ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IX
100 CALIFORNIA STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
JANUARY 15, 1973
TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT
' FOR THE METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES
INTRASTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
-------
SUMMARY
This technical document consists of three Sections:
1. Control Strategy Package
An evaluation of emissions in 1970 and 1977
with and without various additional control
measures.
2. Standards versus VMT reduction
An evaluation of the effect of changing the
oxidant standard on the severity of the VMT
reductions.
3. Future Emissions in the Metropolitan Los
Angeles Intrastate AQCR.
The information contained in this document served the
primary purpose of presenting the severity of the problem in
the South Coast Air Basin (Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate
AQCR). It by no means discusses all the alternatives available
in achieving the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for photo-
chemical oxidant.
Any technical comments on the evaluation presented here are
welcomed. Any persons having such comments should send them to
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Division of
Air and Water Programs, 100 California Street, San Francisco,
California 94111.
-------
CONTROL STRATEGY PACKAGE
TO CONTROL HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBONS
TO MEET .08 OXIDANT STANDARD
IN SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
BY JUNE 30, 1977
January 10, 1973
-------
I. Determination of Maximum Allowable High Reactive Hydro-
carbon Emissions to Meet .08 ppm 1-hour Oxidant Standard.
The oxidant control strategy discussed in this report
involves the control of high reactive hydrocarbons (hydro-
carbons and other organic gases) as defined by Los Angeles
type APCD Rules 10, 56, 57, 58, 59, 61, 65, and 66 for sta-
tionary sources (6), and by California Institute of Technology
referenced reactivity factors (2) for gasoline vehicle
emissions. This inventory and general control approach
was used in the State Air Implementation Plan, and has been
tentatively accepted by EPA. As a result of this approach,
some hydrocarbons considered to be reactive by EPA, are not
considered in this control strategy.
The yearly high 1-hour ambient oxidant reading for a
given day is considered to be directly proportional to the
amount of high reactive hydrocarbon emissions for that day.
In other words, a straight line proportionality is assumed
to exist between the ambient oxidant reading and the high
reactive hydrocarbon inventory. Straight line proportional
roll back of high reactive hydrocarbon.emissions is then
used to predict the emissions reduction needed to meet the
oxidant standard.
The base year of 1970 is used to make this prediction.
On August 6, 1970, the yearly 1-hour high oxidant reading
of .62 ppm was recorded at Riverside. The .67 ppm year
high oxidant reading used by the California Air Resources
Board (ARB) in the air implementation plan has since been
rejected by the ARB. The State Plan showed a total of 195
tons/day of stationary source high reactive hydrocarbon
emission, and 33 tons/day from aircraft in 1970. The 1970
emissions from other mobile sources (i.e., on-highway light
and heavy duty gasoline vehicles and motorcycles) are calcu-
lated in appendix A, and these emissions are 1023 tons/day.
As indicated, this number does not include the emissions from
off-highway gasoline usage. However, this usage is considered
negligible on the basis of data obtained from the ARB staff,
which showed that current off-highway gasoline usage accounts
for only slightly more than 2% of gasoline sales.
-------
Based on the federal .08 ppm maximum 1-hour oxidant
standard, the 1970 high 1-hour ambient oxidant reading of
.62 ppm, and the 1970 emissions inventory just discussed,
the allowable high reactive hydrocarbon emissions are
determined as follows:
(195+33+1023) .08 = 161 tons/day
II. Outline of the Control Strategy Package to Meet the
Federal . 08 ppm 1-hour Oxidant Standard b_y_ July 1977;
(Per Appendices B_, C, D, and IS)
The strategies discussed in this package include those
for which it was felt that sufficient information existed
to claim or estimate emissions reductions. The exceptions
to this are the Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) reduction
strategies evaluated by TRW and its subcontractor, De Leuw
Gather (7). No VMT reductions are claimed in this report from
these measures. Any VMT reduction that these strategies
might produce, would lessen the amount of gas rationing
that would be needed as a final last resort measure to
meet the standard.
Aircraft emissions and their control are based on the
State Plan emission inventory and an EPA estimate of 30%
aircraft emissions reductions determined as a result of
conversations with EPA personnel. These emissions in 1977
are calculated to be
35 x .7 = 24 tons/day
The June 1977 emissions from light and heavy duty
vehicles and motorcycles, when taking into account only
the emissions reduction that would result from present and
proposed factory installed control devices, are determined
in Appendix B. Using these emissions as a basline in
Appendix C, control strategies are applied to various segments
of the light and heavy duty vehicle population and the
resulting emissions reductions are calculated. Gas rationing
is the final strategy that is evaluated, and is used as a
last resort to attain the standard. Gas rationing not only
affects the emissions from vehicular sources, but also
affects the emissions from gasoline marketing operations.
This is discussed and reflected in the calculations of
Appendices C and D. Appendix D contains the evaluation
and discussion of stationary source control strategies.
-------
A compilation of the strategies and their step by step
reductions are shown in the following Table 1. The emissions
reductions that are shown for each mobile control strategy
b. thru g., are the reductions that can be expected by the
addition of each strategy only after the strategies listed
prior to it have been implemented. In other words, the
emissions reductions are determined from an emissions
base that has been altered by the strategies previously
evaluated. As a result of this then, the reductions in
ton/day of one strategy cannot be compared to the reductions
obtained by another strategy because the emissions base
is altered (i.e., lowered) after each strategy is applied.
Table 2 shows the normalized emissions reductions that
should be actually related to each strategy. The calcula-
tions and discussion involved in this weighting approach
are found in Appendix E.
-------
TABLE 1
Compilation of Non-Normalized Control Strategy
Effects (Per Appendices C and D)
On June 30, 1977
Allowable Emissions
Stationary source emissions
(not including gasoline marketing)
Stationary Control Strategy Reductions:
a. Dry cleaning vapor recovery
b. Degreaser substitute
c. Additional Stationary Control Rule
strengthening
Stationary Emissions Remaining
Motorcycle Emissions (not controlled)
Aircraft Emissions
a. Aircraft emissions reductions
Motorcycle & Aircraft Emissions Remaining
Mobile emissions from on-highway light
and heavy duty vehicles, and from
gasoline marketing operations
Mobile Control Strategy Reductions
a. VSAD & PVD retrofit program
b. Inspection and maintenance
c. Vehicle evaporative control retrofit
d. Gaseous fuel conversion
e. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
f. Gas rationing
g. Gasoline marketing vapor control
Mobile Emissions Remaining
Total Emissions Remaining
Tons/day
+ 161
+ 140
6
- 25
- 45
+ 64
+ 30
+ 35
- 11
+ 54
+ 486
- 19
- 39
- 26
- 12
- 84
- 251
- 12
+ 43
+ 161
-------
TABLE 2
Compilation of Normalized Control Strategy Effects
(Per Appendix E)
On June 30, 1977
Allowable Emissions
Stationary source emissions
(not including gasoline marketing)
Stationary Control Strategy Reductions:
a. Dry cleaning vapor recovery
b. Degreaser substitute
c. Additional Stationary Control Rule
strengthening
Stationary Emissions Remaining
Motorcycle Emissions (not controlled)
Aircraft Emissions
a. Aircraft emissions reductions
Motorcycle & Aircraft Emissions Remaining
Mobile emissions from on-highway light and
heavy duty vehicles, and from gasoline
marketing operations
Mobile Control Strategy Reductions
a. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
b. Inspection and maintenance
c. Vehicle evaporative control retrofit
d. Gaseous fuel conversion
e. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
f. Gas rationing
g. Gasoline marketing vapor control
Mobile Emissions Remaining
Total Emissions Remaining
Tons/day
+ 161
+ 140
~ 6
- 25
- 45
+ 64
+ 30
+ 35
- 11
+ 54
+ 486
- 13
- 28
- 19
8
- 70
- 269
- 37
- 42
+ 160
-------
Ill Discussion of Control Strategy and Relative Importance
of Emission Sources;
The control strategy package previously discussed in
Section II employs some strategy applications and reduction
factors that are not justified on the basis of Ref. A. (These
are discussed briefly in the footnotes in the appropriate
sections of Appendix C.) This is the case with regard to
heavy duty vehicle exhaust emissions, and the control of
these emissions by inspection and maintenance and oxidizing
catalyst retrofit strategies. It was felt, however, that
it was not unreasonable to expect that these strategies
could be implemented by 1977; and based on the fact that
the uncontrolled heavy duty exhaust emissions (Ref. Appendix
B) are (73.19/272.2 = .37) of the light duty vehicle exhaust
emissions in 1977, it was considered necessary to apply
these two strategies, even though rough estimates had to be
used to determine the strategy effects. These two strategies
as applied to heavy duty vehicles in this control package,
account for normalized reductions of 21.69 tons/day (See
Appendix E, Section b, under Calculations).
Motorcycle emissions in 1977 contribute 30 tons/day
(a disproportionate amount of emissions), and some controls
on these vehicles should be seriously considered. Two stroke
motorcycles, which comprise only 38% of the motorcycle
population, contribute 69% of the 30 tons/day (See Appendix
B), and deserve special attention for control considerations,
including possibly a complete ban on these vehicles. If
severe gasoline consuption restrictions were placed on the
South Coast Air Basin, it could be expected that the motor-
cycle population and the miles traveled per vehicle year
would drastically increase. Only a normal "miles traveled
per vehicle year" figure, and vehicle population growth rate
are reflected in the predicted motorcycle emissions for 1977.
