EPA-902/4-77-003
EMISSIONS INVENTORY PROJECTIONS AND
ALLOCATION PROJECTIONS TO
SUB-COUNTY AREAS FOR
THE SYRACUSE AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREA
JULY 1976
FINAL REPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION II, AIR BRANCH
26 FEDERAL PLAZA
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10007
-------
EPA-902/4-77-003
July 1976
Final Report
EMMISSIONS INVENTORY PROJECTIONS AND
ALLOCATION PROJECTIONS TO
SUB-COUNTY AREAS FOR
THE SYRACUSE AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE AREA
Contract No. 68-02-2302
George Kerr, Project Officer
Air Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
This study was conducted in cooperation with the
Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board
700 E. Watter Street, Syracuse, New York 13210
-------
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
This document is available to the public through
the National Technical Information Service,
2285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia, 22151.
- ii -
-------
DISCLAIMER STATEMENT
This report has been reviewed by the Air Branch,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
- iii -
-------
FOREWARD
Pursuant to Federal regulations, New York State is
required to identify those areas where, due to cur-
rent air quality and/or projected growth rates,
there is a potential for exceeding national air
quality standards. The State must develop an
analysis oĢ the impact on air quality of projected
growth in each identified problem area. Where
necessary, plans must be developed which describe
the measures that will be taken to ensure mainten-
ance of the national standards.
To assist in the air quality planning process, this
report provides a particulate matter emissions in-
ventory for the Syracuse Air Quality Maintenance
Area (Onondaga County, New York) projected to the
years 1980, 1985, 1995, and 2000. which can be used
as a basis 'for formulating an air quality mainten-
ance plan.
- iv -
-------
ABSTRACT
This report provides a disaggregated particulate
matter emissions inventory suitable for use in
both base year and projection year air quality
dispersion modeling required for the Syracuse Air
Quality Maintenance Area (Onondaga County, New
York). The allocation and projection methodology
is essentially that of volumes 7 and 13 of the
Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning
series published by the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency.
The New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation furnished point and area source
emission inventories of particulate matter for
the Syracuse AQMA. The Central New York Regional
Planning and Development Board allocated the area
source emissions inventory to square kilometer
grids to establish the base year inventory and
applied growth factor analysis to population, em-
ployment, transportation, and land use data to pro-
ject point and area source emissions for the years
1980, 1985, 1995, and 2000. Allocations were made
for population-based, transportation-based,
commercial/institutional-based, industrial-based
and solid waste-based emissions.
The study results clearly indicate that the dom-
inant sources of particulate emissions in Onondaga
County are industrial process and fuel point
sources. Because Onondaga County is characterized
by a uni-center activity area, relatively undevel-
oped hinterlands, and does not experience problems
from exogenous particulate emission sources, tech-
nological control strategies applied to the dom-
inant industrial point sources appear to offer the
most promise as the initial control approach for
particulate emissions in the County.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of
Contract No. 68-02-2302 by the Central New York
Regional Planning and Development Board under the
sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. This report covers the period 1 Decem-
ber 1975 to 15 June 1976, and work was completed
as of 15 July 1977.
- v -
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. RESIDENTIAL EMISSIONS 7
3. TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS 18
4. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMISSIONS 24
5. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS 30
6. SOLID WASTE EMISSIONS 51
7. MASTER GRIDDING PROCEDURE 54
8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 68
- vi -
-------
TABLES
PAGE
1. DWELLING UNIT BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS
AND PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS FOR SUB-COUNTY
AREAS
2. MOTOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ALLOCATION PRO-
PORTIONS BY SUBAREA
3. AIRCRAFT AND RAILYARD EMISSIONS
4. TRANSPORTATION PARTICULATE EMISSIONS BY SUB-
AREA
5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCA-
TIONS AND EMISSIONS BY SUB-COUNTY AREAS
6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
7. SOLID WASTE OPEN BURNING PARTICULATE EMIS-
SIONS BY SUBAREA
8. SOLID WASTE INCINERATOR EMISSIONS BY SUB-
AREA
9. GRID SQUARE COORDINATES
10. GRID SQUARE PROPORTIONS ~ TOWNS
11. GRID SQUARE PROPORTIONS ~ TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
FIGURES
PAGE
1. MASTER GRID FOR ONONDAGA COUNTY
- vii -
-------
INTRODUCTION
UNDERSTANDING OF PROBLEM
Pursuant to regulations promulgated on 18 June 1973 (38 FR 15834), New York
State was required to identify those areas which, due to current air quality
and/or projected growth rates, may have the potential for exceeding national
standards. In addition, the State must submit an analysis of the impact on
air quality of projected growth in each identified problem area. Where neces-
sary, plans must be developed which describe the measures that will be taken
to ensure maintenance of the national standards. Completion of this task will
provide a comprehensive emissions inventory for the Syracuse AQMA projected
to 1980, 1985, 1995, and 2000 which can be used as a basis for formulation of
an air quality maintenance plan for AQMA.
Information derived as a result of completion of the task by the Central New
York Regional Planning and Development Board will be utilized by the NYS De-
partment of Environmental Conservation to quantify the emission reductions
needed in order to develop the plan. DEC's submittal of the plan to EPA will
be in accordance with Federal Regulation Requirements and will follow estab-
lished time schedules for a one or two-year phase plan.
In providing this assistance to the State in a coordinated manner, the RPDB
used analysis requirements specified by 40 CFR 51 regulations, subject to
data analysis capabilities and needs of NYS DEC. EPA "Guidelines for Air
Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis" Volumes 1-13 served as a basis for
the analysis.
TECHNICAL APPROACH
The Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board reviewed and
evaluated existing data, developed growth factors, and upgraded and prepared
data for planned development for the Syracuse Air Quality Maintenance Area
consisting of the Onondaga County pollutant for which the area is designated
particulate matter.
The RPDB acquired data necessary for the completion of the proposed task, in-
cluding published guidelines for emission inventories furnished by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation furnished point and area source
emission inventories of particulate matter for the Syracuse AQMA (Onondaga
County) in both paper copy and computer tapes, and provided them in the required
format for use by the diffusion model. The CNY RPDB provided current population,
employment, transportation, and land use data in a Universal Transverse Mercator
grid for the AQMA with cells from 1 to 64 sq. km.
- 1 -
-------
The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation assembled, re-reviewed and
evaluated the current point and area source emissions inventory for the Syra-
cuse AQMA. In addition, the NYS DEC retained the industrial point source
employment file and requested only area employment allocations by grid cell
from the CNY RPDB.
After NYS Department of Environmental Conservation developed and furnished
the total area source emissions inventory, the CNY RPDB allocated the area
source inventory for the county to square kilometer grids using the methodology
expressed in EPA document Volume 13: Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-
County Areas.
The Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board then developed
growth factors. Applying growth factor analysis to population, employment,
transportation, and land use data, the CNY RPDB made projections of point and
area source emissions inventories for 1980, 1985, 1995, and 2000 using EPA
Vol. 13: Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-County Areas.
The requirements for developing AQMAs, including those requirements for inter-
governmental cooperation, will be set forth in the Federal Regulations,
40 CFR 51, for the Preparation of State Implementation Plans, Maintenance of
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Until finalization of the Regulations,
New York State DEC shall be guided by draft copies of the regulations and any
subsequent proposals for promulgations of these regulations in the Federal
Register.
The RPDB used the 13-volume set of EPA guidelines, herein listed, as an aid in
the interpretation of federal regulations relating to the development of an
AQMA. The CNY RPDB followed the EPA Guidelines, Volumes 1-13 where applicable
and practical. Deviations from the exact methodology suggested in the guide-
lines are documented in the sections dealing with emission allocations and
projections by type.
