeles have been published
in attempts to quantify these impacts in a particular locale.   Data from

-------
     TABLE 3-2  ESTIMATED REGIONAL COSTS FOR EACH MEASURE
 CONTROL  MEASURE          SAN  FRANCISCO   SAN  JOAQUIN   SACRAMENTO

 bulk  terminal
   vapor  recovery          $6,000,000

 gasoline marketing
   controls

    initial               31,200,000      $15,851,000   $ 7,119,000
    annual                .  274,000          209,000      188,000

 inspection/maintenance
   Idle test

    initial               3,538,000          756,000      810,000
    annual                15,000,000       3,202,000    3,434,000
   Loaded test (additional cost over idle test cost)

    initial               2,582,000          524,000      590,000
    annual                14,920,000       3,107,000    3,419,000

VSAD/LIAF retrofit    .   22,400,000       5,192,000    5,709,000
catalytic converter
  retrofit              188,000,000      38,236,000   41,383,000
TOTAL COST (including loaded I/M)

  initial              $253,720,000      $60,559,000  $55,611,000
  annual                 30,194,000        6,518,000    7,041,000


Per Capita Cost

  initial                    $51              $56          $55
  annual                       7                7            7
                                   89

-------
these studies have been used in the following discussion, under the
assumption that a reasonable number of similarities between Los Angeles
and each of the three major urban areas exists for quantitative impact
evaluation.
     It will be important for APCD's and planning agencies to anticipate
and minimize the impact of controls where possible.  Increased public
awareness and concern have been largely responsible for the desires to
live in a clean environment.  In addition, public participation in the
decision making process will continue" to be crucial to the orderly
transition and acceptability of various controls.  To be meaningful, citizen
participation must be encouraged at the local and county levels.  Only then
can the final decisions concerning which controls are applicable for a given
region be complete and a reflection of the public's desires; this in turn
will result in minimizing the social impacts.
3.2.1  Stationary Source Measures and Vehicle-Oriented Mobile Source Measures
     The per capita costs of the stationary source control measures and
the vehicle-oriented control measures recommended in this study have been
shown to be nominal.  The actual distribution of the vehicle costs may
tend to be socially regressive, in that the poor elements of the population
experience a heavier burden by comparison when required to pay the costs
of retrofit devices and vehicle maintenance.  For example, the cost of the
pre-1966 retrofit measure and the maintenance cost of vehicles rejected
during the inspection procedure are most likely to affect the poor more
strongly than the middle class and the rich, since the poor are more
likely to own the older and poorly maintained veh.icles.  The total of
these two costs, as estimated in Section 3-1. are significant compared to
the probable market value of the vehicles in these categories in 1975 and
1977.
     Redistribution of these costs has been the subject of numerous
research efforts in the state of California.  Among the recent proposals
for consideration are the following alternative payment schemes:
        t   User-Pays ~ the cost of a control strategy is
            totally assumed by the owners of the vehicles
            affected.
                                     90

-------
        t   Uniform-Payment-Per-Vehicle-Mile-Driver -- the
            total annualized regional costs are divided by
            the annual vehicle miles driven.  This could
            be monitored by annual odometer readings during
            registration, for example.

        •   Uniform-Payment-Per-Vehicle -- the total  annualized
            regional costs are divided by the number of light
            duty vehicles in the basin.  Each vehicle owner
            then pays an identical amount per vehicle.  Payment
            could be made by a uniform increase in vehicle
            registration fees.

        •   Uniform-Payment-Per-Unit of Pollution Emitted --
            costs for automotive pollution is proportional
            to pollution emitted, i.e. a form of a "smog"
            tax.  Administered through inspection/maintenance
            and annual registration cycle.  Individual costs
            become a function of mileage and exhaust
            characteristics.

        •   Income-Proportional  -- payment of the control
            strategy is made on a scale that is directly
            proportional  to income.  For this scheme, every-
            one in the region - not just those owning vehicles -
            is responsible for financing the additional
            controls.

     In the above list, the user pays scheme must be regarded as the

most regressive.  That is, the vehicle ownership by model  year is suffi-

ciently biased that the largest burden rests on the group with the smallest
income.  Conversely, the income proportional scheme is the least regressive
in this sense.

3.2.2  Impact on Mobility Patterns

     Among the control measures being recommended are those which will

directly impact existing mobility patterns, or when and  where people

travel.  These measures are dealt with in the following  discussions.  The

magnitude of the social impact to be expected from any measures depend

heavily on regional  characteristics.   Present driving patterns have evolved
slowly and intuition suggests these patterns will  show a high degree of
resistance to change.

3.2.2.1  Reducing Optional  Trips

     When a person makes a trip from one location  to  another, it is done

to serve some human need or desire.  The choice of travel  mode, as well

                                     91

-------
as the actual decision to travel, both involve a human decision process.
Both decisions are probably made rationally with due consideration for a
number of actual and apparent factors.  The ability of various individuals
to accurately assess these factors varies, but overall, incorrect judg-
ments in both directions tend to offset each other.  Upon consideration of
the actual and perceived factors relating to a trip, the individual
decides whether or not to make the trip and by which mode to travel.   Once
the decision has been made to make the trip,, to eliminate or prohibit this
trip would mean that some need would be unmet or purpose unfulfilled.
     It must be emphasized that attempting to define which travel  is
optional or unnecessary is difficult.  One obvious difficulty involves
the definitions of terms such as, "necessary, optional, and essential;"
Since we are dealing with personal value judgments, what one individual
views as unnecessary may be considered very essential  to another
individual.  Even for the same individual and the same trip, circumstances
frequently change so that the individual's perception of the need to  make
the trip change.  Another difficulty encountered in assessing individual
needs is the dynamic state of decision making as it relates to human
values with the passage of time.  The steady growth of VMT experienced
since World War II has in large part been attributable to an improved
quality of life.  This affluence has resulted in a higher standard of
living with an increased ability to afford more travel and more time  to
partake of it.  What was once the Sunday afternoon drive in the park  has
now become the weekend excursion to the resort areas.
     In order to even approximate what level of trip making is optional
or marginally necessary, it is necessary to superimpose one set of human
values upon another.  The imposition of new values upon others will
always result in social costs to the individuals affected.  The magnitude
of these costs are related to the severity of the constraints and the
individual's ability to adapt to the constraints.  It is apparent,
therefore, that caution be exercised in carefully weighing the societal
costs associated with the gains to be derived and the degree of controls
needed to attain any desired level of VMT reduction.
     A number of factors enter into any decision concerning whether or
not a trip should be undertaken.  For example, a ghetto family without a
                                    92

-------
car will make fewer trips overall than an upper class family which has
three cars at its disposal.  In this case, the differences in opportunity
will define the trip making characteristics and needs.   Because of dif-
ferences in household characteristics and physical environments, eliminating
identical trips are perceived to have significantly different impact
depending on the groups experiencing the impact.  Controls which will  result
in trip reductions should not only consider trips intended for basic
functions as working and shipping, but also the human needs for recreation
and relaxation.
3.2.3  Impact on Accessibility
     In many of the regions discussed here, it can be.said that "to have
a job, you must have a car and to have a car, you must have a job."  This
relationship of employment opportunities (especially for certain
minorities) to transportation has been alluded to previously.  The trans-
portation system control measures recommended in this study will have a
definite impact on accessibility and, consequently, they will result in
social impacts.
     In general, it is estimated that impacts from accessibility-restrictive
measures are minor and can be very positive.  The intent is generally to
penalize private transportation while favoring public transit.  In addition
to being conservation-oriented, such schemes tend to favor many of the
underprivileged population segments.
3.2.4  Impact on Mode Choice Decisions
     Numerous factors affect an individual's choice of travel mode.
Those relating to the individual include age, sex, and income.  Equally
important are variables dealing with the individual's environmental
surroundings -- land use patterns and transportation systems.  Land use
patterns,and trends are such that choices of modes other than the auto-
mobile are inherently discouraged.
     Experience has shown that additional important factors in mode
choice decision-making are related to the transportation system and its
performance characteristics.  Basically, the parameters which determine
mode choice are the time and money associated with the trip.  Viewing
the trip in terms of time and money, making the trip requires a certain-
economic cost.  Obviously, the traveler will attempt to reduce the
actual and perceived costs.         93

-------
     Most of the controls being considered increase the cost of private
automobile travel and/or reduce the cost of public transportation.   The
purpose, of course, is to induce higher percentages of people onto  public
transit.  While aiding those dependent on transit services, measures which
make it more expensive to drive tend to be regressive.  As such, the
social impacts experienced will be more heavily felt by the poor.
     It has been shown that time costs are frequently a more serious
penalty to the middle and high income groups.   Consequently, measures
which result in time penalties, e.g., ramp metering, exclusive bus  and
carpool lanes, are often more effective at inducing transit ridership
than monetary fees.  From an equity standpoint, these controls are  highly
desirable since the poor place less value on their time.  As a result, one
would expect a more uniform mode shift by income groups from such controls.
     The result of the recommended control measures on mode choice
decisions will generally favor more extensive public transit usage.
Socially, the impacts will initially be viewed as inconveniences and to
a limited extent, a loss of personal mobility.  In the long run, as
adjustments are made to new life styles, these impacts will have been
appreciably diminished.
3.2.5  Summary of Social Impacts
     Table 3-3 presents a summary of the overall social impacts likely
to occur as a function of the control measures.  Estimates for the  extent
of the overall impacts are intended to present a relative index and have
to be qualified by some rather simplifying assumptions.  For example, it
was assumed that the young, old, poor and minorities owned old cars (if
any), drove primarily out of necessity, and placed little value on  their
time.  The "average" American, however, was viewed as relatively mobile,
the owner of at least one car, and someone who placed a high value  on
his time.
     The impacts on mobility were considered to be those which impeded
when trips would be made and what types of trips would be made; these
effects were related directly to the typical urban driving patterns.
Accessibility impacts are those which restrict where one goes and the
ease with which the trips can be made.