A simplifying assumption is made in Appendix C, which
equates a given percentage reduction in gasoline consumption
(i.e. gas rationing) to an equal reduction in VMT. In reality
it should be expected that under gas rationing conditions
people would drive more miles with vehicles that would produce
better gas mileage, such as compact economy cars, thus
producing more VMT and emissions than is calculated based on
the simplifying assumption. Therefore, the effects of any gas
-------
rationing program would in reality have to be evaluated by
actually measuring the affects of the rationing on VMT reduc-
tion, and using this relationship to attempt to model or
predict the affect of additional rationing on VMT during
the next gas rationing season. It is anticipated that gas
rationing would be in affect during only the high potential
photochemical smog season of approximately Nay through
October.
-------
APPENDIX A
Dec. 31, 1970 South Coast Air Basin
On-Highway Gasoline Vehicle
High Reactive Hydrocarbon Emission Inventory
-------
This appendix details the information and calculations
involved in determining this emission inventory for light and
heavy duty gasoline-powered motor vehicles and 2 and 4 stroke
motorcycles.
The following data were obtained from the California Depart-
ment of Motor Vehicles (DMV), the California Highway Patrol, and
the California Air Resources Board (ARE), and were supplied to
EPA by the ARE:
Average vehicle age
Age distribution
Vehicle population and population
Miles driven per vehicle year
fraction
The emission factors and deterioration factors are from the
EPA draft report "Interim Report On Motor Vehicle Emission
Estimation." (1) The reactivity factors (i.e., fraction of
hydrocarbon vapor that is highly reactive per LAAPCD inventory)
for gasoline exhaust and gasoline evaporative and crankcase
emission are obtained from the California Institute of Technology
Environmental Quality Laboratory Report "SMOG a Report to the
People." (2) The miles traveled per vehicle year for heavy duty
vehicles are obtained from the publication "1971 Motor Truck
Facts." (3) The motorcycle emission factors were obtained
verbally from EPA sources, Armstrong and Kircher.
The age distribution for heavy duty vehicles
be the same as that for light duty vehicles.
is assumed to
The vehicle population in the South Coast Air Basin on
December 31, 1970 is estimated by multiplying the 1970 state-wide
vehicle population by the 1970 South Coast Basin fraction of
state-wide population. The light duty vehicle population for the
basin is calculated as follows:
11,250,000 x .4972 = 5,600,000
The Basin heavy duty vehicle population is calculated as
follows:
466,300 x .4972 = 233,000
The Basin motorcycle population is calculated as follows:
568,500 x .4972 = 283,000
2-stroke motorcycles constitute 38% of the population, and
4-stroke motorcycles make up the remainder.
A-l
-------
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE
Total
TABLE A-l
December 31, 1970
HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Low
Mileage Age Conversion
Model
Year
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
^1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959
Average
Age (yr . )
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1/8
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4
3/4+
Basin
Vehicle Age Vehicle
Distribution Population
.023
.090
.106
.0971
.0847
.0898
.0948
.0838
.0723
.0597
.0409
.0367
.1212
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
.6 x
.6 x
. 6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
. 6 x
.6 x
.6 x
. 6 x
.6 x
IO6
IO6
io6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
io6
io6
Miles Driven Emission
Per Vehicle Factor
Year (gm . /mi)
2
11
11
10
9
7
7
6
5
4
3
3
3
,000
,600
,500
,200
,000
,700
,000
,000
,000
,400
,900
,800
,300
2
3
4
4
4
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
.9
.6
.4
.5
.6
.0
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
De terior
a tion
Factor
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.01
.04
.15
.21
.14
.29
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
Factor Emissio
(ton-yr.) Reactivity (ton)
(gm
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
.-day)
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-9
10
io9
-9
10
Q
10
io9
i59
io9
-9
10
i69
io9
-9
10
i69
io9
Factor
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
(day)
1.
52.
83.
73.
54.
72.
79.
59.
43.
31.
19.
16.
47.
8
9
5
0
1
4
0
9
0
3
0
6
6
& earlier
Total
634.1
-------
TABLE A-2
December 31, 1970
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emission Inventory
Total Conversion
Basin Miles Driven Emission Factor
Model Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (Ton/yr . ) Reactivity Emissions
Year Distribution Population
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959
.023
.090
.106
.0971
.0847
.0898
.0948
.0838
.0723
.0597
.0409
.0367
.1212
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
. 6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
. 6 x
.6 x
. 6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
.6 x
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
io6
IO6
IO6
IO6
IO6
io6
2
11
11
10
9
7
7
6
5
4
3
3
3
Year
,000
,600
,500
,200
,000
,700
,000
,000
,000
,400
,900
,800
.300
(gm/mi)
.
.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
7.
7.
5
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
8
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
(gm/day)
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
10-9
10-9
lO-9
io-9
io-9
ID'9
ID'9
io-9
io-9
io-9
ID'9
ID"9
ID"9
Factor
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
(Tons/day)
5
41
33
25
23
22
17
15
11
6
11
32
.3
.9
.4
.7
.9
.5
.6
.1
.6
.3
.9
.2
.2
ro
& earlier
Total
247.6
-------
TABLE A-3
December 31, 1970
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Low
Total Mileage Age* Conversion
Basin Miles Driven Emission Deterior- Factor Emission,
Model Average Vehicle Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor ation (ton-yr.) Reactivity (ton)
»»____ A _ _ / \
-------
TABLE A-4
December 31, 1970
Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emission Inventory
Total Conversion
Basin Miles Driven Emission Factor
Model Age Vehicle Per Vehicle Factor (Ton/yr . ) Reactivity Emissions
Year Distribution Population
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959
.023
.090
.106
.0971
.0847
.0898
.0948
.0838
.0723
.0597
.0409
.0367
.1212
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.32
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
1
7
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Year
,300
,500
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
(gm/mi)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
8
8
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.8
.8
.8
.2
.2
(gm/day)
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
10-9
10-9
ID"9
io-9
ID'9
ID"9
io-9
io-9
io-9
io-9
io-9
io-9
ID'9
Factor
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
.67
(Tons/day)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
4
.04
.95
.49
.37
.19
.26
.34
.18
.29
.06
.73
.41
.67
& earlier
Total
17.98
-------
TABLE A-5
December 31, 1970
2 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gin/mi)
Convers ion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(gm-day)
Reactivity
Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
107,500
3,900
15
3.02 x 10
-9
8
15.2
i
CT>
TABLE A-6
December 31, 1970
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gin/mi)
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(gm-day)
Reactivity
Factor
Emiss ions
Ton
Day
175,500
3,900
3.3
3.02 x 10~9
.8
5.5
-------
TABLE A-7
December 31, 1970
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase Emission Inventory
Conversion
Vehicle
Population
175,500
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
3,900
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
.7
TABLE A-8
December 31, 1
2 Stroke Motorcycle React
Evaporative Emission
Vehicle
Population
107 ,500
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
3,900
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
.32
TABLE A-9
December 31, 1
4 Stroke Motorcycle React
Evaporative Emission
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
Factor
(ton-yr) Reactivity
(gin-day) Factor
3.02 x 10~9 .67
970
ive Hydrocarbon
Inventory
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr) Reactivity
(gm-day) Factor
3.02 x 10~9 .67
970
ive Hydrocarbon
Inventory
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr) Reactivity
(gm-day) Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
1.0
Emissions
Ton
Day
.3
Emissions
Ton
Day
175,500
3,900
.35
3.02 x 10~9
.67
.5
-------
APPENDIX B
June 30, 1977 South Coast Air Basin
On-Highway Gasoline Vehicle
High Reactive Hydrocarbon Emission Inventory
(Based on the emissions control produced by new car
(i.e., factory Installed) emission control devices)
-------
This appendix details the information and calculations
involved in determining this emission inventory for light and
heavy duty gasoline powered motor vehicles and 2 and 4 stroke
motorcycles.
The following data were obtained from the California
Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), the California Highway
Patrol, and the California Air Resources Board (ARE), and were
supplied to EPA by the ARE:
Average vehicle age
Age distribution
Vehicle population and population fraction
Miles driven per vehicle year
Population growth factor
The emission factors and deterioration factors are from the
EPA draft report "Interim Report On Motor Vehicle Emission
Estimation." (1) The reactivity factors (i.e., fraction of
hydrocarbon vapor that is highly reactive per Los Angeles Air
Pollution Control District inventory) for gasoline exhaust and
gasoline evaporative and crankcase emission are obtained from
the California Institute of Technology -. Environmental Quality
Laboratory Report. "SMOG A Report to the People." (2) The
miles traveled per vehicle year for heavy duty vehicles are ob-
tained from the publication "1971 Motor Truck Facts." (3) The
motorcycle emission factors were obtained verbally from EPA
sources, Armstrong and Kircher.
The age distribution for heavy duty vehicles is assumed to
be the same as that for light duty vehicles.