Volume
1. Designation of Air Quality Maintenance Areas
2. Plan Preparation
3. Control Strategies
4. Land Use and Transportation Consideration
5. Case Studies in Plan Development
6. Overview of Air Quality Maintenance Area Analysis
7. Projecting County Emissions
8. Computer-Assisted Area Source Emissions Gridding
Procedure
9. Evaluating Indirect Sources
10. Reviewing New Stationary Sources
11. Air Quality Monitoring and Data Analysis
12. Applying Atmospheric Simulation Models to Air
Quality Maintenance Areas
13. Allocating Projected Emissions to Sub-County Areas
- 2 -
-------
The Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board consulted and
worked with local and state agencies when necessary and used those data bases
which were necessary to provide estimates of future emissions. Such agencies
included, but were not limited to, the NYS Department of Environmental Con-
servation, NYS Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Transportation
Planning Team of the Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Study, regional
offices of DEC and DoT, the Syracuse-Onondaga County Planning Agency, and the
Onondaga County Health Department.
In sum, the Central New York Regional Planning and Development produced sub-
county areas and projected allocations and projections for 1975, 1980, 1985,
1995, and 2000.
METHODOLOGY
SCOPE AND STRUCTURE
The sub-county allocation procedure takes place in five distinct stages:
(1) population-based; (2) transportation-based; (3) commercial/institional-
based; (4) industrial-based; and (5) solid waste-based. The separation of
these five stages allowed RPDB to perform the allocation using several dif-
ferent types of available data bases; RPDB combined data from each of the
Stages consistent with a master grid system.
We have chosen in all cases allocation procedures to fit the most detailed
data that are readily available and commensurate with the air quality main-
tenance problem.
We used traffic districts designed by NYS DoT and towns as sub-areas for al-
location. Our baseline year is 1975, and projected emissions are for the
years 1980, 1985, 1995, and 2000.
RESIDENTIAL FUEL COMBUSTION EMISSIONS
Procedural Overview
The combustion of fuel for space heating in residential buildings is a ubi-
quitous source of emissions that can be directly related to population dis-
tribution or more specifically to household distribution. We accomplished
an analysis by using local and regional studies in addition to U.S. Census
and NYS DoT data to determine the household distribution in traffic districts.
Specific Methodology
1. Determine the number of households and the sub-area proportion from
census data and the SMTS/SOCPA socio-economic file.
2. Using the allocation proportion, allocate residential fuel combustion
emissions using the total area source emissions from the DEC emissions
file.
- 3 -
-------
3. Allocate residential fuel combustion emissions to each sub-area for
projection years based on local, regional, and state growth factors.
TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS
Procedural Overview
RPDB considered transportation emissions in the study area to be the result
of three principal activities. It accounted for motor vehicle, airport and
railyard emissions sources in the allocation procedure.
Allocation methodology applied to the three emissions sources is straightfor-
ward; Motor vehicle emissions are based on the SMTS 1975 and 1985 air quality
listing provided by the NYS DoT. Hancock International Airport is the princi-
pal air facility in the County and is the only airport considered. Similarly,
"the DeWitt railyard is the principal emissions source for that activity in
Onondaga County and the only such source we use for allocation procedures.
Base year and forecast years emissions for the airport and railyard are allo-
cated to the towns in which they are located.
Rail lines, barges, and recreational vehicles do not contribute significantly
to the particulate emissions in Onondaga County, and RPDB did not consider
them in this study.
Specific Methodology
1. Identify total annual vehicle miles traveled for each town using the
1975 SMTS Air Quality List.
2. Determine allocation proportion of each sub-area.
3. Calculate emissions for each sub-area using the DEC emissions inventory.
4. Identify airport location by subarea. Then calculate emissions from the
DEC emissions inventory for each subarea containing the airport.
5. Identify railyard and activity proportion from DoT information. Then
Calculate emissions from the DEC emissions inventory for each subarea
containing a railyard.
6. Determine growth factors for motor vehicles, airports, and railyards
from local, regional, and state information.
7. Allocate transportation emissions for projection years.
- 4 -
-------
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL FUEL
COMBUSTION EMISSIONS
Procedural Overview
Generally the commercial and institutional development follows the distribu-
tion of population. There are situations, however, where this assumption may
not be accurate. Large urban CBD's, regional shopping centers, and regional
hospitals are examples of development locating in an area of low population
density.
We used the SMTS Onondaga County Employment File to determine commercial/
institutional employment ratios in each traffic district. We calculated the
proportion for each traffic district and applied proportions to the employ-
ment totals as developed in the 1976 CNY KPDB Economic Profile and
Projections report.
Specific Methodology
1. Determine commercial/institutional employment proportions for each sub-
area.
2. Allocate commercial/institutional employment to each sub-area.
3. Allocate commercial/institutional fuel combustion emissions to each sub-
area.
4. Determine projections using 1976 CNY RPDB Economic Profile and Projections.
5. Allocate commercial/institutional fuel combustion emissions for projection
years.
l
INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Procedural Overview
The CNY RPDB worked closely with the NYS DEC in order to provide them with
the most useful data. Confidential point source employment was retained by
DEC.
CNY RPDB located industries in appropriate grid squares from the Facilities
Emissions Summary (FES) for Onondaga County. The 1975 SOCPA Industrial
Index (IEE) provided RPDB with employment distribution ratios. The employ-
ment totals from the 1976 CNY RPDB Economic Profile and Projections report
were allocated to grid squares.
- 5 -
-------
Specific Methodology
1. Locate appropriate grid square for each industry listed in the FES.
2. Determine employment location ratios from the SOCPA 1975 IEE.
3. Allocate industrial employment from the 1976 Economic Profile and
Projections report.
SOLID WASTE EMISSIONS
Procedural Overview
The RPDB used population as an allocator of residential open burning. Popula-
tion proportions for each sub-area where open burning is allowable was calcu-
lated by RPDB.
In Onondaga County, cities and villages are prohibited from open burning. How-
ever, towns with populations of less than 20,000 are permitted to have burning
of rubbish generated by residential activity. Therefore, we calculated emis-
sions for those areas in which open burning is permitted.
Commercial/institutional and industrial incinerators are indicated on the DEC
point source file. Therefore, RPDB allocated incinerator, emission point
sources to appropriate sub-areas.
Specific Methodology
1. Determine commercial/institutional and industrial incinerator point
sources from the DEC point source .file and allocate emissions to sub-
area.
2. Determine sub-areas with populations of less than 20,000.
3. Determine allocation proportions for sub-areas and calculate residential
open burning emissions using the area open burning factors from DEC data.
4. Using local, regional, and state information, allocate emissions for
solid waste open burning for projection years.
-------
RESIDENTIAL EMISSIONS
Particulate emissions which result from residential fuel combustion have been
based by RPDB on the number and location of households within Onondaga County.
We obtained 1975 base year and 1980, 1985, and 1995 forecast year horizon house-
holds from socio-economic data files provided by SMTS/SOCPA. In the data files,
households for the base year 1975 and indicated forecast years were delineated
by traffic zones. These zones were aggregated by RPDB to form traffic districts
reducing the number of County subareas from 220 to 43.
RPDB assumed that each household required a dwelling unit, therefore the number
of dwelling units in any subarea in any forecast year were assumed by RPDB to
be equal to the number of households.
For forecast year 2000, the number of dwelling units was determined by applying
the previous actual or proportional 5-year increase in each traffic district to
the existing forecast year number of dwelling units. The equation used by RPDB
to determine forecast year 2000 dwelling units was:
(1995 dwelling units ./ 1990 dwelling units .) 1995 dwelling units =
-J J J
year 2000 dwelling units .
where: j = traffic district subareas
RPDB determined allocation proportions for each traffic district by dividing the
dwelling units in each traffic district subarea by the total dwelling units in
the county for the given year. Allocation proportions were calculated through
the following formula:
Dwelling units / Total dwelling units . = Allocation proportion ...
where i = year
j = traffic district subarea
Several alternative methods were investigated by RPDB before the simple alloca-
tion based on dwelling units was adopted. Initially RPDB used census tract
data to determine the number and location of dwelling units per building. Prob-
lems which the RPDB encountered in using this approach included the small num-
ber of larger buildings and subsequent difficulty in predicting their growth
in forecast years.