                                    94

-------
                                                  TABLE  3-3.   SUMMARY OF  SOCIAL  IMPACTS
Control Measure
Phase I Measures (Recommended)
Gasoline Marketing
Evaporative Loss Control
Organic Surfacing Coating Substitution
Dry Cleaning Vapor Control
Degreaser Substitution
Burning Regulation
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance
Aircraft Controls
Oxidizing Catalytic Converter
Pre-1966 Retrofit Device
Improvement of Public Transit
Increased Car Pooling
Parking Control
Phase II Measures (If Demonstrably Warranted)
Additional Organic Solvent Use Controls
Eliminating Motorcycle Use During Smog Season
Heavy Duty Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance
Heavy Duty Vehicle Retrofit
Light Duty Vehicle Evaporative Retrofit
VMT Reduction Through Gasoline Rationing
Impact on Sodo-Economic
Young/
Elderly Poor Minorities
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
—
—
+
0
0
0
—
0
0
'
—
0
0
0
0
0
"
0
—
—
+
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
—
--
+
o •
0
0
0
0
0
—
--
Groups
Average
Citizen
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
-
0
-
-
0
-
0
0
-
-
Impact
on
Mobility
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+
-
-
0
-
0
0
0
--
Impact
on
Accessibility
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
+
0
-
0
-
0
0
0
0
Impact on
Mode - Choice Decision
Private Public
Auto Transit
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
—
--
0
-
-
0
0
0
0
--
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
++
• +
+
0
.0
0
0
0
0
en
                                                                                                                     LEGEND (RELATIVE IMPACTS)
                                                                                                                     •H-  Very Favorable
                                                                                                                      +  Favorable
                                                                                                                      0  Very Minor or None
                                                                                                                      -  Unfavorable
                                                                                                                     --  Very Unfavorable

-------
     Lastly, a summary of the impact on mode choice decisions is given.

This considered the relative effect a given measure would have on the

attractiveness of the predominant transportation modes, i.e., the private

auto and public transit.

     For each control measure, there are usually several  kinds of programs

which can be instituted and even more ways of implementing them.  In many

cases, the means by which a program is implemented can  significantly affect

the degree of social impacts encountered.   To illustrate  this point,

several examples are considered below.

        o   Retrofit devices are shown to have a very unfavorable
            impact on the young/elderly, poor, and minorities.
            This has assumed these groups have old cars which are
            not used much and which require expensive retrofits,
            e.g., catalytic converters.  If individuals in these
            groups had no car or the government provided  subsidies
            to finance the retrofits, the impacts would be completely
            different.

        o   Pricing schemes are also shown to have regressive impacts
            on the young/elderly, poor, and minorities.  This assumes
            relatively uniform fee or taxing policies on  all  groups.
            As discussed in Section 3.1.2, a host of methods  are
            available to insure a more equitable distribution
            of pollution control costs.  Institution of such
            financing schemes would change the overall  impacts on
            special population groups.

        o   Gasoline rationing is noted as a very unfavorable impact
            on the young/elderly, poor, and minorities.  This assumes
            a free market situation where gasoline is limited at the
            distributor level and the price is allowed  to seek its
            own level.  The net result would be almost  equivalent to
            uniform taxing policies.  Those less able to  afford gas
            would be priced off the road.   If, however, a rationing
            system was established allocating equal  shares of gas
            to all vehicles at fixed prices, the social impacts
            would be significantly changed and more'favorable.

3.3  Public Attitude Surveys

     Critical to the evaluation of the social impacts of  the  various
proposed control measures are surveys of public attitude  toward such

measures.  Since the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, numerous

surveys have been conducted throughout California for this very

purpose.


                                    96

-------
     A recent California Poll (Time Magazine, July 16, 1973)  revealed
that:

        •   62% of Californians are in favor of building rail
            rapid transit lines, even at an increased tax cost
            of $100/year/family.

        t   62% back the much criticized Clean Air Act of 1970,
            even if Detroit is threatened with partial shutdowns
            for failure to meet the law's strict requirements.

        •   55% favor the law's requirement that cars and trucks
            have antipollution devices, even if those devices  cost
            $300 per car.

        •   55% think that the schedule for installing effective
            exhaust control equipment by 1976 is "about right";
            another 27% think the schedule is "too slow."

        •   76% rejected the notion of closing off certain
            freeways to discourage "excessive driving."

        •   56% oppose a drastic slowdown in the state's freeway
            building program.

     The results of a survey taken in San Francisco,  Sacramento, Stockton,
Fresno, and Bakersfield, in conjunction with this study, revealed the

following:  (See Appendix A for detailed results).

        •   About 80-90 percent of all respondents in all cities
            feel auto air pollution is a serious or very serious
            nationwide problem.  This feeling is highest in
            Fresno (89%) and  lowest in Sacramento (81%).

        •   Respondents in all five cities feel that auto air
            pollution is a more serious problem nationwide
            than it is locally.

        •   A law requiring auto emission control equipment on
            all pre-1975 cars is much more acceptable at a
            government subsidized cost of $50 than a non-government
            subsidized cost of $125.  Regardless of the cost,  this
            law is viewed more favorably by respondents in Fresno.
            A law requiring inspection of this equipment is viewed
            more favorably by respondents in Fresno and Bakersfield.
            Respondents in all cities would expect to pay at least
            $7.00 for the inspection; the maximum expected
            cost is $9.32.

        •   In all cities the two most acceptable proposals (based
            on mean ratings) for controlling auto air pollution  are
            "prohibit traffic/parking in central business districts"

                                    97

-------
    and  "create car pool/bus only lanes on major
    thoroughfares."  The two most unacceptable are
    $200 registration fee for each auto" and "have
    tolls on exit ramps of major thoroughfares."
    Respondents were also asked to indicate which
    proposals were most/least acceptable.  These
    data are consistent with the mean ratings except
    that "gasoline rationing" replaced "have tolls
    on exit ramps" as one of the two most unacceptable
    proposals.

•   The most acceptable proposal for combating a
    possible gasoline shortage is to limit purchases
    to 90 percent of current consumption.  Least
    acceptable are proposals to double the price of
    gasoline and to impose an emission tax of $15 per
    thousand miles traveled.

•   Interest in car pools as a means of reducing auto
    air pollution ranges from 41-48 percent of the
    respondents in each city, except Bakersfield.
    However, in the latter city, where the level of
    interest is 31%, more respondents are already in
    a car pool or do not travel to work by car.  A
    majority of respondents in all cities feel getting
    into a car pool would be difficult.

•   Rating of proposals for reducing traffic congestion
    varied by the city.  Those rated most effective included
    "improving timing of traffic signals" and "prohibiting
    parking, loading, and unloading on busy streets."  Among
    those considered least effective was "widening major
    streets at intersections."

•   Public transportation usage is highest in San Francisco
    (94 trips per household per year).  The remaining cities
    are much lower in usage (ranging from 10-28 trips).

•   Reasons for public transportation usage vary by city.   In
    San Francisco, it is used because it's cheaper and less
    congested.  In Sacramento, it's used because it's cheaper
    and because the user does not have a driver's license.
    In the San Joaquin Valley cities, it is used by women  and
    children out of necessity (no car available or no driver's
    license).  Men in the San Joaquin Valley said they use
    public transportation because it is faster, more available,
    and more comfortable.

t   Reasons for auto usage are the same in all cities -- faster,
    more flexible, more available.

0   In general, the most effective proposals for encouraging
    usage of public transportation facilities are: more

                            98

-------
    frequent service, faster travel,  more conveniently
    located stops and stations,  and lower fares.

t   In all cities, there is a substantial reluctance
    (67 percent or higher) to dispose of any car  or
    cars even if public transportation were improved.
                             99

-------
                     4.0  STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION

     This section deals with the implementation of the control  strategies
proposed in this report.  Discussion is confined to two areas:  the
procedure and time schedule for implementation of the strategies, and the
responsibilities of the government agencies which will be involved in their
implementation.
4.1  Procedure and Time Schedule
     The proposed time schedule for implementation of the control strategy
is given in Table 4-1.  The dates shown for promulgation of the plan are
those prescribed by Federal law.  Legislative authority for the recommended
Phase I measures must be obtained by the end of 1973; gasoline  rationing
legislation should be obtained by the end of 1975.
     As the table indicates, all gasoline marketing facilities  should be
controlled to the extent recommended by mid-1975.  That is, existing
facilities should be retrofit with appropriate control systems  by that
date, and all new facilities built after that date should be required to
include control systems in their construction.
     A development program for substitutes for organic surface  coating
compounds is currently underway and should be continued.  The use of less
reactive substitutes should be expanded, beginning in 1974.  Carbon
adsorption systems effective to the degree recommended in this  study are
currently available and should be installed at all dry cleaning estab-
lishments during 1974.  Likewise, available substitutes for organic
degreasers should be implemented during 1974.  Burning regulations, to
some degree, have already been instituted by the county APCD's.  The
additional regulation recommended in this study should be in effect
through 1980.
     The three vehicle-oriented control measures are Mandatory  Inspection/
Maintenance, Oxidizing Catalytic Converter, and Pre-1966 Retrofit Device.
The first part of the inspection/maintenance program, the idle  test with
the 10% rejection rate, should be carried out during 1975 and 1976.  This
means that all light duty vehicles in each affected county should be
inspected (and 10% should be maintained) during the year 1975 and again
                                   100

-------
TABLE 4-1.  PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIME SCHEDULE
Element
Promulgation of Control Strategy Plan
. • Proposed Control Strategy Plan
• Public Hearings on Plan; Review and Evaluation of
Comments
t Promulgation of Final Control Strategy Plan
(15 August 1973)
Legislative Authority Required for Controls
California Air Resources Board • •
• Obtain enabling legislation for Inspection of
maintenance
• Obtain enabling legislation for additional
retrofit devices, e.g. catalytic converters
• Obtain enabling legislation to ration gasoline
Phase I Measures (Recommended)
Gasoline Marketing Evaporative Loss Controls
0 Establish necessary regulations
• Initiate program of controlling losses from
gasoline marketing
• All marketing facilities controlled
Organic Surface Coating Substitution
. » k -j
• Development OT alternatives (e*g. water*Daseu
or high solid control formulation)
• Expand use of less reactive substitutes
Dry Cleaning Vapor Control
.• Implement Carbon Absorption Systems
Degreaser Substitution
• Implement substitution
1973
4

].


