The vehicle population in the South Coast Air Basin on
June 30, 1977 is estimated by multiplying the statewide vehicle
population in 1970 by a population growth factor that is
adjusted to reflect the June 30 inventory date. This product
is then multiplied by the adjusted 1977 South Coast Air Basin
fraction of statewide vehicle population. The calculation for
determining the light duty vehicle population in the Basin on
June 30, 1977 is shown below.
1970 Statewide Vehicle Population x [1 + 1970 to 77 Growth
Factor x (June 77/Dec. 77) adjustment] x South Coast Basin
Vehicle Population Fraction = Basin Vehicle Population
6.5
11,250,000 (1 + .104 x T~) .4918 = 6,070,000
The vehicle age distribution was adjusted to reflect the
June 30 inventory by eliminating the .023 fraction of "next
year" model vehicles, and also eliminating an estimated .017
fraction of present year model vehicles. The age distributions
for the remaining years were then adjusted (i.e., increased) to
reflect this change.
B-l
-------
The calculation for determining the heavy duty vehicle
population tn the Basin is shown below.
6.5
46,300 (1 + .104 x -7- ) .4918 = 252,000
The calculation for determinating the motorcycle population
in the Basin is shown below, using a DMV prediction for statewide
motorcycle population and the same vehicle population fraction
used in the previous two calculations.
771,800 x .4918 = 380,000
2-stroke motorcycles constitute 38% of the population, and
4-stroke make up the remainder.
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l
June 30, 1977
LIGHT DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Model *Average
year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
and
earlier
A8e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
-------
TABLE B-2
June 30, 1977
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emission Inventory
Model Age
Year Distribution
1977
1976
1975
w 1974
JL 1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
and
earlier
.076
.110
.101
.0883
.0936
.0988
.0873
.0753
.0622
.0426
.0382
.0312
.095
Total
Basin
Vehicle
Population
6.07 x 106
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
5,800
11,500
10,200
9,000
7 ,700
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,400
3,900
3,800
3,300
3,300
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.5
.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3 .4*
Conversion
Factor
(ton/yr . )
(gm/day)
3.02 x 10~9
it
n
it
n
it
it
ti
n
n
n
n
ii
Reactivity
Factor
.67
n
it
it
n
it
n
n
n
ii
n
it
n
Emissions
(tons/day)
1.08
3.39
2.52
2.15
1.77
1.70
3.21
2.31
10.10
6.12
5.35
3.79
13.10
Total
56.59
* An estimate to reflect the 1965 and earlier average emission factor.
-------
TABLE B-3
June 30, 1977
HEAVY DUTY GASOLINE VEHICLE HIGH REACTIVE HYDROCARBON EXHAUST EMISSION INVENTORY
Low
Total Miles Mileage Age
Vehicle Basin Driven Emission Deterior-
Model Average Age Dis- Vehicle Per Vehi- Factor ation
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr.)
Emissions
Reactivity (ton)
Year Age (yr.)
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968 &
earlier
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2
1/2+
tribution Population cle Year
.76 2.52 x 105 5,000
.110 " 10,000
.101
.0883 " "
.0936
.0988 " "
.0873 "
.0753
.0622 " "
.2070 "
(gm.
2
2
"
7
n
9
15
15
19
19
/mi)
.4
.4
8
.9
.0
.0
.0
.0
Factor
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.06
.15
.20
.32
.25
.27
.29
.31
.0
.0
(gm.-day) Factor (
3.02 x 10~9 .8
1
it " 1
II It C
ii "5
it it -j
10
II II Q
' II II - ' -I
24
Total 73
day
.59
.60
.7.7
.55
.56
.55
.30
.05
.22
.00
.2
CO
-------
TABLE B-4
June 30, 1977
Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emission Inventory
Model
year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
and
earlier
Age
Distribution
.76
.110
.101
.0883
.936
.988
.0873
.0753
.0622
.0426
.0382
.0312
.095
Total
Basin
Vehicle
Population
2.52 x 105
M
II
It
It
II
It
It
II
II
II
It
II
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
5,000
10,000
it
ii
tt
it
ti
it
ii
M
it
ii
ti
Emission
Factor
(gin/mi)
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
3.0
3.0
3.0'
3.0
3.0
3.0*
3.0*
3.4*
Conversion
Factor
(ton/yr .)
(gm/day)
3.02 x 10~9
ii
it
it
n
it
n
n
it
tt
M
ti
it
Reactivity Emissions
Factor
.67
ii
n
n
n
ii
tt
ii
n
tt
ti
it
ii
(tons/day
.16
.45
.41
.36
.38
1.52
1.34
1.16
.96
.66
.58
.48
1.66
Total
10.10
* These heavy duty vehicle hydrocarbon emission factors of Ref. (1), Table 16, were changed in
order to reflect the fact that PCV devices were installed on heavy duty gasoline vehicles on
the same schedule as the light duty vehicles.
-------
TABLE B-5
Vehicle
Population
144,000
June 30, 1977
2 Stroke Motorcycle High. Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emission Inventory
Kiles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
3,900
Emission
Factor
(gin/mi)
15.0
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(era-day)
3.02 x 10
-9
Reactivity
Fac tor
.8
Emissions
Ton
Day
20.4
236,000
TABLE B-6
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhanst Emission Inventory
Vehicle
Populat ion
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(gm-day)
Reactivity
Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
I
m
3,900
3.3
3.02 x 10
-9
.8
7.36
Vehicle
Population
TABLE B-7
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase Emission Inventory
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(gm-day)
Reactivity
Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
236,000
3,900
.7
3.02 x 10
-9
.67
1.3
-------
144,000
TABLE B-8
June 30, 1977
2 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Evaporative Emission Inventory
Conversion
Vehicle
Population
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
Factor
(ton-yr )
(gm-day)
Reactivity
Factor
Emissions
Ton
Day
3,900
.32
3.02 x 10
-9
.67
.36
w
i
oo
Vehicle
Population
236,000
TABLE B-9
June 30, 1977
4 Stroke Motorcycle Reactive Hydrocarbon
Evaporative Emission Inventory
Miles Driven
Per Vehicle
Year
3,900
Emission
Factor
(gm/mi)
.35
Conversion
Factor
(ton-yr)
(gm-day)
3.02 x 10
-9
Reactivity
Factor
.67
Emissions
Ton
Day
.65
-------
APPENDIX C
June 30, 1977, Emissions Reductions
From Various Control Strategies
In the South Coast Air Basin
For on-Highway Gasoline Vehicle
High Reactive Hydrocarbons
-------
I. Strategy Basis and Background: ""
. The 1970 and 1977 high reactive hydrocarbon emissions
from light and heavy duty vehicles and from 2 and 4 stroke
motorcycles when considering emissions control based only on
control devices installed on new vehicles, are shown in Table
C-l. This table is a compilation of Appendix A and B calcu-
lation results.
Using the emissions shown in the 1977 column as a base,
various control strategies are applied, and tine emissions re-
ductions obtained by these control strategies .are shown in the
various subsections of section II. It should; again be pointed
out and emphasized that the emissions reductions in tons/day
that are calculated for each strategy, are the reductions
that can be expected by the addition of a particular strategy
only after the strategy or strategies previously evaluated
have been implemented. In other words, the emission reductions
are determined from an emission base that has; been reduced by
the strategies previously evaluated. As a result of this
then, the reduction in tons/day of one strategy cannot be
compared to the reduction obtained by another strategy be-
cause the emission base is altered (ie., lowered) after each
strategy is applied. ; :
The total emissions remaining and the eiaissions remaining
for each model year after implementing each strategy on the
two types of vehicles (light and heavy duty) and on the two
sources of emission from these vehicles (exhaust and crankcase
and evaporative emissions), are shown in Tables C-2, C-3, C-4
and C-5 at the end of the following section.
C-l
-------
TABLE C-l
High Reactive Hydrocarbon Emissions From Light
and Heavy Duty Vehicles and Motorcycles
(A Compilation of Appendix A and B Results
Reactive Hydrocarbon Tons/Day
Exhaust Emissions 1970 1977
a. Light duty vehicles (considering 634.1 272.0
only factory installed control
devices)
b. Heavy duty vehicles (considering 101.0 73.2
only factory installed control
devices)
c. 2-Stroke Motorcycle (no controls) 15.2 20.4
d. 4-Stroke Motorcycle (no controls) 5.5 7.4
Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emissions
a. Light duty vehicles (considering 247.6 56.6
only factory installed control
devices)
b. Heavy duty vehicles (considering 18.0 10.1
only factory installed control
devices)
c. 2 and 4 Stroke motorcycle (no 1.8 2.3
controls)
Total 1023.2 442.0
C-2
-------
II. Strategy Calculations
1. State of California Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect
(VSAD), and PCV Valve Retrofit Program:
a. VSAD retrofit on light and heavy duty vehicles
for model years 1955-65:
Hydrocarbon (HC) Reductions = (HC emissions subject
to reduction) x (reduction factor)
Reduction factor = .25 (based on the HC re-
duction shown for a VSAD and lean idle air fuel (4)
ratio adjustment in draft proposed EPA regulations )
HC emissions subject to reduction = (1955-65
uncontrolled exhaust emissions) x (fraction of
vehicles subject to retrofit based on make) x
(change of ownership factor)
1955-65 uncontrolled exhaust emission:
(40.5 + 24 x .095 = 40.5 + 11.0 - 51.5
.207
Fraction of vehicles subject to retrofit
based on make:
1 - *(foreign cars statewide in 1970 * statewide
total passenger cars) = 1 - (1,649,000/11,250,00)
= 1 - .147 - .853
Change of ownership factor (assuming 25%
change of ownership per
1972 1973 1974 1975 1976
.25 + (.75x.25) + (.56x.25)+ (.42x.25)+ (.31x.25)+
1977
(.23x.l25) = .25 + .19 + .14 + .11 + .08 +.03 = .80
HC reductions = 51.5 x .853 x .8 x .25 = 8.7
*Ref. ARE phone conversation; foreign cars = 1,649,000
C-3
-------
b.
c.