We eliminated type of fuel as a factor due to the lack of precise data for fuel
type below the SMSA level. The only means of classifying fuel type use by sub-
area would have been application of the SMSA fuel use characteristics to each
subarea and building size. Such a process involving small numbers of dwelling
units in the less populated census tracts would have made the predicted in-
creases for forecast years too small to be meaningful. Because 85% of residen-
tial fuel type use is natural gas, we felt the benefit of uncertain fuel type
forecasting would have been outweighed by the lack of significant results.
Residential emissions are displayed in Table 1, Dwelling Unit-Based Allocation
Projections and Particulate Emissions for Sub-County Areas.
- 7 -
-------
TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS
RPDB developed motor vehicle particulate emissions allocations in town-based
subareas through the use of data supplied by the NYS DoT. The data base we
used consisted of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by traffic zone in the County
of Onondaga. This data was provided to us for both base year 1975 and fore-
cast year 1985.
RPDB used towns as the subarea designation due to difficulties in fitting the
links, zones, and districts used in the DoT data set to the traffic districts
used by the SMTS/SOCPA socio-economic file. Rather than attempt to allocate
the schematically designated zones and districts which were the basis of the
NYS DoT data file to the political- and geographic-based traffic districts used
in the SMTS-SOCPA data file, we chose to use a town subarea system of designa-
tion. This provided continuity in the subarea designation system used for in-
dustrial, solid waste, and transportation emissions allocations.
To arrange the data for use on a town subarea basis, RPDB assigned the traffic
zones contained in the NYS DoT data file to town-based political units. Those
zones which crossed political unit boundaries were assigned to the political
unit which contained the greatest amount of the traffic zone.
With the completion of the above procedure, RPDB had VMT in the average travel
day by town-based political unit subareas for base year 1975 and forecast year
1985. We calculated the percent of change for each subarea by means of the
following formula:
(1) (1985 VMT. - 1975 VMT.)/ 1975 VMT^ =
Percent change
6 1975-1985J
where j = subarea
The results of equation 1 were multiplied by 0.5 in order to calculate the ve-
hicle miles traveled in each subarea for forecast year 1980. The unchanged re-
sults of equation 1 were applied by us to the 1985 VMT in each subarea to obtain
VMT in forecast year 1995. Finally, RPDB calculated forecast year 2000 VMT in
a manner similar to that used for 1980 forecast. We used one-half of the
change calculated in equation 1 as a multiplier of the 1995 vehicle miles
traveled in each subarea.
We multiplied the results for each forecast year and subarea by 365 to deter-
mine the vehicle miles traveled in a year. The 365 figure was suggested to
RPDB by the NYS DoT Region 3 Office as an appropriate factor for determining
vehicle miles traveled in a year.
To determine the particulates emitted in each subarea by motor vehicles, RPDB
developed allocation factors for each subarea by applying the following
formula:
- 8 -
-------
(2) VMT/year../ VMT/yea^ = % VMT/year^
where i = base or forecast year
j = subarea
Total, motor vehicle particulate emissions were provided to RPDB by NYS DEC for
base year 1975 and forecast years 1980 and 1985. RPDB calculated emissions for
forecast years 1995 and 2000 through a linear projection of the average 1975-
1985 emission increases. We multiplied the base year and forecast year emis-
sions by the results of equation 2 to calculate particulate emissions by
forecast year and subarea.
We added railroad and aircraft emissions to the appropriate subareas subsequent
to the calculation of motor vehicle emissions. Information concerning railroad
and aircraft emissions was provided by the NYS DEC. RPDB considered these emis-
sions sources to be point sources located in discrete subareas. Transportation
emissions are displayed in Table 2, Motor Vehicle Miles Traveled Allocation
Projections, Table 3, Aircraft and Kailyard Emissions, and Table 4, Transpor-
tation Particulate Emission Allocations.
- 9 -
-------
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMISSIONS
The CNY RPDB has based the allocation of commercial-institutional fuel
combust Ion partlculate emissions on location of employment. This method
follows the general form of an order 2 analysis as presented in Guidelines
for Air Quality Maintenance Planning and Analysis, Areawide Waste Water
Treatment Management Planning Program, CNY RPDB, Nov. 1976. Commercial/
Institutional employment for AQMA consisted of the following categories from
the Economic Profile and Projections Report: Transportation, Communications,
Utilities, Wholesale and Retail Trade, Finance, Insurance, Real Estate,
Service, and Government. Allocation ratios for traffic districts were deriv-
ed from the Onondaga County SMTS Employment File.
The particulate emissions were allocated according to the employment ratios
in each subarea and the total area-wide particulate emissions received from
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Commercial/
Institutional emissions are displayed in Table 5, Commercial/Institutional
Employment Allocations and Emissions for Sub-County Areas.
- 10 -
-------
INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT BY GRID SQUARE
RPDB calculated the industrial employment for grid squares using four sets
of data: the Facility Emissions Summary (FES) for Onondaga County provided
to RPDB by NYS DEC, the 1975 Industrial Index for Onondaga County, the 1975
Syracuse IEE file provided to the RPDB by the Syracuse-Onondaga County Plan-
ning Agency, and the 1976 RPDB Economic Profile and Projections.
RPDB first located the appropriate grid square for each industry listed in
the FES by the grid coordinates. In several instances these had to be
corrected, as the location indicated by the grid coordinates in the FES did
not correspond to the actual location of the industry. Once located in a
grid square, employment for the industry was taken by RPDB from the 1975
Industrial Index or the IEE file based on compatibility of location and SIC
codes. This employment figure was then assigned to the grid square. When
this procedure had been completed for those industries in the FES, all
industries listed in the 1975 Industrial Index were located in grid squares
based on addresses listed in the Index. Employment was determined and -
assigned to grid squares in the manner outlined above.
The last step in the employment calculation consisted of checking those grid
squares where no industrial employment was indicated subsequent to the appli-
cation of the method outlined above. The checking procedure consisted of de-
termining the industrial employment for the traffic zone or zones which
encompassed the grid square in question. If the industrial employment listed
in the IEE file had not been accounted for it was listed in the grid square
being checked. Industrial employment is displayed in Table 6, Industrial
Employment Allocations.
- 11 -
-------
SOLID WASTE EMISSIONS
RPDB was concerned with two factors in the allocation of particulate emissions
resulting from solid waste disposal. These factors were emissions generated by
open burning and those generated by incineration operations.
We calculated open burning emissions by applying the following, formula supplied
by the NYS DEC:
(1) (Pop of exempt subareas/1000) x .976 = Emissions in tons
i per year
The subareas which we used for open burning emissions are based on town political
units in the county. A number of the towns are prevented by NYS law from per-
mitting burning. These limitations included restrictions on open burning in
towns over 20,000 population and all incorporated villages. The population
number used in equation 1 did not include the populations of incorporated vil-
lages which were encompassed by a town subarea. Forecast populations for towns
under 20,000 population were taken by RPDB from the 1975 SMTS/SOCPA socio-
economic characteristic file. Those towns in which the population exceeded
20,000 in a forecast year were then dropped by us from further consideration
as a source of open-burning emissions.
The second source of solid waste disposal particulate emissions considered by
RPDB was that produced by incinerator operations. We aggregated all incinerator
emissions by subarea from the point source emission file provided by NYS DEC.