A

:



A

1974





:




t
1



1
,




,
^





k—


















1975

















<











-^
T
— ^
^







1976






>



































1977










































• 1978










































1979










































1980











































-------
o
ro
Element
Burning Regulation
• Agricultural 4

t Incineration 4
Aircraft Emission Control
• Establish necessary regulations
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance
• Program Design
• Program Preparation

•' Mandatory Loaded Emission Inspection
Oxldlzlm Catalytic Converter
• Installation Program
Pre-1966 Retrofit Device
t Installation Program
Mass Transit Program
• Improve levels of service '
• Establish bus and carpool lanes on freeways
where feasible
• Establish park-and-r1de facilities where
feasible

19
k

!
' —






73




A-

:
-
;

i



A
-A
A-

A
^~
k
r
k
k

374



,
'
-
1

-
^
-


1



.
'
\
*
-
,


975






-
I


193







k


6




^
A
*



197




k
I
• ••"•



7










197










8










197










9










19£










0











-------
Element '
Phase II Measures (if demonstrate y warranted)
Additional Organic Solvent Use Controls
Eliminating Motorcycle Use During Smog Season
Heavy Duty Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance
Heavy Duty Vehicle Retrofit
Light Duty Vehicle Evaporative Retrofit
YWT Reduction through Gasoline Rationing
1973


1974


1975
-

1976
A-
4

t
-A
t
t
-At

1977
b 	
A-

•



-*




1978

A-





-A




1979

A-



*

-A




1980













-------
during 1976.  In 1977 and every year thereafter, all  light duty vehicles
should be inspected using a loaded test, and 50% of them should be
required to receive maintenance.  The installation of the oxidizing
catalytic converter should take place between mid-1974 and mid-1975.
The pre-1966 retrofit device should be installed during 1974.
     The transportation system-oriented measures recommended for
implementation should begin in 1974 and should continue through 1980.   It
is recommended that an aggressive public information program be instituted
in 1974 to encourage and advertise increased use of car pooling.  Car
pooling should be coordinated among employees at work centers  in the  urban
centers beginning in mid-1974.  Construction of parking facilities should
be limited as soon as possible, preferably by the end of 1973.   Long-term
parking rates should be increased by the middle of 1974.
     All Phase II measures should be implemented by 1977, if it is
demonstrated that they can be effective and that they are necessary.   The
elimination of motorcycle use during smog season and gasoline  rationing
involve relatively difficult institutional and administrative  problems
and should be begun in 1976, so that these kinds of problems are obviated
by 1977 for maximum effectiveness of the measures in that year.
4.2  Agency Involvement
     Table 4-2 gives the agency responsible for the implementation of
each of the control measures recommended in this study.  The sections of
the California Health and Safety Code which provide the respective agencies
with the authority for implementation of the measures are listed in the
table also.  It can be observed that the county APCD's have the authority
to implement all recommended stationary source controls.  All  that remains
in each case is for the Air Pollution Control Board of each agency to pass
or modify appropriate rules and regulations for use within each of the
counties.       •
     Vehicle-oriented mobile source controls, on the other hand, require
new .legislation, with the one exception being the pre-1966 retrofit device.
This device is already required in three air basins -- the South Coast,
San Diego, and San Francisco.  Authority has been given to all  APCD's in
the state for implementation of this measure.  Thus,  each of the APCD's in

                                   104

-------
                    TABLE 4-2.  AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY FOR
                       CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION
Measure
Responsible
Agency
Authorizing
Legislation
(Sections of
California Health
and Safety Code)

Phase I
Stationary Source Controls
Gasoline Marketing Evaporative
Loss Control
Dry Cleaning Vapor Control
Degreaser Substitution
Organic Surface Coating Control
Mobile Source Controls
Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance
Oxidizing Catalytic Converter
Pre-1966 Retrofit Device
Transportation System Controls
and Improvements
Aircraft Controls
Phase II
Stationary Source Controls
Additional Organic Solvent Use
Controls
Mobile Source Controls
Eliminating Motorcycle Use During
Smog Season
Heavy Duty Vehicle Inspection/
Maintenance
Heavy Duty Vehicle Retrofit
Gasoline Rationing
Evaporative Retrofit Device
Additional Retrofit Devices

APCD
APCD
APCD
APCD

CARB
CARB/APCD
APCD
County/City
Government
FAA/EPA

APCD

CARB
CARB
CARB/APCD
CARB
CARB/APCD
CARB/APCD

24260, 24260.
24260, 24260.
24260, 24260.
24260, 24260.

TBL
TBL
24263.8



24260, 24260

TBL
TBL
TBL
TBL
TBL
TBL

1
1
1
1







.1







TBL:  To be legislated
                                     105

-------
the affected regions needs to pass an appropriate rule requiring these
devices on light duty motor vehicles.  Effective devices of this type have,
of course, been accredited by the CARB.
     Authorizing legislation must be passed for the other two vehicle-
oriented measures.  The CARB will be responsible for the mandatory
inspection/maintenance program, while, if the oxidizing catalytic converter
is required in only part of the APCD's of the state (as is likely), it will
be the responsibility of each APCD to implement necessary rules, and,
therefore, all APCD's must have the authority by state law to implement
the measure.  Thus, two types of legislation must be passed for implemen-
tation of the catalytic converter measure* state legislative authority and
APCD rules, pending, of course, CARB accreditation of catalytic converter
devices.
     Transportation system controls and improvements in Phase I do not
involve the requirement for major authorizing legislation.  In each case,
it will require the appropriate division of the local  city and county
governments to implement or modify regulations and to impose, where
necessary, procedural constraints and encouragements.
     Stationary source measures in Phase II, as in Phase I, require no
additional authorizing legislation.  On the other hand, mobile source
controls in Phase II all must be legislated.  All will likely be at
least the partial responsibility of the CARB, although like the catalytic
converter, it is likely that the legal requirement for the three retrofit
measures in Phase II will actually be the authority of each APCD and that
each APCD will have the responsibility, after accreditation of hardware
by the CARB, to implement the measures in its jurisdictional area.  It is
assumed for the present that gasoline rationing will be within the
authority of the CARB, although the actual legal requirements of this
controversial measure are vague.
                                    106

-------
                  5.0  OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION


     The relative significance of obstacles to implementation  of the

proposed control  strategy has been estimated using the following

definitions of obstacle categories:

     Technical obstacles - obstacles involving the design of
     hardware, details of administrative procedure, or specification
     of standards or acceptance limits necessary for implementing
     recommended control measures.

     Political obstacles - obstacles involving the feasibility
     of productive interaction among appropriate leaders,
     administrators, legislators, and special  interest groups
     for the purpose of instituting recommended control  measures.

     Institutional obstacles - obstacles involving the opposition
     of institutions required by the plan with those already in
     existence, and necessary adjustment thereof.

     Socio-economic obstacles - obstacles involving the impact of
     control measures on the public, commerce, and industry.

5.1  Phase I Measures

5.1.1  Stationary Source Control Measures

          •   Gasoline Marketing  Evaporative Loss Control - This
              control may meet minor legislative and socio-economic
              obstacles.  Necessary laws and regulations are easily
              specified since there is a large backlog of feasibility
              studies and investigations involving this measure, and
              since several APCD's in the state have already
              instituted requirements for a similar measure and
              can serve as a model.  There should be very little
              socio-economic impact due to this measure.  The cost
              of changes in gasoline refining and marketing will
              indeed be passed on to the consumer, but the actual
              cost increase per gallon should be small.  Public
              convenience should be little affected; consequently,
              minimal adverse public reaction is expected for this
              measure.  The design and development of hardware for
              evaporative control systems at the filling stations
              and on tank trucks may provide a moderate technical
              obstacle.  These technical obstacles must be met by
              the oil companies of California, since it will be
              their responsibility to select appropriate methods
              for meeting the proposed standards for gasoline
              evaporative control.  As a result, their reaction
              to the proposal for the evaporative emission control


                                   107

-------
              measure is expected to present a moderate
              political  obstacle to implementation.

          •   Organic Surface Coating Substitution -  This
              measure should encounter no political or
              institutional  obstacles.  It will  encounter
              some technical obstacles, in that substitutes  such
              as water-based coatings, high solids content coatings,
              and powdered coatings are currently under development
              and require lengthy testing before promising formulas
              can be used commercially.  A minor legal  obstacle  is
              anticipated in writing rules which require the
              recommended degrees of control  by 1975  and 1977.
              Small  changes  in the price of the product may  create
              minor socio-economic obstacles.

          •   Dry Cleaning Vapor Control  - The principle of  carbon
              adsorption has been proven as an effective means
              of controlling evaporative losses of solvents  from
              dry cleaning,  and the required hardware is available.
              Thus,  no technical obstacles are anticipated.   The
              local  APCD's have the authority to implement such
              controls,  and  no institutional  obstacles are
              expected.   The only legal obstacle to overcome is
              the appropriate local rule making, and  it should
              be minor.   No  political  or socio-economic obstacles
              are expected.

          •   Degreaser Substitution - Acceptable non-reactive
              substitutes for current degreaser solvents exist
              and should encounter no major obstacles to
              implementation by 1975.   Rulemaking may present
              a minor legal  obstacle.

          •   Burning Regulations - Burning restrictions have
              already been instituted to some degree, and  it is
              anticipated that more extensive regulation will
              not meet significant obstacles.

5.1.2  Mobile Source Control Measures

          •   Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance - Part I -
              Idle test, ten percent rejection rate.
              Part I of this measure is technically simple,
              and requires little more developmental  or design
              effort than has already gone into the random state
              lane inspection already in existence in
              California.  No institutional obstacles are
              anticipated, since the Department of Motor
              Vehicles can include inspection/maintenance
              certification  as part of vehicle registration
              requirements,  much as it does with retrofit
              devices.  Furthermore, this measure may

                                    108

-------
    encounter few legal or political  obstacles,
    particularly if a current bill requiring
    inspection and maintenance in the South Coast
    Air Basin (Assembly Bill 380) passes both
    houses and is signed by the Governor.
    Legislation will remain a potential  obstacle,
    since four similar bills in 1972 and 1973 have
    not passed the legislature and the administration.
    Socio-economic obstacles should be minor.

•   Part II - Loaded test. 50 percent rejection rate -
    Obstacles for Part II of this measure will be
    similar in nature to those expected for Part I,
    but of larger magnitude.  This testing method
    is more involved and time-consming than the method
    in Part I and will require more effort directed
    toward technical development, design, instru-
    ment assembly, and shelter construction.  Legal
    obstacles will consequently be significant,
    and socio-economic obstacles will probably be
    greater because of the higher cost and greater
    inconvenience for the vehicle owner.