VSAD retrofit on light duty vehicles for model
years 1966-70:
HC reductions = (HC emissions subject to
reduction) x (reduction factor)
reduction factor » .12 (based on the reductions
shown for exhaust gas recalculations and VSAD
HC emissions subject to reduction = (1966-70
uncontrolled exhaust emissions) x (fraction of
vehicles subject to retrofit)
1966-70 uncontrolled exhaust emissions =
(12.2 + 11.8 + 14.7 -I- 22.9 + 24.5) = 86.1
fraction of vehicles subject to retrofit based
on make - .853 (see Section II, l.a)
HC reduction = 86.1 x .853 x .12 = 8.7
PCV retrofit on light and heavy duty vehicles for
model years 1955-62.
HC reductions = (crankcase emissions subject
tp reduction) x (reduction factor)
reduction factor = 1.0 (complete control is
assumed)
***
= 13.10
**
+ 1.6 x
x (.02) x ((7.1 +
(.095) ((7.1 +
(.02)*** ((8.2 + 3.8
(.095) ((8.2 + 3.8
3.8) .5-3)
3.8) .5 )
.5-3)****
.5 )
****
= 13.1 x .02 x .42 + 1.6 x .02 x .5
.095
+ 1.2 + .2 = 1.4
.095
*The emissions reduction factor of .12 is based on the
EPA reference (4), which limits the application of this
factor to pre-controlled (i.e. pre-1966) vehicles.
However a conversation with an ARE staff member has re-
vealed that ARE tests showed that one of the two VSAD
devices approved for 1966-70 vehicles shows HC reductions
of 22.2%, which indicates that the .12 reduction factor
is a reasonable approximation.
**Crankcase and evaporative losses summed over a range of
years.
***Estimated fraction of 1965 + earlier emissions that are
applicable to 1955-62 vehicles
****Estimated fraction of emissions that are due to crankcase
based on a corrected Table 16 of Ref. (1), see attachment.
C-4
-------
2. Inspection and Maintenance Program, Claiming a 12%
Exhaust Emissions Reduction (based on a loaded emission
test per Ref. (4)):
HC reductions = (light and heavy duty vehicle
exhaust emissions available for reduction) x (reduction
factor)
reduction factor = .12
light and heavy duty exhaust emissions available for
reduction = (1.8 + 7.3 + 4.3 + 39.5 + 33.5 + 32.3 +
26.9 + 22.0 + 20.6 + 13.2 + 10.6 -I- 11.0 + 33.7) +
(.59 + 1.60 + 1.77 + 5.55 + 5.56 + 7.5 + 10.30 + 9.05 +
7.22 + 22.10) = 256.7 + 71.3 - 328.0
HC reduction = 328 x .12 = 39.4
3. Evaporative control retrofit on light duty vehicles:
a. Evaporative control retrofit on light duty vehicles
for model years 1966-69.
HC reduction = (HC emissions available for reduction)
x (reduction factor)
Reduction factor: Using the corrected emission factors
of Table 16, Ref. 1; assuming that the efficiency of
retrofit devices will be equal to that of the 1970-71
new car devices; and assuming that the PCV control in
1966-69 is virtually complete, while evaporative cases
are uncontrolled, the control factor is then -
control factor = 3.0 - .5 = 2.5 = .83
3 3
HC available for control = the. HC evaporative
and crankcase emission for the years 1966-69 =
(3.79 + 5.35 + 6.12 + 10.0) = 25.6
HC reductions = 25.6 x .83 = 21
*Ref. 4 does not recommend a reduction factor for inspection
and maintenance of heavy duty vehicles; therefore the use
of .12 reduction factor is an estimate for these vehicles.
**For this range of years, crankcase control is considered to
be total, therefore the emissions are entirely evaporative.
C-5
-------
b. Evaporative control retrofit on heavy duty vehicles
of model years 1966-72
HC reductions » (HC emissions available for reduction)
x (reduction factor)
reduction factor: using the corrected emission
factors of Table 16, Ref. 1; assuming that the
efficiency of the retrofit devices will be equal
to the new 1973 heavy duty vehicle devices; and
assuming that the PCV control in 1966-69 is virtually
complete, while evaporative losses are uncontrolled,
the reduction factor is then -
reduction factor = 3.0 - .8 = .73
3.0
HC available for reduction = the HC evaporative and
crankcase emissions for the years 1966-72* »
(.48 + .58 + .66 + .96 + 1.16 + 1.34 + 1.52) - 6.7
HC reductions » 6.7 x .73 = 4.9
4. Gaseous Fuel Conversion for all Fleet Vehicles (i.e.
.210 vehicles per owner) for Model Years 1971-74:
HC reductions = (emissions from gasoline vehicles re-
placed by gaseous fueled vehicles) - (emission from
gaseous fueled vehicles)
Emissions from gaseous fueled vehicles in both private
and public fleets:
*For this range of years, crankcase control is considered to
be total, therefore the emissions are entirely evaporative.
C-6
-------
PRIVATE FLEET DATA
Model
Year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970 &
earlier
1971
Statewide
Private Fleet
169,000
132,000
118,000
102,000
62,000
43,000
41,000
162,000
1977 So. Coast
Basin Growth and
Vehicle Popula-
tive Proportional
Factors
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
1.082 x .4918
Model
Year
1974
1973
1972
1971
Model
Year
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
Statewide
Public
Fleet
194,000
194,000
194,000
194,000
1977 So. Coast
Basin Growth
and Propor-
tional Factors
1,097 x .4918
1,097 x .4918
1,097 x .4918
1.097 x .4918
1977 Model Year
Proportional
Factors (See
Previous Table
54.500
442,300
33.100
442,300
22.900
442,300
21.600
442,300
Private and Public Light and Heavy
Duty Fleet Vehicles
54,000 + 12,900 = 67,400
33,000 + 7,900 = 40,900
22,900 + 5,500 - 28,400
21,800 + 5,000 = 26,800
1977 So. Coast
Basin Private
Fleet
90,000
70,500
63,000
54,500
33,000
22,900
21,800
86.500
442,300
1977 So. Coast
Basin Public
Fleet
12,900
7,900
5,500
5,000
* Based on DMV data supplied by ARB
C-7
-------
Using vehicle population data from Appendix 8, the ratio of the
Basin heavy duty vehicle population to total vehicle population
is as follows:
2.52 x 10-
.0398
6.07 x 10°+ 2.52 x 10D
Because of this small proportion of heavy duty vehicles to the
total population, it was assumed for ease of calculation that
the vehicles converted would all be light duty.
The emissions from the gaseous fueled fleet vehicles are then
calculated as follows,:
C-8
-------
Adjusted Miles Driven Conversion Emissions
Factor Reactivity (Ton )
(Ton/Yr)
(gm/day)
***
3.02 x 10~9 .85 1.50
.91
.63
" " .85
* The state 7-mode emission factor was multiplied by 2 to approximate an equivalent CVS-2
emission factor
* A value vased on ARB interviews with fleet operators
o\
Model
Yr.
1974
1973
1972
1971
Total Basin
Fleet Vehicles.
67,400
40,900
28,400
26,800
Emission Factor
(gm/mi)
.7
.7
.7
1.0
Per Vehicle
Yr.
12,400**
it
"
ii
***This factor was estimated by the ARB on the basis of several research reports
o
-------
Model
Yr.
1974
1973
1972
1971
Emissions from gasoline fueled vehicles replaced by gaseous
fueled vehicles:
The following table shows the calculations involved in
estimating the number of light duty vehicles that are
replaced by the gaseous fueled fleet vehicles. The concept
used. to evaluate this is that the total VMT produced by
the gaseous fueled vehicles is equal to the total VMT of
the gasoline vehicles replaced.
Equivalent Gasoline
Total Gaseous VMT = Total Gasoline VMT Vehicles Replaced
67,400 x 12,400 «X-x 9,000
40,900 x 12,400 =%x 7,700
28,400 x 12,400 =^x 7,000
26,800 x 12,400 =Tx 6,000
= 93,000
. 66,000
U 50,300
55,400
The gasoline exhaust and the gasoline crankcase and
evaporative emissions eliminated by the gaseous fueled fleet
conversion are calculated by multiplying the total gasoline
HC emissions for the model years affected by the ratio of
the vehicles replaced over the number of vehicles for each
model year. These calculations are as follows:
C-10
-------
Gasoline High Reactive HC Eliminated
Model
Yr.