No area source incinerator particulate emissions figure was available to RPDB,
and consequently we did not forecast incinerator emissions. Forecasts devel-
oped through the application of a growth factor to the 1975 data were not seen
as useful by RPDB due to the irregular mix of incinerator emissions sources
in the subareas. Several subareas had base year emission sources which were
not likely to expand, such as apartment buildings. Due to such source specific
distortions and the small contribution made by incinerator emissions to total
particulates, RPDB did not forecast incinerator particulate emissions but held
the 1975 base year figures constant throughout the forecast years. Table 7
displays open burning particulate emissions and Table 8 incinerator emissions.
- 12 -
-------
MASTER GRIDDING PROCEDURE
PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW
To,this point, we have handled each of the stages of .the allocation procedure
separately: population, transportation, commercial/institutional/industrial,
and solid waste. We have used a number of sub-county areas different from
each other in allocating emissions from each source category. In order to
coordinate the results from all the analyses, RPDB constructed a single master
grid system.
We used a Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system superimposed
on the Onondaga County base map. We chose grid squares according to various
population and other demographic factors.
The objective of the gridding procedure is to provide a logically determined
set of grid squares to which area source emissions can be allocated on the
basis of both subjective and objective factors. Some pertinent grid character-
istics are: contained population (or its inverse), area side length, contained
housing units, housing per unit area (or its inverse), specific point sources,
and commercial/industrial/institutional employment. These characteristics in-
dicate the dominance of population as a basis for the distribution of area
source emissions. We used specific land use data to determine the location of
predominant land uses within each sub-area.
SPECIFIC METHODOLOGY
1. On a sheet of mylar, RPDB constructed a grid system using squares of 1 to
64 sq. km. ;
2. RPDB selected appropriate U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 scale maps to
cover Onondaga County, and used topographic features, terrain character-
istics, urbanization, forestation, transportation systems, and other
pertinent characteristics to establish preliminary grid cells.
3. RPDB used a detailed land use map to further aid gridding. The grid ob-
tained from (2) above served as a basis for further refinement by the
land use information. In order to ensure compatibility with the projec-
tions of county emissions, we also used the Central New York Region Metro-
l politan Area Land Use Study to make the grid system compatible with the
predictive nature of the air quality study.
4. Generally, RPDB assumed that having selected grid cells, the allocated
particulate matter is evenly distributed over the entire grid cell.
The application of the above steps resulted in the distribution of town and
traffic districts subarea to grid squares on the basis of the percentage of
land each subarea had in each grid square. Table 9 shows the UTM coordinates
for each grid square, Table 10 the grid square allocations by town, and
Table 11 the grid square allocations by traffic districts.
- 13 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
Ŧ <0ŧ ItWUtTuullK'i
\ V * :''
! i \ ' -.V-4-
i, i t' ir"i ŧ~'i CIQ a T_
FIGURE 1. MASTER GRID FOR ONONDAGA COUNTY
- 14 -
-------
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The particulate allocation procedure performed by RPDB requires that several
cautionary notes be made regarding the methods used to determine the final
particulate amounts allocated to each master grid square.
First, all procedures were based on essentially linear projection methods.
This approach included both interpolation and extrapolation to generate con-
trol parameters. Within the framework of this method, sensitivity to either
natural cyclical trends affecting economic activity in Onondaga County or
subarea specific alterations of base year parameters is not reflected in the
study results. The nature of the data manipulation techniques we used was
not intended to account for non-linear change. Where rate of change varies
between forecast years for a class of particulate emission sources, it is a
result arising from the format of the data sources we felt best suited the
purposes of the air quality study.
A second consideration regarding limitations on the study results concerns
the assumed steady state of technological control of particulate emissions
and a constant mix of fuel use type. In these respects, the study results
illustrate "worst-case" particulate emissions situations for the forecast
years, particularly in the industrial class of process particulate emissions
sources. There was some discussion in the early phases of program execution
concerning the impact of technological change in industrial groups, but the
possible parameters accounting for such change were not sufficiently proven
to justify their use as a factor for the forecasting of group specific in-
dustrial emissions.
Technological change is reflected in the transportation emissions. Consi-
deration of this change is limited to increases in each forecast year in the
number of vehicle miles traveled for each ton of particulate matter emitted.
This change is a reflection of federally mandated improvements in mileage
performance.for passenger cars.
A corollary to the consideration of technological changes is the change in
type of fuel use. The study did not account for possible changes in fuel
use, particularly for those classes of particulate emissions sources, resi-
dential and commercial, where substititution for heating purposes is possible.
The fuel currently in predominant use for heating in Onondaga County is nat-
ural gas. Available data on possible effects of price deregulation or ra-
tioning and subsequent change-over to alternate heat sources such as
electricity, fuel oil, or coal were not of sufficient sensitivity to be used
in this study.
SUMMARY
The study results clearly indicate that the dominant sources of particulate
emissions in Onondaga County are industrial process and fuel point sources.
Furthermore, the principal sources of these emissions are localized in certain
- 15 -
-------
areas of the County. Within these considerations possible control strategies
to ameliorate particulate emissions levels are best focused on the industrial
group, which makes the significant contribution to particulate emissions
levels.
Alternate strategies,such as land use controls directed at limiting concen-
tration of emission sources, would not address the problems currently existing
due to point sources emissions. Because Onondaga County is characterized by
a uni-center activity area, relatively under-utilized hinterlands, and does
not experience problems from exogenous particulate emissions sources, tech-
nological control strategies applied to the dominant industrial point sources
appear to be the preferable initial control approach for particulate emissions
in the County.
- 16 -
-------
TABLE 1. DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1975
larea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
Number of
Dwelling Units
1,192
5,943
4,128
1,035
1,377
2,908
5,877
1,769
114
3,673
4,750
7,278
5,967
5,166
6,671
5,946
4,425
4,154
1,780
12,319
3,148
5,534
1,044
1,063
1,894
4,835
1,610
11,556
4,479
473
Allocation
Proportion
.0077
.0383
.0266
.0067
.0089
,0187
.0379
.0114
.0007
.0237
.0306
.0469
.0384
.0333
.0430
.0383
.0285
.0268
.0115
.0794
.0203
.0357
.0067
.0068
.0122
.0312
.0104
.0745
.0288
.0030
T/Yr.
1.95
9.69
6.73
1.70
2.25
4.73
9.59
2.88
.18
6.00
7.74
11.87
9.72
8.43
1,0.88
9.69
7.21
6.68
2.91
20.09
5.14
9.03
1.70
1.75
3.09
7.89
2.63
18.85
7.29
.76
- 17 -
-------
TABLE 1. DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1975
larea
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
Number of
Dwelling Units
7,236
1,154
964
1,186
3,876
5,765
3,460
724
1,055
1,380
3,126
1,711
1,437
Allocation
Proportion
.0466
.0074
.0062
.0076
.0249
.0372
.0222
.0047
.0068
.0089
.0202
.0111
.0092
T/Yr
11.79
1.87
1.57
1.92
6.30
9.41
5.. 64
1.19
1.72
2.25
5.11
2.81
2.33
253.00
County Total
155,182
- 18 -
-------
TABLE 1: DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1980
jarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
Number of
Dwelling Units
1,662
5,883
4,078
1,615
1,357
2,743
5,717
1,749
104
3,673
4,757
7,495
6,132
5,166
6,666
5,951
4,535
4,234
1,790
12,380
3,353
5,818
1,259
1,078
2,300
5,345
1,625
12,456
5,013
498
Allocation
Proportion
.0099
.0350
.0242
.0096
.0081
.0163
.0340
.0104
.0006
.0218
.0283
.0445
.0364
.0307
.0396
.0354
.0270
.0252
.0106
.0736
.0199
.0356
.0075
.0064
.0137
.0318
.0097
.0740
.0298
.0030
T/Yr.