•   Oxidizing Catalytic Converters - There are major
    technical obstacles involving the implementation of
    this retrofit measure by 1975.  These obstacles are
    due to several technical weaknesses in current
    catalytic converter designs.  Further development
    and testing are required but would not be possible
    if implementation is to occur by the recommended
    dates.  The converters will be relatively easy to
    install, but they must be replaced periodically
    (between 25,000 and 50,000 miles) and unleaded
    fuel must be used.  Furthermore, the converter is
    costly as compared to  other retrofit devicesJ and
    for older vehicles, as compared to the value of
    the auto.  As a result, major socio-economic, political,
    and legal obstacles are anticipated for this measure.

§   Pre-1966 Retrofit Device - Since exhaust control
    devices incorporating vacuum spark advance disconnect
    are already required for these model years in the
    South Coast, San Diego, and San Francisco Air Basins,
    it is not expected that this measure will encounter
    any significant obstacles to implementation.  A rule
    must be written and passed by the appropriate Air
    Pollution Control Board in each county, but this
    should be a minor legal obstacle.  VSAD is neither
    costly or complicated, but it is effective and
    should meet a minimum of social and political
    opposition.
                          109

-------
          t   Aircraft Emission Controls -  This control  measure
              should have only minor political  and socio-economic
              obstacles.  Technical  and institutional  obstacles
              may be more severe.   The emission controls  for new
              and in-use aircraft engines will  have major technical
              obstacles.  The ground operation  procedure  modification
              elements of the measure may encounter moderate
              institutional  obstacles with FAA  and the affected airport
              authorities.  Response by pilots  to the  measure is not
              anticipated to be negative.

          t   Mass Transit - Mass transit improvements should meet
              no institutional or legal obstacles, but there will
              be significant technical, political  and  socio-
              economic difficulties  to be overcome. Technical
              obstacles will involve the system design and fare
              structure of the improvements.  Socio-economic
              obstacles will result  from the actual design of the
              system, and the funding mechanism for its insitution.
              Political opposition will depend  on how  well the
              other two major obstacles are met.  The  funding
              aspects are expected to be the most controversial
              portions.

5.2  Phase II Measures

5.2.1  Stationary Source Control Measures

          •   Elimination of Motorcycle Use During Smog Season -
              This measure will encounter few technical obstacles,
              but political  and legal obstacles will be quite
              significant, considering the popularity  of  motor-
              cycles in California (especially  during  the summer)
              and the potentially significant political strength
              of motorcycle manufacturers and enthusiasts.  There
              will be moderate socio-economic obstacles because of
              the recreational and personal values of  motorcycle
              riding, and enforcement will be an institutional  problem.

          •   Inspection/Maintenance for HDV -  Inspection/maintenance
              procedures for heavy duty vehicles have  been developed
              and tested in only a few areas of the country (New York
              State, for example); the potential exists for major
              technical obstacles to implementation in California.
              Minor political, institutional, legal, and  socio-
              economic obstacles are also expected.

          •   Retrofit Devices for HDV - Obstacles to  implementation
              of a retrofit program for heavy duty vehicles are
              expected to be very similar to those described for
              inspection/maintenance.
                                   110

-------
5.2.2 MOBILE SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES
        t   Gasoline Rationing - A large scale VMT reduction
            through gasoline rationing would be extremely
            difficult to implement.  Since nearly everyone
            would be affected, opposition can be expected on
            all fronts.  Due to the potential severity of the
            measure, the political, institutional, and socio-
            economic obstacles will be so great that they are
            likely to force a reevaluation of the  overall
            program objectives, and constraints.

        t   Evaporative Retrofit Device - Major technical,
            political, legal, and socio-economic obstacles
            are anticipated for implementation of an
            evaporative retrofit program.  Although devices
            for pre-1970 vehicles have not yet been developed,
            it is expected that they will be costly compared
            to the value of the vehicle and that installation
            will not be simple.

        •   Additional Retrofit Measures - It is expected that
            additional retrofit measures beyond those specifically
            recommended in this study will encounter major
            technical, political, institutional, legal, and socio-
            economic obstacles during implementation.  Most of these
            additional devices are not cost-effective for application
            in these air basins and will meet significant opposition.
                                  Ill

-------
      APPENDIX  A



PUBLIC ATTITUDE SURVEY
          A-1

-------
      The study was conducted using Consumer Mail Panels,  Market Facts'




controlled mail panel facility.  Questionnaires were  sent to panel members




living in these metropolitan areas:




           San Francisco               Bakersfield




           Sacramento                  Fresno




           Stockton







      Panel members were requested  to fill out the questionnaires imme-




diately and return them to Market Facts as soon as possible.  Certain




questions required the panel members (female household head) to obtain




responses from other members of the household.  Approximately 965




questionnaires  were mailed out,  ranging from 522 in San Francisco to




67 in Bakersfield.  Approximately 700 usable returns were received, a




return rate of 72 percent.







      The questionnaires  were mailed on April 18, 1972 and returns were




cut-off on May  10,  1972.
                                A-2

-------
         CONSUMER  MAIL PANELS
         323 SOUTH FRANKLIN STREET • CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60*06
(3-D348)
 Dear Panel Member,

 Today, I am sending you a questionnaire which I consider both exciting and
 interesting.   Hopefully, you will too.  This questionnaire  deals with the impor«
 tant problem of air pollution caused by automobiles.

 As you know,  autos  are a major  source of air pollution—especially in metro-
 politan areas.   You probably have read in newspapers or magazines that auto
 manufacturers are being required to make changes in their cars that will
 reduce the amount of pollutants coming out of cars.   This will be particularly
 true for cars manufactured in  1975 and thereafter.

 Many pollution experts believe, however, that despite these new federal regu-
 lations on auto air pollution, other ways will have to be found to further reduce
 pollution caused by cars.   The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain your
 reaction to these new auto pollution control ideas being suggested by the
 experts.  In answering some questions, you will probably have to consult
 other members of your family to get their ideas  and  reactions.   I am sorry
 if this is inconvenient, but I am sure you will agree that the importance of
 solving pollution problems is worth making every reasonable effort.

 As always,  please check each  of your answers after  you have completed the
 questionnaire.   Then return it to me in the enclosed postage-paid envelope.
 If you have any additional comments, please write  them on the lines pro-
 vided in Question  12.
 P.S.:  For your help with this questionnaire I will be sending you a token of
        my appreciation, as soon as the processing of completed questionnaires
        is completed.
                                 A-3

-------
                                                                   CONSUMER MAIL PANELS
                                                                   in MUTH rauutiM ITWtr CHICAGO. IU.INOII
                                                                                            (3-D348)
                                                      QTKSTIONNAIBJ:
1.
I.
Jc.
4a.
4k.
All auto8 made in 1975 ar:! thereafter will be equipped with emmision control device* to reduce air
pollution.   If in  ! 975 you owned a car built before that year, how would you {eel about a law re-\
quiring vou to put emission control equipment which might co»t $125 on your  car?   ("X" BE'fcOW)

How would you feel about this law if the cost was reduced by government subsidy to about $50?
("X" BELOW)
                                           1.    Cost $12»    2.   Cost $50
                            Toward Law;
                    Very rnui;t; in favor of law . .
                    Somewhat in favor of law ...
                    Somewhat against law .....
                    Very much against law ....
                                                                 Qi
}a.   Even cars properly equipped with emmision control equipment might still pollute the air if the equip-
      ment was not properly maintained.   How would you feel about a law requiring periodic Inspection of
      the emission control system to assure that it was working properly?  ("X"  ONE ONLY)
Very much in
 favor of law
Somewhat In  ,
 favor of law
Somewhat.  ,
 against law1
     Assuming you had to have your car inspected at least once a year,
     reasonable cost for the inspection?   (WRITE IN AMOUNT)
                                                               Very much   .-..
                                                                against law LJ

                                                              what wculd you consider a
                                                                                             20
Assuming you had to have your car inspected at least once a year,  where do you think the inspection
should be made?  ("X"  ONE ONLY)
            At state-operated inspection centers >Ql
            At city-ope rated inspection centers. . Q2
                                                    At some other place (Specify):


Even if all autos were equipped with properly maintained 1
emission control systems, some cities might still have auto 1 u
air pollution problems due to the large number of cars I 3
either on the streets at the same time or concentrated in I j?
particular areas. Listed below are several possible ways 1 «
to reduce pollution under one or both of these conditions, 1 u
Please tell me how you feel about each of these proposals, f ^
("X" ONE ON EACH LINE) 1 •; j
Proposal! l^—^^l


c. Very high ($200) registration fee per auto but only ,-,
d. Prohibit traffic and parking in central business districts Ql
e. A tax on all day parking in central business districts . . Ql
f. A tax on parking in centra) business districts regardless _.
of whether a person parked only one hour or all day —
g. Tolls on exit ramps of major freeways and expressways Q]l
h. Tolls on exit ramps of major freeways and expressways _ ..
i. Mandatory car pooling — allowing only cars ,
carrying at least three persons Ql
j. Turn some existing lanes into "bus only" and "car pool ,— ..
only" lanes on major expressways and streets. ... '-'
Which of the proposals listed above would be the mostacceptable ?