1974
1973
Gasoline Exhaust (Ton)
Emissions Eliminated (day)
3A.8 x 9.3 x 104
6.07x 106
29.5 x 6.6 x TO4
6.07x
6.1
x .0936 = 3.4
Gasoline Vapor Emissions (Ton)
Eliminated (day)
2.15 x 9.3 x TO4
.37
6.07 x 106 x .0883
1.77 x 6.6 x 104 .21
6.07x 106 x .0936
28.4 x 5.03 x 104 - 2.4 1.70 x 5.03 x 10
6.07 x 100 x .0988
1972
1971 23.7 x 5.54 x 104
6.07 x 10° x .0988
- 2.5 3.21 x 5.54 x 10*
6.07 x 10& x .0873
6.07 x 10b x .0873
14.4
.20
.34
1.12
HC reductions = (emissions from gasoline fueled vehicles
replaced by gaseous fueled vehicles) - (emissions from gaseous fueled
vehicles)
- (14.4 + 1.12) - 3.89
- 15.52 - 3.89
- 11.63
5. Oxidizing Catalyst Retrofit Program on Light and Heavy Duty
Vehicles* for Model years 1966-1974:
HC reduction = (HC emissions available for reduction) x
(reduction factor)
reduction factor = .5 (Ref. (4)
HC emissions available for reduction = (exhaust emissions
remaining after previous controls are implemented) x (con-
version factor)*
*Although the reduction factor in Ref. (4) is limited to light
duty vehicles, it is felt that this factor could reasonably
be applied to heavy duty vehicle retrofit also. New York is
now in the process of testing catalyst retrofit or heavy duty
vehicles per EPA, Don Armstrong (Land-Use Planning Branch) and
the proposed New York Air Plan.
**This is a factor derived on the basis of discussion with Dr.
Joel Horowitz of EPA, and Mr. Jack Gockel of Clean Air Research
Co. The number indicates the fraction of vehicles that could
be catalyst retrofited, based on the availability of unleaded
high octane fuel for high compression engines.
C-ll
-------
exhaust emissions remaining after previous controls
are implemented = (30.2 + 27.0 + 26.6 + 22.1 + 19.4 +
18.1 + 11.6 + 9.3 + 9.7) + (4.88 + 4.89 + 6.64 + 9.06
+ 7.96 + 6.35 + 19.4 x .112) = 174 + 50.3 «= 224.3
.207)
HC reductions » 224.3 x .75 x .5 =84.3
6. Reduction of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Gasoline
Marketing Emissions by Means of Gasoline Rationing: Gasoline
rationing unlike the other mobile control strategies,
does have an affect on non-vehicular emissions. The
non-vehicular sources affected in this case are the
gasoline marketing or transfer operations. It is assumed
that the emissions from gasoline marketing operations
are reduced in direct proportion to the reduction in
gasoline sales as a result of gas rationing. A further
simplifying assumption is made that a given percentage
of gas rationing will result in a equal percentage re-
duction in VMT.
Based on the California Air Implementation Plan, the
gasoline marketing operations without additional control,
would result in 75 tons/day of high reactive hydrocarbons
in 1977. The state plan shows a reduction of 65 tons/day
of high reactive hydrocarbons using vapor recovery systems
during gasoline transfer operations, indicating a control
efficiency of 87%. Estimating that approximately 82%
gas rationing will be needed to meet the air quality
standards in 1977, the gasoline marketing emission in-
ventory is then adjusted to reflect this as follows:
Gasoline marketing emissions reductions = Reductions from
82% gas rationing
+ Reductions from
vapor controlled
gasoline marketing
operations after
82% gas rationing
= 75x.82+75x.78x.87
= 62+12
C-12
-------
The emissions reductions that are estimated from
the applications of additional stationary source
control, are discussed in Appendix D. The stationary
emissions remaining are 64 tons/day.
The amount of emissions that can be affected by gasoline
rationing is then determined. It is conservatively
assumed that motorcycle VMT will not be reduced by
gas rationing; therefore the emissions available for
reduction by gas rationing are the light and heavy
duty exhaust and evaporative-crankcase vehicle emis-
sions. They are as follows:
(150.12 + 33.2 + 43.86 + 5.03) = 232
The emissions that will not be reduced by gas ration-
ing are the remaining stationary sources, motorcycle
emissions, and aircraft emissions. These emissions
are as follows: (64 + 30 + 24) = 118
The allowable emissions are calculated to be
161 tons/day based on the 1970 high oxidant reading
of .62 ppm associated with an emissions inventory of
1251 tons/day of high reactive hydrocarbons. This
leaves only 161 - 118 = 43 tons/day that can be
emitted from the remaining sources.
This means that only 43 of the 232 tons/day of light
and heavy duty vehicle emissions can be allowed. The
remaining amount of emissions or VMT reduction is
accomplished by gasoline rationing, and the percent of
gasoline rationing required is then:
(232 - 43) 100% - 81.5% gas rationing (i.e. VMT
232
reduction)
This is very close to the estimated 82% gas rationing
used in the gasoline marketing emissions calculation
and therefore no recalculation is necessary.
The total reductions from gas rationing are the sum
of the emissions reductions that this control strategy
produces on the gasoline marketing and VMT emission
sources. These reductions are as follows:
62 + (232-43) - 62 + 189 = 251
C-13
-------
TABLE C-2
June 30, 1977
Strategy Running Inventory
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emissions
Emissions
O
i
Model
Year
Appendix B
Emissions
With New
Car Con-
trols Only
VSAD &
PCV
Retro-
fit
Inspec-
tion &
Mainten
ance
Evapora-
tive
Control
Retrofit
Gaseous
Fuel
Conversion
Retrofit
Oxidizing
Catalyst
Retrofit
81.5% Gas
Rationing
1977
1 Q "7 £
iy / o
1 Q 7 c,
i a 7 /.
i y / 4
iy / j
10-70
19 / 2.
1 Q 7 1
iy / 1
i o ~i n
iy / u
1 O & Q
iy o y
1 O £ Q
1 7 00
1 O £ ?
iy o /
T o /- /-
iy ob
1 O £ C c
iy o j &
earlier
1 8
7^
. J
L "\
O. Q e;
j y . j
J J . _>
O O O
J/ . J
If. Q
i o y
o /i <;
2 4 . j i
2O Q
/ . y -
1/1 "7 -mnrr
14 . / «-"..
11 . B "" "' '
12.2
4 U . _>
1 8
7O -LMJ.
. J *
A t -
O rt C
j y . _> -~-
j j . j "
JO 0
J2 . J
o c Q . .. .
2 o . y
K o o n
^ 2 2 . U
iv on £
{> 2 U . D
h J. J . 2 ~|
W 1 f\ f
& 10 . D
^ 11.0
^ J J . /
-* 1 6
6/,
. 4
^ ^ 8
_bi T ft O
^* JH . O
9.5
20 /
o . 4
2"" Q 7
J . /
^ 1O /.
^^ iy . 4
ifr^ 10 i
lo . 1
Jb 1 1 £
~ 1J. . O
^^ 9 . 3
. 7
fc*. on »
~^ 2y . /
l 6
6y
. A
0 Q
o /. o *^^^»
J4 u -^^-*
2 9 . J " '
o o / ^^_
28.4
O T T
2 J . /
1 Q /.
iy . 4
TO 1
18 . 1
11 £
11 . O
. 3
. 7
20 "j
9.7
1 6
6/.
. 4
q Q
I*1 JU . £. ^^
& 27 . 0
o . o -...-
<^ 2 2 . J.
in ft .^^^_
101 * «_.
11 t -...-
11 . o '""
. 3
. 7
29 . /
1 60
1 ftO
W.6 . 90
^1 o o 0
fewi *> *7 n ......
^1 J . / U
IPl 1 . J U ^^
70 ^ - -
2D --mn-
y 3 . 8 1 n
(^ o . 06
2 9 . 7 U
-* 28
W fi?
K^ 0 0 /\
"^ J . JU
^^3 . 00
Ihfc o f\ o
T^Z .92
V, 0 /, 1
^*-2 .41
Ife. O 1 "J
~2 . 1 J
^r 1 . y /
1O Q
.28
-^ 1.02
^^1) . 1 J
Total 272.2
256.7
226.0
226.0
215.5
150.12
26.31
NOTE: An arrow indicates that the emissions at the tail of the arrow are reduced to the
amount at the head of the- arrow by the strategy listed above the arrowhead column.