2.91
10.29
7.12
2.52
2.38
4.79
10.00
3.06
.18
6.41
8.32
13.08
10.70
9.03
11.64
10.41
8.00
7.41
3.12
21.64
5.85
10.47
2.91
1.88
4.03
9.35
2.85
21.76
8.76
.88
- 19 -
-------
TABLE 1: DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1980
area
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
Number of
Dwelling Units
8,110
1,279
1,061
1,361
4,199
9,290
6,295
754
1,152
1,492
3,246
1,875
1,687
Allocation
Proportion
.0482
.0076
.0063
.0081
.0249
.0552
.0374
.0045
.0068
.0089
.0193
.0111
.0100
T/Yr,
14.17
2.23
1.85
2.38
7.32
16.23
11.00
1.32
2.00
2.62
5.67
3.26
2.94
294.00
County Total
168,233
- 20 -
-------
TABLE 1: DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1985
barea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
Number of
Dwelling Units
1,712
5,893
4,353
1,570
1,357
2,703
5,692
1,749
104
3,683
4,737
7,515
6,167
5,216
6,666
5,951
4,540
4,244
1,789
12,621
3,520
6,033
1,559
1,097
2,515
6,918
1,660
13,155
5,595
588
Allocation
Proportion
.0095
.0327
.0242
.0087
.0075
.0150
.0316
.0097
.0006
.0204
.0263
.0417
.0342
.0290
.0370
.0330
.0252
.0236
.0099
.0701
.0195
.0335
.0087
.0061
.0140
.0384
.0092
.0730
.0311
.0033
T/Yr.
3.03
10.43
7.72
2.78
2.39
4.79
10.08
3.09
.19
6.51
8.39
13.30
10.91
9.25
11.80
10.53
. 8.04
7.53
3.16
22.36
6.22
10.69
2.78
1.95
4.47
12.25
2.94
23.29
9.92
1.05
- 21 -
-------
TABLE 1 : DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1985
area
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
Number of
Dwelling Units
8,785
1,419
1,143
1,521
5,217
11,390
8,745
779
1,262
1,612
3,399
2,050
1,887
Allocation
Proportion
.0488,
.0079
.0063
.0084
.0290
.0632
.0485
.0043
.0070
.0089
.0189
.0114
.0105
T/Yr
15.57
2.52
2.01
2.68
9.25
20.16
15.47
1.37
2.23
2.84
6.03
3.64
3.35
County Total
180,111
319.00
- 22 -
-------
TABLE 1. DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1995
barea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
Number of
Dwelling Units
1,182
5,988
4,343
1,550
1,357
2,673
5,602
1,764
104
3,683
4,762
7,620
6,227
5,226
6,751
6,072
4,540
4,304
1,809
13,371
3,795
6,358
1,749
1,133
3.090
7,068
1,775
14,316
6,470
863
Allocation
Proportion
.0091
.0302
.0219
.0078 ,
.0068
.0135
.0283
.0089
.0005
.0186
.0240
.0384
.0314
.0264
.0340
.0306
.0229
.0217
.0091
.0674
.0191
.0321
.0088
.0057
.0156
.0356
.0089
.0722
.0326
.0044
T/Yr.
3.13
10.39
7.53
2.68
2.34
4.64
9.74
3.06
.17
6.40
8.26
13.21
10.80
9.08
11.70
10.53
7.88
7.47
3.13
23.19
6.57
11.04
3.03
1.96
5.37
12.25
3.06
25.27
11.21
1.51
- 23 -
-------
TABLE 1. DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 1995
area
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
Number of.
Dwelling Units
9,735
1,704
1,363
2,061
7,142
15,438
12,165
879
1,543
1,888
3,689
2,390
2,157
Allocation
Proportion
,0491
.0086
.0069
.0104
.0360
.0779
.0164
.0044
.0078
.0095
.0186
.0121
.0109
T/Yr.
16.89
2.96
2.37
3.58
12.38
26.80
15.64
1.51
2.68
3.27
6.40
4.16
3.75
344.00
County Total
198,279
-------
TABLE 1: DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 2000
area
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
Number of
Dwelling Units
"1,822
5,985
4,333
1,530
1,357
2,653
5,562
1,774
104
3,683
4,795
7,630
6,257
5,226
6,811
6,092
4,540
4,304
1,809
13,971
3,945
6,658
1,801
1,233
3,496
7,098
1,840
15,116
6,880
910
Allocation
Proportion
.0090
.0295
.0214
.0075
.0067
.0131
.0274
.0087
.0005
.0182
.0237
.0376
.0309
.0258
.0336
.0301 ,
.0224
.0212
.0089 .
.0689
.0195
.0328
.0089
.0061
.0172
.0350
.0091
.0746
.0339
.0045
T/Yr.
3.17
10.38
7.53
2.64
2.36
4.61
9.65
3.06
.18
6.41
.8.34
13.24
10.88
9.08
11.83
10.60
7.89
7.46
3.13
24.25
6.86
11.55
3.13
2.15
6.05
12.39
3.20
26.26
11.93
1.58
- 25 -
-------
TABLE 1: DWELLING UNIT-BASED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS & PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
A. County - Onondaga
B. Year - 2000
area
42
A3
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
Number of
Dwelling Units
10,085
1,804
1,410
2,171
7,162
15,738
12,565
835
1,563
1,898
3,701
2,410
2,157
Allocation
Proportion
.0497
.0089
.0070
.0107
.0353
.0776
.0620
.0041
.0077
.0093
.0183
.0119
.0106
T/Yr.
17.49
3.13
2.46
3.77
12.43
27.32
21.82
1.44
2.71
3.27
6.44
4.19
3.73
352.00
County Total 202,713
- 26 -
-------
SUBAREA
TABLE 2. MOTOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS
1975 1980 1985
VMT/YR.* PRO.* VMT/YR.* PRO.* VMT/YR.* PRO.*
(xlOO)
(xlOO)
*VMT/YR. Vehicle miles traveled per year
*Pro. = Proportion of total VMT/Yr. in subarea
(xlOO)
Camillus
Cicero
Clay
Dewitt
Elbridge
Fabius
Geddes
Lafayette
Lysander
Manlius
Marcellus
Onondaga
Otisco
Pompey
Salina
Skaneateles
Spaf ford
Syracuse
Tully
Van Buren
Total
VMT/Yr.
(xlOO)
976740
1101205
1406345
2181970
586190
42705
1098285
772705
693500
1203040
341275
953380
101105
21900
1804925
323755
82125
5001595
127385
1339195
20160045
.0484
.0546
.0697
.1082
.0021
.0021
.0545
.0383
.0344
.0597
.0169
.0473
.0050
.0010
.0895
.0161
.0041
.2481
.0063
.0064
1190812
1346120
1748532
2323774
643717
75372
1186470
892425
1053390
1374042
389455
1280055
131765
34127
1842520
384345
95082
5266767
153482
1474422
22886674
.0520
.0588
.0764
.1015
.0281
.0033
.0518
.0390
.0460
.0600
.0170
.0559
.0057
.0015
.0805
.0168
.0041
.2301
.0067
.0644
1404885
1591035
2090720
2465575
641305
108040
1294655
1012145
1413280
1545045
437635
1606730
162425
46355
1880115
444935
108040
5531940
179580
1609650
25574090
.0549
.0622
.0817
.0964
.0250
.0042
.0506
.0396
.0553
.0604
.0171
.0628
.0063
.0018
.0735
.0174
.0042
.2163
.0070
.0629
- 27 -
-------
TABLE 2. MOTOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ALLOCATION PROPORTIONS
SUBAREA
1995
2000
Camillus
Cicero
Clay
Dewitt
Elbridge
Fabius
Ceddes
Lafayette
Lysander
Manlius
Marcellus
Onondaga
Otisco
Pompey
Salina
Skaneateles
Spafford
Syracuse
Tully
Van Buren
Total
VMT/Yr.