To Me This Proposal 1st 1
/"
tt
f ^0 ,jt
]
az
DZ
D2
DZ
D2
DZ
(Give
(Give
Ul
IS 3 a.
D3
D3
D3
D3
D3
D3
D3
Letter 4
Letter j
k
fu
a i
»i|
D4
D4
D4
D4
D4
D4
D4 .
D4
D4

/ - 1
I S I
/'/
I u f
i
g 1
DS
DS
as
as
as
DS
DS
DS
DS
                                                                                                        13
                                                                                          D
                                                                                          14.16
                                                                                          Open
                                                                                                        19
                                                                                                        21
                                                                                                        22
                                                                                                   23
                                                                                                   24
                                                                                                   25
                                                                                                   26

                                                                                                   27

                                                                                                   28

                                                                                                   29

                                                                                                   30


                                                                                                   31


                                                                                                   32



                                                                                                   34
                                                A-4

-------
Page 2
                                                                                    (3-D348)
QUESTIONS 5-6 ASK FOR INFORMATION RELATING TO OTHER HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS.
CONSULT THEM, IF NECESSARY, FOR THE ANSWERS.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
How often do the various member* of your household travel by public transportation? (For ex-
ample, by bus, subway, or commuter train.)
Children
Husband Wife (Over 16 Yeara Old)
Three or more time* a week . ... CU •




Please rate each household member's reason for using public tri
important reason "1", the next most Important "2", the next "3"
never uses public transportation, "X" the "never use" box at the
Please rate each household member's reasons for traveling by a
as in Question 5b. (WRITE IN BELOW UNDER 5c)
5b. Public Transportation
Children
(Over 16
Reasons: Husband Wife Years Old)
a Cheaper 	 (38) (39)-- (40)
b. Faster 	 (44) (45) (46)
c. More comfortable 	 (50) (51) (52)
d. Safer for passenger .... (56) 	 (57) (58)
e Less congested 	 (62) (63) (64)
f More available 	 (68) (69) (70)
g. More flexible (I can come
and go as I please) . . . 	 (15) 	 (16) 	 (17)
h. More relaxing (able to
read while traveling). . 	 (21) 	 (22) 	 (23)
j. I do not have a driver's
license . . . (27) (28) (29)
k. Car is not available when
I need it (30) (31) ('2)
1. Other (Specify):
(33) (34) 	 (35)
..QI ...ni
. .DZ ...QZ
:.D3(36) ...03,3,,
. .QS ...as
. .D6 ...a*
insportation. (Rate the most
etc. If a household member
bottom of the list.)
uto. Follow the same procedure
5c. Auto Transportation
Children
(Over 16
Husband Wife Yeara Old)
... 	 (41) 	 (42) 	 (43)
. . • 	 (47) 	 (48) 	 (49)
... 	 (53) 	 (54) 	 (55)
... 	 (59) 	 (60) 	 <61> (74.78
. . . 	 (65) 	 (66) 	 (67) open)
... 	 (71) 	 (72) 	 (73)79EIDBO
... 	 (18) 	 (19) 	 <2°> Dup.
1-14
... (24) (25) (26)


(36) (37) (38)
-- 	 - 	 	 	 	 t 	 	 	 	 -
m. Never use ("X" Box) . . . Ql D* Q3 (39) . . . Ql G2 Q3 (40)
Again, consulting other members of your household, please rate in order of effectiveness which items
below you feel would be most effective in encouraging the use of public transporation. (Rate the most
effective item a "1", the next most effective "2", the next "3", etc.)
Children
Items: Husband Wife (Over 16 Years Old)
Cleaner and newer vehicles 	 (41)

Air-conditioned vehicle* 	 (47)


Parking facilities at stops or stations 	 (56)
Shelters against bad weather at stops
Better security to assure personal
More conveniently located stops
Other (Specify):
(68)
	 (42) 	 (43)
	 (45) 	 (46)
	 (48) 	 (49)
	 (51) 	 (52)
	 (54) 	 (55)
	 (57) 	 (58)
	 (60) 	 (61)
	 (63) 	 (64)
	 (66) 	 (67)
(71-78 open)
(69) (70) 79nZl80
                                                   A-5

-------
(3-D348)                                                                                       p»g, 3

6».   How would you or other household member• feel about traveling to and from work in a car pool?           '
      ("X" ONE ONLY)                                                                                 (Dup.
                                         Very Interested	Ql                                    !->4 )
                                         Somewhat Interested. . . . QZ
                                         Not at all Interested . . . . Q3
                                         Already in car pool	Q4
                                         Do not travel to and from r-|5
                                           work by car	


6b.   If it became necessary to restrict the number of cars on expressways and streets In order to
      reduce pollution and car pools became necessary,  how difficult do you think it would be to get
      into one an  existing one or organize one amongst your friends,  neighbors and/or work associates.
      ("X" ONE ONLY)
                                         Extremely difficult	Ql
                                         Very difficult	;QZ                                      16
                                         Somewhat difficult	Q3
                                         Somewhat easy	( |4
                                         Very easy	Qs
                                         Extremely easy	,-,,
                                         Already In car pool  .  . .  .Q7


7.    One of the major causes of areas of high pollution is traffic
      congestion.  Pollution could be reduced if traffic congestion
      and stop-and-go traffic wag  reduced.  Listed below are
      several ideas for reducing traffic congestion.   Please tell
      me how effective you think each of these ideas would be in
      reducing congestion and pollution.    ("X" ONE BOX FOR
    ;  EACH IDEA)
             Idea:
        a.   Prohibit parking, loading and unloading on busy streets   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             17
        b.   Increase the number of one-way streets	   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             18
        c.   Establish reversible lanes on busy streets to be used      .—i     i—,_    •—,,    i—.^             .„
                 during rush hours	
        d.   Prohibit turns at busy Intersections during rush hours  .   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             20
        e.   Widen major streets	   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             21
         f.   Widen major streets at intersections only	   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             22
        g.   Provide pedestrian underpasses and/or overpasses . .  .   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             2J
        h.   Improve timing of traffic signals	   Ql    Qz    Q3    Q4             24
         i.   Increase the number and frequency of radio traffic re-
                 ports 	   Ql    QZ    Q3    Q4             Z5
         j.   Turn some existing  lanes into "bus only" and "car pool
                 only" lanes on expressways and busy streets  ....   Ql    Q2    Q3    Q4             26
             Your ideas  (Please List):
             	   Ql    Qz    Q3    Q4             Z7
8.    Since traffic congestion is most severe at times when people are going to or coming from work,
     one alternative for reducing congestion would be to have people start and stop work at different
     times of the day.  That is,  some people would start work at 5:00 AM and quit at 2:00 PM, others
     would work from 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM, others from 10:00 AM to 7:00 PM,  etc.  How do you feel about
     this IdeaT   ("X" ONE ONLY)
                                        Very much in favor	Ql
                                        Somewhat in favor	Q2
                                        Indifferent	Q3                                    28
                                        Somewhat opposed	Q4
                                        Very much opposed . . . , . I 15

                                                            	      Dsal
                                                        I      1	1       I-
 9.    Along with the air pollution problem, the country
      may also be faced with a gasoline shortage.  The
      following methods have been suggested as ways
      to both combat air pollution and conserve gaso-
      line.  How do you feel about each of these pro-
      posals ?  ("X" ONE ON EACH LINE)
      a.   Gasoline rationing with drivers being allowed
          to purchase during a year:                     Ql     QZ    Q3    Q4    QS                  29
            about 90 percent of the fuel now used
      b.     about 80 percent of the fuel now used         Ql     QZ    Q3    Q4    Q5                  30
      c.     about 2/3 of the fuel now used               pi.     p.,    n      n     _                   -,
      d.   An "Emissions" or "Smog" tax based on the     l~l      LJ      ^      ^     u
          number  of miles driven during a year:          _                                                -*
            at $10 per thousand miles                   LJ1     QZ    Q3    Q4    Q5                  „
      c.     at $15 per thousand miles                   D!     QZ    Q3    Q4    Qj
      f.   Doubling the price  of gasoline and using         j— ij     ,— .      _.      _                          34
               the additional revenue to imrove                        I— '      I— I*    Q5
               the additional revenue to improve
               mass transit
                                                A-6

-------
Page 4

lOa. Please record the model year of each car owned in your household.  (WRITE IN BELOW
       UNDER  lOa)


lOb.   Please estimate the number of miles each car was driven in the last year.  (WRITE IN
       NUMBER OF MILES UNDER lOb BELOW)
                                                                                                (J-D348)
lOc.   For each car, please estimate what percentage of last year'a mileage was accounted for
       by driving outside your local metropolitan area. (For example, vacation, business trips,
       short weekend trips,  otc,) (WRITE IN  BELOW UNDER  lOc)
               Car *1

               Car #2
               Car #3
               Car #4
                                 lOa
                             Model Year
                                                    lOb
                                                Last Year's
                                                  Mileage
Percentage of Mileage
 Outside Local Area
lOd.   How many licensed drivers are there in your household?  (WRITE IN)

                         Number of Licensed Drivers:	
                                 D«
10e.   If better public transportation were available, would you consider disposing of any of
       the cars you own?
                   ,   ,.
                  Maybe   LJ2
                  No
                                    I0f-
                                               m»ny?   (WRITE IN)
                             -7
lla.   Overall,  how serious a problem do you think auto air pollution is in your city?  ("X"  ONE
       BOX UNDER lla BELOW)


lib.   Overall,  how serious a problem do you think auto air pollution is nationwide?   ("X"  ONE
       BOX UNDER lib BELOW)

                                                      lla        lib

                                                     City     Nationwide

                        Very serious problem	| 11        [  |I
                        Serious problem	Q2 .,„.    O2  ....
                        Slightly serious  problem	D*        D3
                        No problem at all	Q4        D4
12.    If you have any views or comments regarding any question or idea, please record them belowi
                                                                                               (52-78
                                                                                                Open)
                                                                                               7SGEQ80
Thank you for your help.  Please check your answers and then return the questionnaire to me in the;
enclosed postage-paid envelope.
                                                   A-7

-------
 A.2   Detailed Findings - Auto Air Pollution
            1.    Seriousness of Auto Air Pollution
      Over 80 percent of the respondents in each city rated auto air pollu-
tion as a "serious" or "very serious" nation-wide problem.   Levels ranged
from a low of 81 percent in Sacramento to a high of 89 percent in Fresno.
      In contrast, fewer than half of the respondents in any city felt that
auto air pollution in their city was a "serious" or
                             "very serious"
                                   problem.
Greatest concern was expressed in San Francisco (49%) and least in Stock-
ton (20%).
Said Auto Air
Pollution Nation-
wide Is:
                         This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
San
Fran-
cisco
Sacra-
mento
                 San Joaquin
Bakers-            Valley
 field    Fresno   Cities
  Very serious      37
  Serious            48
  Slightly serious    14
  No problem         1
                     36
                     51
                     13
                      48
                      36
                      11
                       5
                      42
                      45
                      12
                       1
Said Auto Air
Pollution In
Their City Is;
 Very serious
 Serious
 Slightly serious
 No problem
 23
 26
 43
  8
  19
  15
  51
  15
   9
  14
  37
  40
 15
 26
 51
  8
  10
  19
  44
  27
(Total Number of
 Respondents)    ('384)
         ('139)
           (65)
 (44)
(66)
(175)
                                    A-8

-------
                2.     Regulation of Auto Air Pollution Through
                      Emission Control Equipment
                     a.    By Law Requiring Equipment on All Autos

          Respondents were asked how they would feel about a possible law
     requiring them in 1975 to put emission control equipment on cars manu-
     factured prior to 1975 at both a non-government subsidized cost of $125
     per car or a government subsidized cost  of $50 per car.