-------
TABLE C-3
June 30, 1977
Strategy Running Inventory
Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Exhaust Emissions
Emissions
Model
Year
Appendix B
Emissions
With New
Car Con-
trols Only
VSAD & Irispec- Evapora-
PCV tion & tive
Retro- Mainten- Control
fit ance Retrofit
Gaseous
Fuel
Conversion
Retrofit
Oxidizing
Catalyst
Retrofit
81.5% Gas
Rationing
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
A & v y
1968 &
earlier
.59
1.60
1.77
5.55
5.56
7.55
10.39
9.05
7 . 22
/**
o A nn
.59
1.60
1.77
5.55
5.56
7.55
10.30
9.05
7 .22
^22.10
+~ .52
-^1.41
-b-1.56
-»4.88
-> A.89
> 6.64
-> 9.06
> 7.96
+ 6.35
-kL9.40
.52
1.41
1.56
4.88
4.89
6.64
9.06
7.96
6.35
19.40
.52
1.41
1.56
4.88
4.89
6.64
9.06
.7.96
6 35
19.40
.52
1.41
1.56 -
^ 3.05
+~ 3.06
-W 4.15
V 5.66
V 4.98
k 397
*> 15.50
> .09
+~ .25
-V .27
-te» .54
-^ .54
-^ .73
> 1.00
> .88
-W- 70
^^^^ / V
+» 2.73
m
H
i
u
Total
NOTE:
73.19
71.29
62.67
62.67
62.67
43.86
7.73
An arrow indicates that the emissions at the tail of the arrow are reduced to the
amount at the head of the arrow by the strategy listed above the arrowhead column
-------
TABLE C-4
June 30, 1977
Strategy Running Inventory
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emissions
Tons
Emissions (Day )
O
i
Model
Year
Appendix B
Emissions
with New
Car Con-
trols Only
VSAD &
PCV
Retro-
fit
Inspec-
tion &
Mainten-
ance
Evapora-
tive
Control
Retrofit
Gaseous
Fuel
Conversion
Retrofit
Oxidizing
Catalyst
Retrofit
81.5% Gas
Rationing
1 Q7 7
1 Q 7 fi
1 Q 7 C
JL y 1 j
1 Q 7 A
1Q7 T
1972
1 Q 7 1
1 Q 7 0
1 Q f\ Q
1968
1 Q 67
1Q66
1 Q A S &
earlier
1 OR
3q Q
« j y
0 S 9
o IS
177
1 70
j 01
o Q i
in in
6 12
S "3 S
1 78
1 q in
i oa
3.0 Q
jy
2S 9
j f.
9 IS
1 77
1 70
3 01
9 -11
i j j.
in in
6 12
S °. S
^ 78
fc 1 1 QO
i no
30 Q
J y
2S 9
j ^
21 C
1 77
1 70
001
20 1
in in
6 1°
s ?, s
"} 7Q
1 1 QO
1 08
30 Q
J y
2S 9
j ^
21 S ... ...
1 77 ^,.
170
0 0 1
20 1
w i 7 n
_ fr. l od
^ Q 1
*^ fi A
11 QO
1 OS
3O. Q
J y
2S 9
« J f.
-ks>. 1 7 R
t^ 1 Sfi
-fe 1 SO
&- 9 87
20 1
j J-
1 7D
J. . / U
1 04
Q1
f\L
1 1 on
1 Oft
3 TO --...-
2S 7
179 .
1 Sfi
1 sn -.
907
? ? 1
1 O/i
0 1
fid
11 on - ...
fr, ID
W^ -L:'
i^ f.r\
iw /i A
_JW 0 1
^ 97
1^ ^ /
Ess. 2fi
--b, S 1
Jht U 1
, iw ifl
(^ 1 fi
fc> 11
fcp i n
Total
56.59
55.39
55.39
34.32
33.20
33.20
5.84
NOTE: An arrow indicates that the emissions at the tail of the arrow are reduced to the
amount at the head of the arrow by the strategy listed above the arrowhead column,
-------
TABLE C-5
June 30, 1977
Strategy Running Inventory
Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicle High Reactive Hydrocarbon
Crankcase and Evaporative Emissions
Tons
Emissions
Model
Year
Appendix B
Emissions
With New
Car Con-
trols Only
VSAD &
PCV
Retro-
fit
Inspec-
tion &
Mainten-
ance
Evapora-
tive
Control
Retrofit
Gaseous
Fuel
Conversion
Retrofit
Oxidizing
Catalyst
Retrofit
81.5%
Rationing
1977
1Q76
1 o 7 c
JL y 1 j
1 Q 7 A
JL y 1 H
107-3
1 Q "7 O
1 y 1 f.
1 O7 1
J. 7 / JL
1 Q 70
J. y i u
1 Q£Q
L y o y
1 O £ O
J.7OO
1 Q A7
J. y O /
t oati
j.y oo
J Q f. e r
x y oy o
earlier
16
L 5
A 1
H JL
0 £
.JO
3ft
1C O
. J £.
1 ^.A
JL « J t
11 fi
. J. O
Q fi
. 7 U
£ £
.00
CO
JO
/. a
. 4o
Ififi
.DO ~~ ^
16
45
A 1
. H J.
o c
.JO
*)8
1^ o
. J/
1 'lA
1 1 fi
Q fi
A (\
.DO
CO
- .JO
Aft
HO
1A fi
HO
16
A5
A 1
. H JL
ox:
.JO
^ft
1C 0
1 TA
J. . J H -
1 1 fi ._,,..
06
Afi - ..-
Ifl - - -
A ft
1 L(\
JL . HO
16
A S
A 1
. H JL
'if.
JO
00
t*. /, i
^ .Hi
fe Ifi
P" .JO
hi -J 1
fc, 0 £
jfe 10
k> 1 ft
-fe 1 1
1 L(\
JL . HO
16
AS
A 1
. H J.
o c
.JO
00
/ 1
H Jl
0 C
. J O
O 1
. J JL
9 fi
£. O
1 Q
. J.O
1 fi
. JLO
1 O
. 1 J
1A A
.40
1 6
AS
An ,
. H J.
7 c _.
.JO
TR
/I
Tfi .
.JO
> 1
. J JL
O fi _. ,.
1 ft .. .. ,.
1 c.
1 o
1A fi .....
.10
-JJfc 01
-^ OR
K n 7
^^ . u /
. Jk r>/-
^ « UO
^ O7
>> n 7
-^ nr\
P . UO
ffc ft C
}? U J
fc OS
^- rt o
».> ft 0
__^ A O
b. 9 fi
' .
-------
APPENDIX D
1977 Emission Reductions
From Various Control Strategies
In the South Coast Air Basin
For Stationary Source High Reactive Hydrocarbons
-------
I 1977 Stationary Source Emissions (not Including gasoline
marketing):
1977 emissions and growth projections were taken from the
State Implementation Plan. The 1977 emissions are projected to
be 140 tons/day if no additional controls are placed on sta-
tionary sources from 1970 to 1977.
II 1977 Stationary Source Reductions:
1. Dry Cleaning Vapor Control:
The State Plan indicated that there would be 6 tons/day of
high reactive hydrocarbon emissions from dry cleaning operations
in 1977. The Cal Tech EQL report (2) Indicated that virtually
complete control of these emissions could be accomplished by
activated carbon scrubbing. Based on this, complete control
was assumed, resulting In a reduction of 6 tons/day.
2. Trichloroethylene (TCE) Degreaser, Substitution:
The State Plan predicted that there would be 25 tons/day
of high reactive emissions from degreasing operations. The Cal
Tech EQL report (2) indicated that these emissions consisted of
TCE high reactive solvent, which could be easily replaced by a
non-reactive substitute, 1,1,1-Trichloroethane. With this
control strategy implemented, an additional 25 tons/day of high
reactive emissions are eliminated.
I
3. Additional Stationary Control Rule Strengthening:
Emissions from surface coatings and miscellaneous solvent
.usage are estimated in the State Plan to be 91 tons/day. The
Cal Tech EQL report (2) , and conversations with the Los Angeles
APCD, indicated that a 50% reduction in high reactive hydrocar-
bons would be accomplished by rule strengthening (primarily Rule
66). Making this assumption, an additional reduction of 45 tons/
day Is taken.
The uncontrolled 1977 stationary emissions and the re-
ductions from the strategies discussed in the previous sub-
sections are shown in the table below.
D-l
-------
Tons/day
1977 Uncontrolled stationary +140
high reactive HC emissions
Control Strategies
a. Dry cleaning vapor - 6
control
b. Degreaser substitution - 25
c. Rule 66 Strengthening - 45
(50%)
Emissions remaining after + 64
implementation of control
measures
D-2
-------
APPENDIX E
Normalizing the Emissions Reductions
Of Interacting Control Strategies
-------
The problem of evaluating various control strategies by
comparing the calculated emission reductions, has been pointed
out in the report body and Appendix C. This appendix presents
an approach that can be used to realistically evaluate the
emissions reductions that can be related to each control
strategy.
In order to determine which control strategies are inter-
acting on the various emission sources, a list of the emission
sources and the control strategies that affect each source are
listed as follows:
a. Light duty gasoline exhaust emissions
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
2. Inspection and maintenance
3. Gaseous fuel conversion
4. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
5. Gasoline rationing
b. Heavy duty gasoline exhaust emissions
1. VSAD &, PCV retrofit program
2. Inspection and maintenance
3. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
4. Gasoline rationing
c. Light duty evaporative and crankcase emissions
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
2. Vehicle evaporative retrofit
3. Gaseous fuel conversion
4. Gasoline rationing
d. Heavy duty evaporative and crankcase emissions
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
2. Vehicle evaporative retrofit
3. Gasoline rationing
e. Gasoline marketing
1. Gasoline marketing operation vapor controls
2. Gasoline rationing
f. Dry cleaning emissions
1. Activated charcoal scrubbing
E-l
-------
g. Degreasing solvent emissions
1. Substitute non-reactive substitute
h. Solvent coating and miscellaneous sources
1. Rule 66 Tightening (50%)
i. Aircraft emissions
1. Federal emission regulations
In order to do the most realistic normalizing, the emission
sources should be broken into their smallest possible components
as is done above.