(xlOO)
VMT/YR.*
(xlOO)
1833029
2080865
2775094
2749183
696419
173374
1471025
1251585
2133060
1887049
533995
2260080
223745
70809
1955305
566115
133954
6062280
231774
1880104
30968844
PRO.*
.0592
.0672
.0896
.0087
.0225
.0056
.0475
.0404
.0689
.0609
.0172
.0729
.0072
.0023
.0631
.0183
.0043
.1957
.0075
.0607
VMT/YR.*
(xlOO)
2047101
2325780
3117281
2890987
723976
206041
1559210
1371305
2492950
2058051
582175
2586755
254405
83036
1992900
626705
146911
6327452
257871
2015331
33666223
PRO.*
.0608
.0691
.0926
.0859
.0215
.0061
.0463
.0407
.0704
.0611
.0173
.0768
.0075
.0025
.0592
.0186
.0044
.1879
.0076
.0598
*VMT/YR. = Vehicle miles traveled per year
*Pro. = Proportion of total VMT/Yr. in Subarea
_ 28 -
-------
TABLE 3. AIRCRAFT AND KAILYARD EMISSIONS
SUBAREA
Dewitt
Manlius
1975
T/Y*
33.5
12.5
1980
T/Y
62.5
12.5
1985
T/Y
65.5
12.5
1995
T/Y
68.5
12.5
2000
T/Y
71.5
12.5
*T/Y = particulate emissions in tons per year
- 29 -
-------
TABLE 4. TRANSPORTATION PARTICIPATE EMISSION ALLOCATIONS
SUBAREA
Camillus
Cicero
Clay
Dewitt
Elbridge
Fabius
Geddes
Lafayette
Lysander
Manlius
Marcellus
Onondaga
Otisco
Pompey
Salina
Skaneateles
Spaf ford
Syracuse
Tully
Van Buren
1975
Pro.*
.0484
.0546
.0697
.1082
.0290
.0021
.0545
.0383
.0344
.0597
.0169
.0473
.0050
.0010
.0895
.0161
.0041
.2481
.0063
.0064
T/Y*
74
83
106
166
44
3
83
58
52
91
25
72
7
1
137
24
6
380
9
9
.3
.8
.9
.1
.5
.2
.6
.8
.8
.7
.9
.6
.7
.5
.4
.7
.3
.8
.6
.8
1980
Pro.*
.0520
.0588
.0764
.1015
.0281
.0033
.0518
.0390
.0460
.0600
.0170
.0559
.0057
.0015
.0805
.0168
.0041
.2301
.0067
.0644
T/Y*
85
96
125
167
46
5
85
64
75
98
27
92
9
2
132
27
6
378
11
106
.6
.7
.7
.1
.2
.4
.2
.2
.7
.8
.9
.0
.4
.5
.5
.6
.7
.7
.0
.0
1985
Pro.*
.0559
.0622
.0817
.0964
.0250
.0042
.0506
.0396
.0553
.0604
.0171
.0628
.0063
.0018
.0735
.0174
.0042
.2163
.0070
.0629
T/Y*
96
109
143
169
43
7
88
69
97
106
30
110
11
3
129
30
7
380
12
110
.5
.3
.6
.4
.9
.4
.9
.6
.2
.2
.1
.4
.0
.1
.2
.6
.4
.2
.3
.6
1995
Pro.* T/Y*
.0592 117.A
.0672 133.3
.0896 177.8
.0870 172.2
.0225 44.6
.0056 11.1
.0475 94.2
.0404 80.1
.0689 136.7
.0609 120.8
.0172 34.1
.0729 144.6
.0072 14.3
.0023 4.6
.0631 125.2
.0183 36.3
.0043 8.5
.1957 388.3
.0075 14.9
.0607 120.4
2000
Pro.* T/Y*
.0608
.0691
.0926
127.5
145.0
194.2
.0859 180.4
.0215 45.1
.0061 12.8
.0463 97.1
.0407 85.4
.0704 147.7
.0611 128.2
.0173 36.3
.0768 161.1
.0075 15.7
.0025 5.2
.0592 124.2
.0186 39.0
.0044 9.2
.1879 394.4
.0076 15.9
.0598 125.4
TOTAL TONS/YEAR
1535
1646
1758
1984
2098
PRO. = allocation proportion
T/Y = particulates in tons per year
- 30 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1975
TABLE 5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
Subarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21 .
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
COUNTY TOTAL
Commercial/Institutional Allocation
Employment Proportion
29,433 .2223
4,012 .0303
4,594 .0347
2,993 .0226
11,797 .0891
3,628 .0891
1,086 .0082
3,284 .0248
5,389 .0407
1,403 .0106
2,529 -0191
5,389 .0407
4,727 .0357
967 .0073
2,317 .0175
1,655 .0125
2,185 .1065
2,860 .0216
2,052 .0155
4,568 .0345
8,646 .0653
5,018 .0379
1,086 .0082
636 .0098
2,542 .0192
3,019 .0228
1,099 .0083
4,846 ' .0366
1,523 .0115
291 .0022
2,542 .0192
172 .0013
371 .0028
93 .0007
1,192 .0090
1,295 .0094
503 .0038
66 .0005
225 .0017
252 .0019
808 .0061
397 .0030
93 .0007
Particulate
Tons/Year
206.50
28.58
32.13
20.93
82.51
82.51
7.59
22.97
37.69
9.82
17.69
37.69
33.06
6.76
16.21
11.58
15.28
20.00
14.35
31.95
60.47
35.10
7.59
4.45
17.78
21.11
7.69
33.90
10.65
2.03
17.78
1.20
2.59
.65
8.33
8.70
3.52
.46
1.57
133,533
.76
.65
.78
.65
935.07
- 31 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1980
TABLE 5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
Subarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
COUNTY TOTALS
Commercial/Institutional
Employment
38,922
3,876
4,411
4,544
12,222
3,371
1,025
3,163
4,782
1,366
2,465
6,460
4,737
1,040
2,257
1,604
2,183
2,851
2,020
4,604
8,969
5,391
1,277
639
3,000
3,252
1.
5,
1,
084
331
648
297
2,777
193
401
104
1,277
1,945
906
59
238
282
861
416
104
148,354
Allocation
Proportion
.2621
.0261
.0297
.0306
.0823
.0227
.0069
.0213
.0322
.0092
.0166
.0435
.0319
.0070
.0152
.0108
.0147
.0192
.0136
.0310
.0604
.0363
.0086
.0043
.0202
.0219
.0073
.0359
.0111
.0020
.0187
.0013
.0027
.0007
.0086
.0131
.0061
.0004
.0016
.0019
.0058
.0028
.0007
Particulate
Tons/Year
269.64
26.85
30.56
31.48
84.67
23.35
7.10
21.91
33.13
9.47
17.08
44.75
32.82
7.20
15.64
11.11
15.12
19.75
13.99
31.89
62.14
37.34
8.85
4.42
20.78
22.53
7.51
36.93
11.42
2.06
12.24
1.34
2.78
.70
8.85
13.48
6.28
4.12
.65
.95
,97
88
.72
1,024.45
- 32 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1985
TABLE 5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
Subarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
COUNTY TOTAL
Commercial/Institutional
Employment
40,984
3,973
4,844
4,527
12,537
3,404
1,157
3,295
4,907
1,409
2,517
,649
,892
6:
4.
1,076
2,311
646
248
929
073
4,812
9,672
5,746
1,615
728
3.356
4,322
1,266
5,778
1,900
380
3,087
222
443
127
1,631
2,454
1,282
79
269
301
934
475
127
158,334
Allocation
Proportion
.2589
.0251
.0306
.0286
.0792
.0215
.0073
.0205
.0310
.0089
.0159
.0420
.0309
.0068
.0146
.0104
.0142
.0183
.0131
.0304
.0611
.0363
.0102
.0046
.0212
.0273
.0080
.0365
.0120
.0024
.0195
.0014
.0028
.0008
.0103
.0155
.0081
.0005
.0017
.0019
.0059
. 0030
.0008
Particulate
Tons/Year
284.33
27.57
33.61
31.41
86.98
23.61
8.02
22.51
34.05
9.77
17.46
46.13
33.94
7.47
16.03
11.42
15.60
20.32
14.39
33.39
67.10
39.87
11.20
5.05
23.28
29.98
8.79
40.09
13.18
2.64
21.42
1.