          Fewer than 40 percent of the respondents in each city viewed the
     non-subsidized cost favorably.  Favorable reaction was highest in Fresno
     (39%) and lowest in Stockton and Bakersfield (30%).  However, a majority
     of all respondents were in favor of the  law with a government subsidized
     cost.

          Regardless of the cost to the owner, respondents in Fresno tended
     to be more in favor of the law  than respondents in other cities.
Feel This Way About a
Law in 1975 requiring
A Car Owner  to Put
Emission Control on
Their  Pre-1975 Model
Cars:
At Cost of $125 Per Car;

Very much in favor
Somewhat  in favor
Somewhat  against
Very much against
    This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
                                            San Joaquin
        Sacra-    Stock-    Bakers-           Valley
        mento       ton       field    Fresno    Cities
16
18
23
43
20
16
20
44
14
16
24
46
15
15
22
48
  15
  18
  20
  47
At Cost of $50 Per Car;

Very much in favor          41
Somewhat in favor           22
Somewhat against           13
Very much against          24

(Total Number of
  Respondents)             (384)
           38
           25
           12
           25
          (139)
          42
          28
          15
          15
         (65)
          45
          17
           7
          31
         (44)
        (66)
                  40
                  29
                  12
                  19
(175)
                                       A-9

-------
                     b.
By Law Requiring Inspection of Equipment
          Respondents were also asked how they would feel about a law requir-
    ing periodic inspection of emission control systems, what they would consider
    a reasonable cost for the inspection,  and where the inspection should be made.
    The majority of respondents in all cities were in favor of the law. However,
    reaction was more  favorable in Bakersfield (83%),  and Fresno (88%) than in
    the other three cities (72-74%).

          Respondents in all cities would expect  to pay a mean amount of at
    least $7. 00 for inspection.  Fresno respondents would expect to pay the
    most ($9. 32).

          In all cities,  a city operated center was the least preferred of the
    three inspection locations suggested.   Preferences for the remaining two
    locations were fairly equally divided, with the exception of Sacramento,
    where respondents  expressed substantial preference for state operated
    centers.
Feel This Wav About Law
Requiring Inspection Of
Emission Control
Equipment:
Very much in favor
Somewhat in favor
Somewhat againsjt
Very much against
       This Percent of Respondents In These Cities;
San
Fran-   Sacra-    Stock-    Bakers-
cisco   mento      ton       field
46         52
28         21
12          9
14         18
                       41
                       31
                       14
                       14
                                              San JoaquirB
                                                Valley
                                       Fresno   Cities
                                        43
                                        45
                                         9
                                         3
                             43
                             35
                             11
                             11
Would Pay This Mean
Amount for Inspection;
Would Prefer to Have
Car Inspected At;

State  operated center
City operated center
Local service station/
  garage
Other
                          7.67
  41
  11

  42
   6
            JL
           8.92
            55
            10

            30
             5
                   7.29
 45
 12

 40
  3
        7.01
JL

 40
 12

 46
  2
                                       35
                                       17

                                       40
                                        8
                                               8.01
          40
          14

          41
            5
(Total Number of
   Respondents)
(384)
          (139)
(65)
                              (44)
(66)
                 (175)
                                       A-10

-------
            3.    Proposals to Control Auto Air Pollution
      Respondents were asked to evaluate several proposals aimed at
 reducing the amount of auto air pollution in their cities.  Each proposal
 was evaluated in terms of the following scale:

                  Very Acceptable                       (+2)
                  Somewhat Acceptable                  ( + 1)
                  Neither Acceptable or Unacceptable    ( 0)
                  Somewhat Unacceptable                (-1)
                  Very Unacceptable                    (-2)

      A mean  rating for each proposal was calculated using the weights
 indicated above in the parentheses.  A positive mean rating means the
 proposal is acceptable.  A negative  rating indicated unacceptability of the
•proposal.  A  rating close to  zero indicates indifference to the proposal.

      Based on the mean ratings, in all five cities,  the two most acceptable
 proposals were to "create bus only and car pool only lanes on major thorough-
 fares"  and to "prohibit traffic and parking in central business districts".
 The two least  acceptable proposals were to  "have a very high $200 registra-
 tion fee per auto owned"  and to "have tolls on exit ramps of major thorough-
 fares".

      It is worth noting that the highest rating received by any proposal in
 any city was . 8 and the lowest in any city was -1.9.  In short, none of the
 proposals were rated as high as "somewhat acceptable" in any city, while
 three of the proposals  were rated lower than "somewhat unacceptable" in
 all cities.
                                A-ll

-------
Gave These Mean
               Respondents In These Cities:
Ratings To These
Proposals for
Reducing Auto Air
Pollution;
Gasoline rationing
$200 registration fee
for each auto
$200 registration fee for
2nd, 3rd, etc. , auto
Prohibit traffic /parking
in central business

districts

San
Fran-
cisco
-.9


-1.7

-.'8


•3
. j


Sacra-
mento
-1.0


-1.8

-1.0


7
. &>


Stock- Bakers-
ton field
-.9 -1.0


-1.8 -1.7

-1.0 -1.1


i i


San Joaquin
Valley
Fresno Cities
-.8 -.9


-1.9 -1.8

-.8 -1.0


- ? - 1

Tax on all day parking
 in central business
 districts
 -.2
Tax on parking in central
 business districts  regard-
 less of time parked       -. 8
Tolls on exit ramps of
 major thoroughfares

Tolls on exit ramps of
 major thoroughfares
 in times of heavy
 traffic

Mandatory car pooling

Create "bus/car pool only"
 lanes on major
 thoroughfares
-1.4
 -.6
 -.3
            -.9
-1.4
 -.5
 -.4
          -1. 1
 -.2
-.5
           -.7    -1.0
-1.2
 -.6
-1.2    -1.2
 -.4
-.6
-.4
                   -.9
-1.
5
-1.
5
-1.
4
-1.
3
-1.
1
-1.
3
         -1.2
-.5
.8
.6
.5
. 5
.4
.4
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(384)
(139)
 (65)
 (44)      (66)      (175)
                                      A-12

-------
      Respondents were also asked to record by letter which proposals
•would be the most acceptable and least acceptable to them.  The following
two tables show the proportion of respondents selecting each proposal as
most/least acceptable.  The tables mirror the mean ratings in pointing
out which two proposals are most acceptable.  The two most unacceptable
proposals are the $200  registration fee for each auto (consistent with the
mean ratings),  and gasoline rationing.
                               A-13

-------
                                This Percent of Respondents In These Cities;
Said These
Proposals Were
Most Acceptable;*

Gasoline rationing

$200 registration fee
  for each auto

$200 registration fee
  for 2nd, 3rd, etc. ,
  auto

Prohibit traffic/parking
  in central  business
  districts

Tax on all day parking
  in central  business
  districts

Tax on parking in central
  business districts regard-
  less of time parked

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares
  in times of heavy traffic

Mandatory car pooling

Create "bus/car  pool
  only" lanes on major
  thoroughfares
San Sacra- Bakers-
Francisco mento Stockton field
3s. -2L 2°- !L
1 3 10 12
1 1 5
8655
27 19 13 10
9 9 5 10
rd-
3422
1 - 32
c 1 1 5
10 15 18 12
44 51 39 46
San Joaquin
Valley
Fresno Cities
_%. JL
19 14
2
8 6
16 13
5 6
5 3
5 4
2
16 16
29 37
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(384)
(139)
(65)
(44)
(66)
(175)
  Percentages add to over 100% due to multiple answers.
                                           A-14

-------
Said These
                                This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
                                                                         San Joaquin
                          San      Sacra-             Bakers-             Valley

Most Unacceptable:*
% %

Gasoline rationing
$200 registration fee
for each auto
29 30
% %
38 33
% %

.22 30

50 46
44 51
56 50
$200 registration fee
  for 2nd, 3rd, etc. ,
  auto                       7

Prohibit traffic/parking
  in central business
  districts                   2

Tax on all day parking in
  central business
  districts                   4

Tax on parking in central
  business districts regard-
  less of time parked        5

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares      12

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares
  in times of heavy
  traffic                     8

Mandatory car pooling      11

Create "bus/car pool
  only" lanes on major
  thoroughfares              1

All                         2
(Total Number of
  Respondents)
                                     14
                                      7

                                      6



                                      2

                                      3
                                               11
 3

11



 3

 2
                         (384)     (139)       (65)

* Percentages add to over 100% due to multiple answers.

                                        A-15
         (44)
  5

 11
(66)
   3

  10



   1

   1


(175)

-------
                 a.    Proposals to Combat Gasoline Shortage
      Respondents were also asked to rate various proposals for dealing
with the possible gasoline shortage facing the country.  The scale  used
was  the same as  on the previous table dealing with proposals to end
auto pollution,  and the mean ratings were calculated in  the same manner.

      The most acceptable proposal was to limit fuel purchases to 90 per-
cent of current consumption.  The levels of the ratings  for this proposal
indicate indifference to it rather than a positive reaction.

      The two least acceptable proposals, both of which received about
the same ratings in each city, were to double the price  of gasoline, and
to impose an emission tax of $10 per thousand miles traveled per year.
                                  A-16

-------
Gave This Mean
Rating to These
Proposals for Con-
serving Gasoline:

Limit Gasoline Pur-
 chases to:
                                       Respondents In These Cities;
                         San      Sacra-
                      Francisco  mento
  90% of current usage
  80% of current usage   -. 5

  2/3 of current usage   -.8
                  Stockton
                    -.2

                   -1.0
                                    San Joaquin
                   Bakers-             Valley
                    field     Fresno    Cities
                              -.8
Emission Tax

  @ $10/1000 mi.

  @ $15/1000 mi.