The purpose of normalizing again, is to fairly or realisti-
cally proportion the total reductions. This normalizing problem
presents itself when more than one strategy is applied to a
single type or category of emissions, as is the case with
emission sources listed a. thru e..
After the listing, the next step is to calculate an "emissions
weighting factor" for each strategy that is applied to an emissions
source. Using the emissions source listed -- "a. light duty
gasoline exhaust emissions" as an example, the weighting or
normalizing process is then demonstrated. The first step in
determining the "emissions weighting factor" in this example is
to calculate the reductions in tons/day that each of the 5 control
strategies could produce when applied to the uncontrolled emissions
value that is calculated in Appendix B and is found in Table B-l
under total emissions. These calculated reductions are the
emissions reductions that each strategy would produce if none of
the other 4 strategies were implemented. Each of these emission
values is then divided by the total emissions available for
reduction* (i.e. Table B-l total emissions).
*The division of each of these emission values by
the total emission is actually not necessary, but
is done here because it appears to be an intuitive
help to visualize this approach. The problem could
be solved by calling the emission values the
"emission weighting factors," and proceeding through
the problem as outlined. All that is needed is a set
of numbers that show the relative affect of each
strategy to any of the other strategies. The numbers
produced by the first multiplication step have this
property.
E-2
-------
The fraction resulting from each of these divisions or ratios,
is the "emission weighting factor" for each of the 5 strategies
as applied to this particular emissions source. The utility of
these emission weighting factors does not depend on their
absolute value, but depends instead on the relative values of the
factors to each other. The next step is to add these "emission
weighting factors" and divide this sum into the actual emissions
reductions that are provided by this combination of strategies on
this particular emission source. The actual emission reduction
for this case is found from Table C-2 by subtacting the total of
the last column from the first column. The normalized emission
reduction for each strategy as applied to this emission source is
then calculated by multiplying the result of the last division
exercise by the "emission weighting factor" for each strategy.
The type of exercise Just described is applied to each of
the emission sources a. thru e., and the weighted emissions of
the individual strategies as applied to the various emission
sources are summed to give the total weighted emission reduction
that should be credited to each control strategy.
E-3
-------
Calculations:
a. Light duty vehicle gasoline exhaust emissions:
Emission weighting factors:
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
272.2 -256.7 _ 15.2
.0558
272.2 272.2
2. Inspection and maintenance
.12 x 272.2 . 12
272.2
3. Gaseous fuel conversion
Recalculating the emissions of the vehicles
replaced by gaseous fuel (see Appendix C,
Section II, 4):
6.1 x 39.5 m 6.92
34 . o
3.4 x llll - 3.86
29.5
2.4 x 22^-L - 2.73
29.5
2.5 x |lll = 2'84
23'7 16.35
Reduction - 16.35 -3.89 = 12.46
12.46 = .04
272.2
4. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
(39.5 +33.5 +32.3 +26.9 +24.5 +22.9 +14.7 +11.8
+12.2).75 x .5 - 218.3 x .75 x .5 - 81.8
81.8
2
E-4
-------
5. Gasoline rationing
272.2 x .824
2722
Summation of emission weighting factors:
.0558
.1200
.0400
.3010
.8240
1.3408
Actual emissions reduction divided by summation of
weighting factors:
272.2 -26.31 _ 245.89 _
. 1.3408 1.3408
Normalized emission reductions:
VSAD & PCV retrofit - 183.2 x .0558 - 10.22
Inspection and maintenance = 183.2 x .12 = 22.00
Gaseous fuel conversion = 183.2 x .04 » 7.33
Oxidizing catalyst retrofit = 183.2 x .301 = 55.10
Gas rationing - 183.2 x .824 = 151.00
b. Heavy duty vehicle gasoline exhaust emissions:
Emission weighting facors:
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit
73.19 -71.29 . 1.9 = n,c0
737T9 TJTI? '°259
2. Inspection and maintenance
73.19 x .12 = 12
73.19
E-5
-------
3. Oxidizing catalyst retrofit
(5.55 +5.56 +7.55 +10.39 +9.05 +7.22 +24.00 x
.75 x .5 = 58.34 x .75 x .5 - 21.9 'Z07
21>9 = .300
73.19
Gasoline rationing
73.19 x .624
.824
73.19
Summation of emission weighting factors:
.0259
.1200
.3000
.8240
1.2699
Actual emissions divided by summation of weighting
factors:
73.19 -7.73 65.46 = 51 6
1.2699 1.2699
Normalized emission reductions:
VSAD & PCV retrofit = 51.6 x .0259 - 1.34
Inspection and maintenance = 51.6 x .12 - 6.19
Oxidizing catalyst retrofit » 51.6 x .30 = 15.50
Gasoline rationing » 51.6 x .824 - 42.50
Light duty vehicle gasoline evaporative and crankcase
emissions:
Emission weighting factors:
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit program
56.59 -55.39 . 1.2 . 02i2
56.59 56.59
E-6
-------
2. Vehicle evaporative retrofit
55.39-34.32 21.07 = 373
56.59 56.59
3. Gaseous fuel conversion
34.34 -33.20 _ 1.12 ^
56.59 "56.59
4. Gasoline rationing
.0198
56.59 x .824
.824
56.59
Summation of emission weighting factors:
.0212
.3730
.0198
.8240
1.2380
Actual emissions reduction divided by summation of
emission weighting factors:
56.59 -5.84 _ 50.75
41.0
1.2380 1.2380
Normalized emission reductions:
VSAD & PCV retrofit - 41.0 x .0212 - .87
Vehicle evaporative retrofit * 41.0 x .373 » 15.30
Gaseous fuel conversion " 4.1.0 x .0198 = .81
Gasoline rationing «= 41.0 K -024 = 33.80
d. Eeavy duty vehicle evaporative ind crankcase emissions:
Emission weighting factors:
1. VSAD & PCV retrofit
10.11 -9.92 = .19
10.11 10.11
.0188
E-7
-------
2. Vehicle evaporative retrofit
9'?2 -5.03 , 4^1
10.11 1.011
3. Gasoline rationing
10.11 x .824
10.11
Summation of emission weighting factors:
.8240
.4830
.0188
1.3258
Actual emissions reduction divided by summation of
weighting factors:
10.11 -.88 9.23
6.96
1.3258 1.3258
Normalized emission reductions:
VSAD & PCV retrofit - 6.96 x .0188 .13
Vehicle evaporative retrofit « 6.96 x .483 = 3.37
Gasoline rationing *> 6.96 x .824 => 5.74
Gasoline marketing
Emission Weighting factors:
1. Marketing vapor control
|f - .866
2. Gasoline rationing
61 -8 = .825
75
Summation of emission weighting factors:
.866
.825
1.691
E-8
-------
Actual emissions reduction divided by summation of
emission weighting factors:
62+12 . _J± 43>1
1.691 1.691
Normalized emission reductions:
Marketing vapor control « 43,1 x .866 » 37.4
Gasoline rationing » 43.1 s .825 » 35.6
f. Dry cleaning emissions
Normalized reduction «= 6
g. Degreasing solvent emissions
Normalized reduction « 25
h. Rule 66 strengthening
Normalized reduction = 45
i. Aircraft emissions
, > Normalized reduction » 11
Total Normalized Reductions:
Total VSAD j& PjCV normalized jred_ucations
10.22
1.34
.87
.13
12.56 tone/day
Total j.uppection anj. roajljTi^et^an^e np_rCT.al:L.?.o/{ reductions
22.00
6.19
28.19 tons/day
Total gaseoun fj^f^l. conversion normalized reductions
7.33
_JB1
8.J.-V tone/day
E-9
-------
Total oxidizing catalyst retrofit normalized reductions
55.10
15.50
70.60 tons/day
Total gas rationing normalized reductions
151.00
42.50
33.80
5.74
35.60
268.64 tons/day
Total vehicle evaporative retrofit normalized reductions
15.30
3.37
18.67 tons/day
Gasoline marketing vapor control normalized reductions
37.4 tons/day
Dry cleaning normalized reductions
6 tons/day
Degreasing solvent normalized reductions
25 tons/day
Rule 66 strengthening normalized reductions
45 tons/day
Aircraft normalized reductions
11 tons/day
E-10
-------
References:
(1) D. S. Kircher, D. P. Armstrong, EPA, draft report
"An Interim Report on Motor Vehicle Emission
Estimation," October 1972
(2) L. Lees, M. Braly, J. Trijonis, et al, California
Institute of Technology - Environmental Quality
Laboratory, "SMOG - A Report to the People," 1972
(3) P. Pekkala, Automobile Manufacuturers Association Inc.,
"1971 Motor Truck Facts"
(4) EPA internal draft of proposed regulations
"Revisions to Requirements for Preparation,
Adoption and Submittal of Implementation Plan,"
November 14, 1972
(5) G. Hass, R. Alexander, A. S. Cooper, C. Harper,
R. Moliso, "Task Force Report on Periodic Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance for Emissions Control
and Recommended Program for California," October, 1972
(6) Chass, R., Lunche R., et al, Los Angeles Co. Air
Pollution Control District "Profile of Air
Pollution Control" as of January 1971
(7) EPA contracted study conducted by TRW under Basic
Ordering Agreement Number 68-02-0048 and titled
"Transportation Control Strategies for State Air
Quality Implementation Plans"
-------
ATTACHMENT
Light Duty and Heavy Duty Vehicle
Crankcase and Evaporative Hydrocarbon
Emissions by Model Year
California ONLY
iodel LDV Hydrocarbons
Year GM/MI
Pre 1961 7.1
1961 - 1963
1964 - 1967
1968 - 1969
1970 - 1971
1972
1973 on
3.8
3.0
3.0
0.2
Evap. Co
0.2
HDV Hydrocarbons
GM/MI
8.2
3.8
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
itrol
I 0.8
^ Evap. Control
i
PCV
Voluntary
« i
Improved PCV
for 100%
control &
This table is an adjustment of Table 16 from Ref (1).