3.
,54
.08
.88
11.31
17.02
8.90
.55
.87
.09
1.
2.
6.48
3.29
.88
1,098.50
- 33 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1995
TABLE 5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
Subarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48 .
52
53
54
55
56
57
COUNTY TOTAL
Commercial/Institutional Allocation
Employment Proportion
47,800 .2595
4,458 .0242
5,323 .0289
4,881 .0265
13,815 .0750
3,721 .0202
1,253 .0068
3,610 .0196
5,416 .0294
1,547 .0084
2,800 .0152
7,423 .0403
5,434 .0295
1,197 .0065
2,579 .0140
1,860 .0101
2,468 .0134
3,260. .0177
2,303 .0125
5,618 .0305
11,476 .0623
6,668 .0362
1,989 .0108
829 .0045
4,550 .0247
4,863 .0264
1,492 .0081
6,926 .0376
2,413 .0131
608 .0033
3,758 .0204
295 .0016
571 .0031
184 .0010
2,450 .013.3
3,647 .0198
1,971 .0107
74 .0004
350 .0019
387 .0021
1,105 .0060
608 .0033
166 .0009
184,146
Particulate
Tons/Year
331.38
30.90
36.91
33.84
95.78
25.80
8.68
25.03
37.54
10.73
19.41
51.46
37.67
8.30
17.88
12.90
17.11
22.60
15.96
38.95
79.56
46.23
13.79
5.75
31.45
33.71
10.34
48.02
16.73
4.21
26.05
2.04
3.96
1.27
16.98
25.28
13.66
.51
2.43
2.68
7.66
4.21
1.15
1,276.59
- 34 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 2000
TABLE 5. COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS
FOR SUB-COUNTY AREAS
Subarea
00
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
52
53
54
55
56
57
COUNTY TOTAL
Commercial/Institutional
Employment
5.
4,
49,776
4,572
,435
,984
14,185
3,787
1,275
3,728
5,553
1,589
2,884
7,632
5,592
1,216
2,668
1,903
2,531
3,555
2,354
6,004
12,243
7,161
2,009
922
5,278
5,003
1,589
7,495
6,082
648
3,983
294
608
196
2,531
3,826
2,060
79
353
392
1,138
628
137
195,877
Allocation
Proportion
.2537
.0233
.0277
.0254
.0723
.0193
.0065
.0190
.0283
.0081
.0147
.0389
.0285
.0062
.0136
.0097
.0129
.0171
0.120
.0306
.0624
.0365
.0107
.0047
.0269
.0255
.0081
.0382
.0310
.0033
.0203
.0015
.0031
.0010
.0129
.0195
.0105
.0004
.0018
.0020
.0058
.0032
.0007
Particulate
Tons/Year
344.52
31.64
37.62
34.49
98.18
26.21
8.83
25.80
38.43
11.00
19.96
52.83
38.70
8.42
18.47
13.17
17.52
23.22
16.30
41.56
84.74
49.57
14.53
6.38
36.53
35.63
11.00
51.88
42.10
4.48
27.57
2.04
4.21
1.36
17.56
26.48
14.26
.54
2.44
2.72
7.88
4.35
.95
1,355.07
- 35 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1975
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
1
2
3
4
5 .
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14'.
15
16
17
18
.19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3.1
32
33
34.
35
36
37
Employment
0
0
84
18
7
0
28
0
91
0
2
152
42
16
160
2
9
0
564
22
23
0
6
12
13
16
27
5
6
28
135
0
0
66
319
5
26
Grid Square
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Employment
41
23
3
139
43
44
5
7
23
94
480
66
0
0
15
13
16
81
51
19
97
.107
42
13
16
8
4
2
300
193
506
409
32
49
51
97
58
- 36 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1975
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
Employment
65
35
0
224
0
0
18
77
336
650
42
36
45
10
87
497
363
4
41
73
134
56
33
290
295
524
302
46
34
47
694
886
1,394
254
413
97
97
Grid Square
112
117
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129 .
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
Employment
41
16
84
9
.6
0
21
652
1,263
222
840
1,165
186
176
195
73
113
70
120
16
267
840
2,092
453
970
97
247
233
293
640
2,680
241
90
29
9
466
145
- 37 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1975
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
. 156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
Employment
137
254
333
772
536
0
89
0
7
2,065
195
173
1,381
48
203
5,597
0
156
0
0
219
58
1,063
77
105
216
3,227
383
31
53
53
43
14
0
10
0
37
Grid Square
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
302
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Employment
0
254
448
38
53
130
3,324
53
35
0
3
0
0
0
261
317
39
0
18
0
0
4
76
30
0
8
0
8
25
0
5
327
738
14
177
519
447
- 38 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1975
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square Employment
223 7
224 0
225 0
226 0
227 59
228 0
229 44
230 20
231 0
232 16
233 9
234 22
235 14
236 11
237 645
238 0
239 0
240 0
241. 4
242 0
243 0
244 14
245 13
246 31
COUNTY TOTAL 54,035
- 39 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1980
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Employment
0
0
83
18
7
0
28
0
90
0
2
151
42
16
159
2
9
0
560
22
23
0
6
12
13
16
27
5
6
28
134
0
0
66
317
5
26
Grid Square
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Employment
41
23
3
138
43
44
5
7
23
93
477
66
0
0
15
13
16
81
51
19
96
106
42
13
16
8
4
2
298
192
503
406
32
49
51
96
58
- 40 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1980
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
Employment
65
35
0
222
0
0
18
17
334
646
42
36
45
10
87
494
360
4
41
73
133
56
33
239
293
521
300
46
34
47
690
881
1,386
252
410
96
96
41
Grid Square
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127'
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
Employment
16
84
9
6
0
21
648
1,256
221
835
1,158
185
175
193
73
112
70
119
16
265
835
2,080
450
964
96
245
231
291
636
2,665
239
89
29
9
463
144
136
252
- 41 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1980
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
151
152
153
154
155
.156
157
158
159
160
161
.162
163
164
165
166
167 .
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179.
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
Employment
331
767
533
0
89
0
7
2,053
194
172
1,373
48
201
5,565
0
155
0
0
218
58
1,057
77
104
215
3,209
380
31
53
53
43
14
0
10
0
37
0
252
445
Grid Square
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
234
225
Employment
38
53
129
3,305
53
35
0
3
0
0
0
259
315
39
0
18
0
0
4
76
30
0
8
0
8
25
0
5
325
733
14
176
516
444
7
0
0
- 42 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1980
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square Employment
226 0
227 59
228 0
229 44
230 20
231 0
232 16
233 9
234 22
235 14
236 11
237 641
238 0
239 0
240 0
241 4
242 0
243 0
244 14
245 13
246 31
COUNTY TOTAL 53,662
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1985
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 .