Double Price of
 Gasoline
                    -.8
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(384)
(139)
                                             (65)
(44)
(66)
(175)
-!' Less than . 05.
                                       A-17

-------
                     b.
                           Travelling  to And From Work in a Car Pool
          Respondents in all five cities were also asked how they would feel
    about travelling to and from work in a. car pool and, if car  pools became
    necessary,  how difficult or easy would it be for them  to join or organize
    one.

          With the exception of Bakersfield, interest in car pools ranged
    narrowly from 41% (San Francisco and Fresno) to 48% (Stockton).  The
    low level of interest in Bakersfield (31%) may  be due in part to small
    sample size and in part to the fact that more respondents in that city
    are already in a car pool or do not travel to work by car.

          Current car pool usage ranges from 3% in Fresno to  15% in Bakers-
    field.  Non-auto travel to and from work is also lowest in Fresno (11%)
    and highest in Bakersfield (27%).

          A majority of respondents felt getting into a car pool would be
    difficult.
Said They Would
Be This Interested
In a Car Pool:
                                   This Percent of Respondents in These Cities;
                             San
                             Fran-  Sacra-
                             cisco   men to
Stock-
 ton
                                  San Joaquin
                 Bakers-            Valley
                  field    Fresno   Cities
Very interested
Somewhat interested

Not at all interested

Already in car pool
Do not travel by car
  to and from work

Said Getting Into A
Car Pool Would Be:*

Difficult

Easy

(Total Number of
  Respondents)
16
25
35
9
22
22
31
4
12
36
32
5
15
16
27
15
8
33
45
3
11
29
36
7
                               15
                               80
                               20
21
81
19
  15
 72
 28
                             (384)    (139)     (65)
*Percentaged over respondents not presently in a car pool.

                                           A-18
 27
 68
 32

(44)
 11
 83
 17

(66)
  17
  75
  25

(175)

-------
            4.    Proposals to Reduce Traffic Congestion
      One of the main causes of auto air pollution is traffic congestion and/
or stop and go driving.  Respondents were asked to consider several pro-
posals aimed at reducing traffic congestion.  Of the ten proposals considered,
respondents  in all cities except Stockton and Bakersfield felt that improving
the timing  of traffic signals would be the most effective method of reducing
traffic congestion.   Respondents in Stockton felt that prohibition of parking,
loading, and unloading on busy streets and provision for pedestrian over
passes, would be somewhat more effective.  Respondents  in Bakersfield
felt that prohibiting turns at busy intersections during rush hours would be
most effective.

      Widening major streets at intersections was judged least effective in
reducing traffic congestion in San Francisco, Sacramento,  and Bakersfield.
In Fresno,  establishment of reversible lanes was  least effective, and in
Stockton, widening major streets at intersections  and  establishing  reversible
lanes shared the "least effective" role.

      In each city most proposals were rated very or somewhat effective by
seventy percent of  the respondents.  These generally high ratings mean that
all of the proposals are felt by the majority of respondents to have some
amount of effectiveness in reducing traffic congestion.
                                  A-19

-------
                                This Percent of Respondents In These Cities;
Said These Proposals
Would Be "Very" or
"Somewhat" Effective
In Reducing.Traffic
Congestion;
   San     Sacra-
Francisco  mento
                   Stockton
                                                      Bakers-
                                                       field
Prohibit parking, loading,
  unloading on busy
  streets                   89

Increase number of
  one-way streets          72

Establish reversible
  lanes for  rush hours      65
Prohibit turns at busy
 intersections for rush
 hours

Widen major streets

Widen major streets
 at intersections
Provide pedestrian
 over passes/under-
 passes                    86
Improve timing of traffic
 signals
Increase number and
 frequency of
 traffic reports            70

Create "bus/car pool
 only" lanes               81
                                     78
                                     76
                                    49
                                     84
                                    75
                                    81
                      87
                     91
                     70
                     66
                               78
                                 76
                               60
                               83
                                 86
                                 76
                                 77
                          San Joaquin
                            Valley
                  Fresno   Cities
                                           94
                    62
                                         56
                                           89
                    76
                    74
                              90
                                                                            75
                                                     53
89
78
71
73
88
79
90
71
66.
86
80
80
                              89
                              92
                                                                            74
                                                                            72
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(384)
           (139)
(65)
                                                       (44)
                                                                 (66)
(175)
                                       A-20

-------
      One additional proposal for reducing traffic congestion was presented to
respondents.  This proposal was to have working hours  staggered throughout
the day for the purpose of reducing large traffic  flows during specific times
of the day - rush hours.

      The majority of respondents  in all cities had favorable attitudes toward
this proposal.  Favorable attitudes towards this  proposal were highest in
Sacramento (78%).  Of the remaining cities, .attitudes opposed to the propose
ranged from 18-20% with the exception of Bakersfield (27%) where the data
may reflect the  small base.
                                This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:


                          «an
Felt This Way
                                                                        San Joaquin
                          San      Sacra-              Bakers-             Valley
A ,   , „.       ,        Francisco  mento   Stockton    field    Fresno    Cities
About Staggered          '          ———   ———   ————  ————
Working Hours:            %        %        %         %         %         %
In favor of idea             68        78        53        57         68        60

Indifferent to idea          14         8        28        16         12        19

Opposed  to idea            18        14        19        27         20        21
(Total Number of
  Respondents)           (384)     (139)       (65)       (44)       (66)      (175)
                                       A-21

-------
    A.3  Detailed Findings  - Transportation  Usage

                1.    Usage of Public Transportation
          Respondents (female household heads) in all cities were requested
     to obtain information from other household members in addition to them-
     selves, regarding usage and reasons for usage of auto and public (bus,
     subway, commuter train) transportation.  One of the questions answered
     by all household members (husband, wife, children over 16  years old)
     pertained to usage of public transportation.  The  responses  were recorded
     on the following scale and weighted to obtain a mean travel frequency per
     year:

              Scale

     Three or more times a week
     One or two  times  a week
     Once a month
     Once every three  months
     Never
     No household  member

          Households  in San Francisco use public transportation far more
     frequently than households in the other cities.  An average household
     in San Francisco uses public transportation 94 times per year.  The
     mean number of trips made per year in the other cities ranges from
     10 (Stockton) to 28 (Bakersfield).

          In all cities except Sacramento,  children (over 16 years old) are
     the most frequent users of public transportation.  In San Francisco and
     Fresno husbands and wives use public transportation about equally often;
     in Sacramento and Stockton,  wives are greater users,  while the opposite
     is true  in Bakersfield.
                                Mean Number of Times Per Year In These Cities:
Public Transportation Is     San                                          San Joaquin
Used By These Household    Fran-    Sacra-     Stock-   Bakers-            Valley
Members:                   cisco    mento       ton       field    Fresno   Cities
Husband                       28        3       **         10        **        3

Wife                           24        6        2          5        **        2
Children (over 16 years old)     42        6        8         13        20       14

Mean Total Per Year*         -—_
 Per Household               | 94 |      15       10         28        20       19

(Total Number of
 Respondents)               (384)    (139)     (65)        (44)      (66)     (175)

* Wording of question is such that "times" is interpreted to be a round trip not
  a one-way  trip.
**  Less than one trip.                    A-22

-------
           2.    Reasons for Usage of Public Transportation
      Household members indicating usage of public transportation
were  asked to rank in order of importance several prelisted reasons
for using public transportation.  Their most important reason was
ranked "1",  next important "2",  etc.   Means were calculated on the
basis of the numerical rank.   The follwoing three tables show the
mean ranking given each reason by the various household members
(husband,  wife,  children over  16 years old).  Eligible household mem-
bers who did not rank a reason were excluded from the mean scores.

      Husbands and wives in San Francisco use public transportation
because it is  cheaper and less  congested.  Children in that city use it
because it is  cheaper,  safer,  and more available.

      With the exception of San Francisco, sample sizes are  too small
to permit drawing any definitive conclusions.  However, the data suggest
that wives in the  remaining cities use  it because  they have no drivers'
license and no car is available to  them.
                                 A-23

-------
Gave This Mean Rating
bo These Reasons for
Using Public Transpor-
tation:*
Husbands in These Cities:
Cheaper
Faster-
More comfortable
Safer for passenger

Less congested
More available
More flexible

More relaxing
No drivers license
Car  not available

(Total Number of
 Eligible Husbands)        (104)     (7)          (4)

*The higher the  number,  the less important the reason.
San
Fran-
cisco
TT|
4.2
3.9
4.6
2.7
4.7
5.6
3.4
7.9
4.7
San Joaquin
Sacra- Stock- Bakers-
mento ton field Fresno
| 2. 0 | - 7.0 5.0
3.0 - | 5. 5j 1.0
8. 0 - 6. 0" 2. 0
3.0 - 7.5 5.5
2.5 - 6.0 3.5
4.5 - 3.0 4.0
11.0 - 6.0 7.0
\ 1. 0 | - 7.0 3.5
11.0
4. 0 - 6. 0
Valley
Cities
6.0
4.0
4.0
6.5
4.8
3. 3
6.3
5.3
11. 0
6.0
             (4)
(3)
(ID
Gave This Mean Rating
to These Reasons for
Using Public Transpor-
tation:*
Wives in These Cities:
Cheaper
Faster
More comfortable
Safer for passenger

Less congested
More available
More flexible

More relaxing
No drivers license
Car  not available

(Total Number of
 Eligible Wives)             (148)    (23)        (10)

* The higher the number, the less important the reason.
San

Fran- Sacra- Stock- Bakers-
cisco mento ton field
tm
4. 5
4.4
4.6
|3.2
4.0
4.4
3.7
4. 1
3. 3
1 2.6 [ 4. 5
5. 3 6. 0
5.0 9.0
5.0 6.0 2.0
4.8 6.7 3.0
4.6 3.7
2.7 5.7
4.7 9.0 4.0
| 2. 3 | 1.0 1.0
3.5 2.0 1.0
San Joaquin
Valley
Fresno Cities
5.7 5.0
7.0 6.4
5.3 7.2
5. 3 5. 1
5.0 5.5
3.0 3.4
2. 0 4. 2
3.3 5.9
1.0 1.0
2.0 1.8
             (4)
(9)
 (23)
                                          A-24

-------
Gave This Mean Rating
       Children Over  16 Years Old in These Cities:
to These Reasons for
Using Public Transpor-
tation :*
Cheaper
Faster
More comfortable
Safer for passenger
Less congested
More available
More flexible
More relaxing
No drivers license
Car not available
San San Joaquin
Fran- Sacra- Stock- Bakers- Valley
cisco mento ton field Fresno Cities
| 3. 1 | | 3. 0 | 3.0 - 4.7
4*2 8.0
4.2 6.5
I 3,5 | 6.5
5.0 6.0
1 3. 5 | 3.3 Q
6.0 6.0
4. 5 8. 0
3.8 1.0 2

3.6 3.5 Q
5. 3
7.0
4.7
7.7
751 rroi rrri
6.3
9.3
.0 - 4.0
.0 - 2.8
4.3
5. 3
7.0
4.7
7.7
nm
6.3
9.3
3.6
2.4 |
(Total Number of
 Eligible Children)
(44)
(6)
(4)
(4)
(5)
(13)
"The higher the number, the less important the reason.
                                       A-25

-------
           3.    Reasons For Using Auto Transportation
      Household members were also asked to indicate their reasons for
traveling by auto in a similiar manner as they indicated their reasons
for traveling by public transportation.  The following three tables  show
the mean ranking given each reason by the various household member.
Once again, eligible household members who did not rank a reason were
excluded from the mean scores.