-------
Metropolitan Los Angeles Intrastate
Air Quality Control Region Transportation
.Control Plan Standards vs. VMT Reductions
Summary:
This report predicts the effect of varying degrees of
vehicle miles traveled reduction (VMTR) in the Los Angeles Air
Quality Control Region (AQCR) on air quality in 1977.
Standard (STD) or
Days/Year Maximum 1-hour Oxidant
0.08 is exceeded reading (ppm) (1 day/yr.) VMTR* %
6 0.10 64
10 0.108 57
20 ' 0.122 45
30 0.133 35
40 0.140 29
50 0.147 23
102 0.174 0
^Assumes all other controls carried out (e.g., retrofit, vapor
recovery, etc.).
-------
Calculations to determine £ of days
various ox id ant standards will b_e exceeded
with various degrees o_f_ VMT reductions
(e.g. £as_ rationing)
1. Maximum 1-hour oxidant reading, 1970: 0.62 ppm.
2. Total emissions projected for 1977 without VMTR:
350 tons/day (assuming 3. a. - 3.e. and stationary
source controls are implemented)
3. .. Light and heavy duty gasoline vehicle emissions in 1977
after the following controls are implemented = 232 tons/day
a. State PCV & VSAD Plan
b. EPA Inspection/Maintenance
c. EPA Evaporative Retrofit
d. EPA Gaseous Fueling
e. EPA Oxidizing Catalyst
4. VMT strategy can be applied to item 3 only, other sources
are assumed unaffected by VMT reductions.
-i ' . , ' ' ' '
5. Allowable emissions if STD = 0.08 is to be attained:
X 1251 tons/day » 161 tons/day
o . o/
where 1251 tons/day = 1970 total emissions
VMTR = 1 - (161-118) 100 81.5%
232
where 118 = emissions unaffected by VMTR = (350 - 232)
6. Allowable emissions if STD. = 0.1:
0>1° X 1251 tons/day = 202 tons/day
VMTR
7. Allowable emissions if STD. «= 0.147:
0>147 X 1251 tons/day - 296 tons/day
0.62
VMTR - 1 - (216 - 118) 10Q 23>3%
232
-------
8. Determine tons/day allowable if STD » 0.08 is exceeded
5, 10, 15 days/year:
6 days °__6_ » 1.64% of year
365
10 days 2.74%
15 4.1
20 5.5
25 6.8
30 8.2
35
40 10.1
45
50 13.7
Using graph 1, attached:
Oxldant Hydrocarbon
Days/Year Maximum 1-hr. . Ton/Day VMTR(2)
.08 is exceeded reading (ppm) Allowable^1' %
(N) (M) (A)
6 0.100 202 64
10 0.108 218 57
15 0.118 238 48
20 0.122 246 45
25 0.128 258 40
30 0.133 269 35
'40 0.140 283 29
50 0.147 297 23
102 0.174 350 0
(1) This column is calculated as follows:
~L- X 1251 - A (tons/day)
where: M - Oxidant Maximum 1-hr, reading
.62 « Oxidant maximum 1-hr, reading in 1970
1251 1970 reactive hydrocarbon emissions
A = Reactive hydrocarbon emissions allowable
(2) This column is calculated as follows:
VMTR - 1 - (A - 118) lno
232 iuu
where: 118 « emissions unaffected by VMTR
232 emission affected by VMTR (1977)
-------
1970 - South Coast Basin
Composite of all stations
Month
Number of days exceeding the specified concentration of oxidant
Maximum // of
,6 .5 .4 .35 .30 .25 .20 .15 .10 .08 .05 .02 .01 days extra con-
trol necessary
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Annual
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
4
4
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
1
7
9
10
8
1
0
0
36
0
0
0
0
2
11
15
15
!*
2
0
0
59
0
0
0
0
5
16
22
23
17
6
0
0
89
0
0
1
' 3
7
21
28
28
23
14
1
0
126
0
1
4
5
9
24
31
31
28
20
3
0
156
1
5
7
11
23
29
-
-
30
21
9
3
201
5
12
17
17
29
30
-
-
-
29
18
10
259
10
14
21
22
30
-
-
-
-
31
21
17
288
23
22
28
29
31
-
-
-
-
-
27
26
339
30 31
28
31
30
_
-
-
- . .
-
-
31 - .
31 - '
364 365
0
0
0
0
2
7
10
10
8
3
0
0
0
Note: This data is used to develop the plot on the following page
-------
.01
-------
Future Emissions in Metropolitan Los Angeles Air Quality
Control Region (i.e. South Coast Air Basin)
SUMMARY
The attached graph shows the emissions of reactive hydrocarbons
(RHC) for the years 1970 through 1990. All retrofit controls
were assumed installed in applicable model-years, but no vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) reduction strategy was used. As can
be seen from the graph, the allowable high reactive hydrocarbon
emissions of 161 tons/day will always be exceeded. Minimum
VMT reduction will be required in 1985 to meet the 161 tons/day
(T/D) limit (for .08 ppm oxidant standard). The VMT reductions
for light and heavy duty gasoline vehicles would be 59%, assuming
a 1.7% average growth.
If zero growth is assumed after 1977, total emissions will
still be 211 T/D in 1985, and .the light and heavy duty gasoline
vehicle VMT reduction needed to meet the oxidant standard would
be 43%.
-------
Assumptions, Calculations and Data
Assumptions:
1. All light and heavy duty gasoline vehicles in 1985 will
be 1975 and later model years (i.e., meet 1975 low
mileage emission standards when new).
2. Average vehicle age in 1985 and later years » 5 years.
3. Catalyst replacement @ 25,000 miles or approximately
2 years of service.
4. Deterioration factor for average light duty vehicle
population age of 5 years a 2.4 and for heavy duty
vehicle population of 5 years » 1.26 (Ref. EPA -
Armstrong, Kircher, draft emission factors).
5. Light duty 1975 gasoline vehicle low mileage emission
factors are:
.2 gm/mile - crankcase and evaporation hydrocarbons
.23 gm/mile - exhaust hydrocarbons
Heavy duty 1975 gasoline vehicle low mileage emission
factors are:
.8 gm/mile - crankcase and evaporation hydrocarbons
2.4 gm/mile - exhaust hydrocarbons
Motorcycle emissions in 1970 and 1977 are per EPA
"Control Strategy Package Report."
Reactivity factor for exhaust emissions is .8 and for
crankcase and evaporative emissions is .67.
6. Average light duty vehicle VMT per car year = 8,200
Average heavy duty vehicle VMT per truck year = 10,500
Average motorcycle VMT per vehicle year = 3,900
7. Gasoline marketing operation emitted 68 T/D of RHC in
1970 and an estimated 10 T/D in 1977 with vapor recovery
controls.
8. 1977 light duty vehicle population = 6.07 x 106
9. 1977 heavy duty vehicle population = 2.52 x 105
-------
10. Aircraft produced 33 T/D of RHC in 1970 and an
estimated .24 T/D of RHC In 1977 with additional
controls. In 1985, these emissions are estimated to
be 10 T/D assuming more stringent controls and no growth
from 1977.
11. Motorcycle emissions in 1985 are considered to be con-
trolled, and are estimated to be 10 T/D assuming no
growth from 1977.
Calculations:
1. Stationary, aircraft, and gasoline marketing emissions
for year Y - 1977 no growth emissions [1 + .017 x
(Y-1977)]
where: .017 « average yearly growth factor
Y » calendar year after 1977
2. Vehicle emissions for year Y = low mileage emission
factor x deterioration factor x basin vehicle popula-
tion x miles traveled per vehicle year x conversion
factor for gm/years*tons/day x [1 + .017 x (Y-1977)]
Data:
Vehicle (i.e., light and heavy duty gasoline vehicles and
motorcycles) emissions in 1970 » 1023 T/D and in 1977 «
262 T/D (with no gas rationing but with all retrofit
controls). This data is from recent EPA Region IX calcula-
tions (see EPA Control Strategy Package Report).
Stationary source emissions (not including gasoline market-
ing emissions) in 1970 - 127 T/D, and in 1977 after additional
controls « 64 T/D. These figures are from the State Imple-
mentation Plan and the EPA Control Strategy Package Report.
-------
II I I
rr-nr
ayisf""duty _yehicle and motorcyb'le"_t5ffid
fitjrj-n*aitionaryy-ind- gasoline maricetingreriiissions»--(-}
~n~ H rl rrrr r~""i" .~~v --rt 7-:-- -|-T"r"~:"T'"~i" i ZIT:!~|TI:I:
ons
------- |