      Three reasons clearly emerge as important reasons  among family
members for using auto transportation.  It is faster, more available,
and more flexible.
                                  A-26

-------
Gave This Mean Rating
to These Reasons for
Using Auto Transpor-
tation:*
                 Husbands in These Cities:
Cheaper
Faster
More comfortable
Safer for passenger

Less  congested
More available
More flexible
Need  car during day

(Total Number of
 Eligible Husbands)          (314)    (115)       (52)

*The  higher the  number, the less important the reason.
San
Fran-
cisco
5. 1
| 2. 6 I
4.4
6.4
5.8
2.4
2.4
3. 5
Sacra-
mento
5.7
| 3. 0 |
5. 1
6.7
5.9
2. 1
2. 5
3.5
Stock-
ton
4.9
3. 5
4.2
6.5
6. 1
1.7
3. 1
3.0
Bakers-
field
5.2
| 2. 8 |
4. 3
6.3
6.0
1.9
,2.7
4.9
San Joaquin
Valley
Fresno Cities
5.6
| 3. 0 |
4.7
6.7
5.7
2. 5
1.9
3.8
5.3
1 3.1
4.4
6.5
5.9
2. 1
2.5
3. 8

1



                              (41)
                    (53)
                    (146)
Gave This Mean Rating
to These Reasons for
Using Auto Transpor-
tation:*
                Wives in These Cities:
Cheaper
Faster
More comfortable
Safer for passenger

Less congested
More available
More flexible
Need car during day

(Total Number of
 Eligible Wives)
San
Fran-
cisco
5. 0
4.4
6.2
5.8
2.4
2. 5
3.8
San Joaquin
Sacra-
mento
5.6
4.9
6.7
6. 1
2.2
2.4
3.6
Stock-
ton
5.2
4. 3
5. 8
5.6
2.3
3. 0
4. 0
Bakers-
field
5. 5
4.8
6.4
6. 1
1.8
2.7
4.3
Fresno
5.4
4. 5
6.4
5.9
2.4
2. 1
3.2
Valley
Cities
5. 4
CUD
4. 5
6.2
5.9
2.2
2. 5
3.8
(350)    (130)
(60)
(42)
(62)
(164)
*The higher the number, the less important the reason.
                                      A-27

-------
Gave This Mean Rating
to These Reasons for       San
Using Auto Transpor-       Fran-
tation:*                    Cisco
       Children Over 16 Years Old in These Cities;
        Sacra-
        mento
                                    San Joaquin
                    Bakers-            Valley
                     field     Fresno   Cities
Cheaper
Faster
More comfortable
Safer for passenger
 5. 1
 2. 3
^^^^MMI
 4.4
 6.6
 5.4
 2.7
••^M^BI
 4.0
 6. 8
 6.6
 3.3
 4.8
 5.8
 2.5
 3.0
 4.0
 6. 5
 5.0
 2.4
 4.4
 6.6
Less congested
More available
More flexible
Need car during day
                                                 5.7
                               2.0l
                                        5.4
                                                [JTT
                                                 2.9
                                         4. 3
(Total Number of
 Eligible Children
(89)
(42)
(23)
(14)
(20)
(57)
*The higher the number, the less important the reason.
                                     A-28

-------
           4.    Proposals  for Encouraging Use of Public Transportation
      Household members were asked to rate various proposals designed
to encourage increased usage of public transportation facilities.  Proposals
were rated in the same manner as were the reasons for traveling by auto
and public transportation.   That is,  the  most effective proposal was rated
"1", the next "2", etc.   Means were calculated for each proposal on the
basis of meaningful responses.

      Household members in all five cities feel that more frequent  service
would be one of the more effective ways of encouraging use of public trans-
portation.

      All respondent groups in San Francisco, and children in Stockton
also rate lower fares as an effective proposal.

      In the other cities, husbands and wives  agree that more conven-
iently located stops would encourage use of public transportation, as
do children in Sacramento.
                                    A-29

-------
 Gave This Mean Rating
                Husbands in These Cities:
to These Ways of San
Encouraging Use of Fran -
Public Transportation:* cisco
Cleaner /newer vehicles 5.4
Faster travel 4. 0
Air conditioned vehicles 6. 7
More frequent service 1 3. 0
Lower fares ; 3. 6
Parking facilities at
stops and stations 4. 5
Shelters against bad
weather 5. 9
Better security for
personal safety 5. 0
More conveniently located
stops /stations 3.7
San Joaquin
- Sacra- Stock- Bakers- Valley
mento ton field Fresno Cities
5.9 5.6
3.9 4.1
5.7 6.6
2. 5 j 2.7 ]
4. 8 4. 1
4.7 4.6
5.7 5.7
6.3 5.4
I 3.6 | | 3.9 1
5.8 5.
4.0 4.
5. 1 5.
3. 3 | 2.
4.2 4.
4.6 6.
6. 3 5.
6. 5 6.
3.91 13.
7 5.7
0 4. 0
8 5. 8
6 | 2.9
4 4. 3
4 5.2
2 5.7
3 6.1
TI rrn

(Total Number of
Eligible Husbands) (357) (128) (60) (43) (57) (160)
*The higher the number, the less effective the proposal.
Gave This Mean Rating Wives in These Cities:
to These Ways of San
Encouraging Use of Fran-
Public Transportation:* cisco
Cleaner /newer vehicles 5. 5
Faster travel 4. 4
Air conditioned vehicles 6. 7
More frequent service 2. 9
Lower fares 3. 4
San Joaquin
Sacra- Stock- Bakers- Valley
mento ton field Fresno Cities
5.8 5.7
4.4 4.7
5.7 6.4
4.5 4.4
5.8 5.
4. 8 4.
5.2 5.
3.2 | [17
4. 5 4.
9 5.8
3 4.6
2 5. 5
2 4.3

Parking facilities at stops
  and stations

Shelters  against bad
  weather

Better security for
  personal safety
More conveniently located
  stops/stations

(Total Number of
  Eligible Wives)
 5.2


 5. 5


 4.5

 3.9
 4.8


 5. 3


 6. 0
WBM^H^M
 3. 5
(382)     (139)
 4.8


 5.2


 5.5

 3.9
MMHHMI


 (65)
 4.9



 5.9



 6. 1

•^MBMMl
 3. 5
MMMMMBM


 (43)
 6.3


 5.6


 6.0

TT
^•^•^•MM


 (65)
 5.4


 5.6


 5.9

 3.7 |


(173)
* The higher the number,  the less effective the proposal.
                                          A-30

-------
Gave This Mean Rating
        Children Over 16 Years  Old in These Cities:
to These Ways of
Encouraging Use of
Public Transportation:
Cleaner/newer vehicles
Faster travel
Air conditioned vehicles
More frequent service
Lower fares
Parking facilities at
stops and stations
Shelters against bad
weather
Better security for
personal safety
More conveniently located
stops /stations
San
Fran-
cisco
5. 8
4. 1
6. 5
rrn
FTTl
6.4
5. 3
4.8
4. 0
Sacra-
mento
6. 1
5. 0
5.9
rm
4.0
6. 5
4.9
5.0
nm
Stock-
ton
6.3
3. 7
6. 8
rm
mn
6. 0
4.7
5. 0
4. 3
San Joaquin
Bakers- Valley
field Fresno Cities
5.8 4.3
I 4. 2 | | 2.3
3.7 4.9
I 3.2 | | 3.3
4.3 3.4
6.2 6.9
6.7 6.3
5.8 6.5
4.6 5.2
5. 5
3.2
5. 3
JTFI
3.6
6.4
5.7
5.8
4.7
(Total Number of Eligible
 Children)
(198)      (74)
(42)
(22)
(33)
(97)
* The higher the number, the less effective the proposal.
                                       A-31

-------
                5.
Disposal of Cars Owned
          Respondents were asked if they would dispose of any of the cars
     owned if better public transportation were available.  Respondents in
     San Francisco and Sacramento are more likely to dispose of a car or
     cars  than respondents in any of the other cities.  Stockton respondents
     are least likely  to dispose of any cars.

          The mean number of cars owned ranges narrowly from 1.6   -
     to  1. 9.

          In all cities the mean number of cars that would be disposed of
     is about 1. 0.
When Asked If They
Would Dispose of Any
of Their Cars If Better
Public Transportation
Were Available Said:
            This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
      San
      Fran-
      cisco
Sacra-
mento
                 San Joaquin
Bakers-             Valley
 field    Fresno    Cities
Yes

Maybe

No

No car owned

Mean Number of Cars
 Owned

Mean Number of Cars
 Disposed
11
18
68
3
1.6
1. 0
16 3
17 9
66 | 83 |
1 5
1.8 1.6
1.0 1. 0

7
1
16
7

5
2
1.9
1. 0
5
9
76

1
1
-
. 8
. 2

1
9
1
78

1
1
2
. 8
. 1
(Total Number of
 Respondents
     (384)    (139)
           (65)
 (44)
(66)
(175)
                                         A-32

-------