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 '
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Employment
0
0
79
17
7
0
26
0
86
0
2
143
40
16
151
2
9
0
531
21
22
0
6
11
12
15
25
5
6
26
127
0
0
62
300
5
24
Grid Square
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Employment
39
22
3
131
41
41
5
7
22
88
452
62
0
0
14
12
15
76
48
18
91
101
40
12
15
8
4
2
282
182
476
385
30
46
48
91
55
- 44 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1985
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
Employment
61
33
0
211
0
0
17
72
316
612
40
34
42
10
82
468
342
4
39
69
126
53
31
226
278
493
284
43
32
44
653
834
1,312
239
389
91
91
Grid Square
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
Employment
39
15
79
9
6
0
20
613
1,188
209
790
1,096
175
166
183
69
106
66
113
15
251
790
1,968
426
913
91
232
219
276
602
2,522
227
85
27
9
438
136
- 45 -
-------
(Concinued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1985
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
. 178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
Employment
129
239
313
726
504
0
84
0
7
1,943
184
163
1,299
45
191
5,266
0
147
0
0
206
55
1,000
72
99
203
3,036
360
29
50
50
40
13
0
10
0
35
Grid Square
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Employment
0
239
422
36
50
122
3,127
50
33
0
3
0
0
0
246
298
37
0
17
0
0
4
72
28
0
8
0
8
24
0
5
308
694
13
167
488
421
- 46 -
-------
(Continued)
UNUNIJACA COUNTY
YEAR - 1985
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square Employment
223 7
224 0
225 0
226 0
227 56
228 0
229 41
230 19
231 0
232 15
233 9
234 21
235 13
236 10
237 607
238 0
239 0
240 0
241 4
242 0
243 0
244 13
245 12
246 29
COUNTY TOTAL 50,853
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1995
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
.19
20
21
22
23
24
' 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Employment
0
0
72
15
6
0
24
0
78
0
2
130
36
14
136
2
8
0
481
19
20
0
6
10
10
14
23
5
6
24
115
0
0
56
272
5
22
Grid Square
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
5
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Employment
35
20
3
118
37
37
5
7
20
80
409
56
0 .
0
13
11
14
69
43
16
83
91
36
11
14
8
4
2
256
164
431
349
27
42
43
83
49
-------
(Continued)
ONONDACA COUNTY
YEAR - 1995
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92 .
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
1.10
111
Employment
55
30
0
191
0
0
15
66
286
554
36
31
38
9
74
424
309
4
35
62
114
48
28
205
251
447
257
39
29
40
591
755
1,188
216
352
83
83
Grid Square
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
Employment
35
14
72
8
5
0
18
556
1,076
189
716
993
159
150
166
62
96
60
102
14
228
716
1,783
386
827
83
210
199
250
545
2,284
205
77
25
8
397
124
- 49 -
-------
(Continued)
<>\',<>\;\>l:< ,1: (.OliN'l Y
YKAK - 1993
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
179
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
Employment
117
216
284
658
457
0
76
0
6
1,760
166
147
1,177
41
173
4,769
0
133
0
0
187
49
906
66
89
184
2,750
326
26
45
45
37
12
0
9
0
32
Grid Square
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Employment
0
216
382
32
45
111
2,833
45
30
0
3
0
0
0
222
270
33
0
15
0
0
4
65
26
0
7
0
7
21
0
4
279
629
12
151
442
381
- 50 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 1995
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square Employment
223 6
224 0
225 0
226 0
.227 50
228 0
229 38
230 17
231 0
232 14
233 8
234 19
235 12
236 10
237 550
238 0
239 0
240 0
241 4
242 0
243 0
244 13
245 12
246 26
COUNTY TOTAL 46,063
- 51 -
-------
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 2000
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Employment
0
0
67
14
6
0
22
0
73
0
2
122
34
13
128
2
7
0
451
18
18
0
6
10
10
13
22
5
6
. 22
108
0
0
53
255
5
21
Grid Square
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
45
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Employment
33
18
3
111
34
35
5
7
18
75
384
53
0
0
12
10
13
65
41
15
78
86
34
10
13
6
3
2
240
154
405
327
26
39
41
78
46
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA COUNTY
YEAR - 2000
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
.82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
Employment
52
28
0
179
0
0
14
62
269
520
34
29
36
8
70
398
291
3
33
58
107
45
26
192
236
419
242
37
27
38
556
709
1,116
203
331
78
78
Grid Square
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
Employment
33
13
67
7
5
0
17
522
1,011
178
672
932
149
141
156
58
90
56
96
13
214
672
1,674
363
776
78
198
186
235
512
2,145
193
72
23
7
373
116
- 53 -
-------
ONONDACA COUNTY
YKAK - :i)
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
167
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171.
172
173
174
175
. 176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
Employment
110
203
267
618
429
0
71
0
6
1,653
156
138
1,105
38
142
4,480
. 0
125
0
0
175
46
851
62
84
173
2,583
307
25
'42
42
34
11
0
8
0
30
Grid Square
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
Employment
0
203
359
30
42
104
2,660
42
28
0
2
0
0
0
209
254
31
0
14
0
0
3
61
24
0
6
0
6
20
0
4
262
591
11
142
415
358
- 54 -
-------
(Continued)
ONONDAGA'COUNTY
YEAR - 2000
TABLE 6. INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATIONS
Grid Square Employment
227 6
224 0
225 0
226 0
227 47
228 0
229 35
230 16
231 0
232 13
233 7
234 . 18
235 11
236 9
237 516
238 0
239 0
240 0
241 3
242 0
243 0
244 11
245 10
246 25
COUNTY TOTAL 43,231
- 55 -
-------
TABLE 7. SOLID WASTE - OPEN BURNING PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS
Year
1975 1980 1985 1995
SUBAREA
Part.* Part.* Part.* Part.*
Pop.* t/y Pop.* t/y Pop.* t/y Pop.* t/y
*Pop. = population
*Part. t/y = participate emissions in tons per year
2000
Part.*
Pop.* t/y
Elbridge
Fabius
Lafayette
Lysander
Marcellus
Otisco
Porapey
Skaneateles
Spaf ford
Tully
Van Buren
4117
1650
4600
8436
3862
1550
4950
4936
1200
1950
11143
4.0
1.6
4.5
8.2
3.8
1.5
4.8
4.8
1.2
1.9
10.9
4350
1700
4900
12865
4282
1600
5350
5035
1250
2000
14898
4
1
4
12
4
1
5
4
1
1
14
.2
.7
.8
.5
.2
.6
.2
.9
.2
.9
.5
4800
1750
5200
17448
4787
1650
5900
5207
1300
2100
16647
4.7
1.7
5.1
17.0
4.7
1.6
5.8
5.1
1.3
2.0
16.2
5400
1850
5900
5426
1850
6650
5550
1400
2300
5.3
1.8
5.7
5.3
1.8
6.5
5.4
1.4
2.2
5600
1900
6200
5826
1950
6950
5700
1450
2400
5.5
1.8
6.1
5.7
1.9
6.8
5.5
1.4
2.3
- 56 -
-------
TABLE 8. SOLID WASTE - INCINERATOR EMISSIONS - TONS PER YEAR
SUBAREA
Camillus
Cicero
Clay
DeWitt
Geddes
Lafayette
Lysander
Manlius
Salina
Skaneateles
Syracuse
Tully
Van Buren
1975
1.63
.26
.14
9.39
.43
.18
.15
1.87
.53
3.44
95.61
.20
.31
1980
1.63
.26
.14
9.39
.43
.18
.15
1.87
.53
3.44
95.61
.20
.31
Year
1985
1.63
.26
.14
9.39
.43
18
.15
1.87
.53
3.44
95.61
.20
.31
1995
1.63
.26
.14
9.39
.43
.18
.15
1.87
.53
3.44
95.61
.20
.31
2000
1.63
.26
.14
9.39
.43
.18
.15
1.87
.53
3.44
95.61
.20
.31
TOTAL 114.14
- 57 -
-------
TABLE 9. GRID SQUARE COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35 i
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
736-389
736-397
736-405
736-413
736-421
744-381
744-389
744-397
744-405
744-413
744-421
752-381
752-389
752-397
752-405
752-413
752-421
760-373
760-381
760-389
760-393
760-397
760-399
760-401
760-403
760-405
760-406
760-407
760-408
760-409
760-411
760-413
760-415
760-417
760-419
760-421
761-405
761-406
761-407
. 761-408
762-397
762-399
762-401
762-403
762-404
762-405
762-406
762-407
762-408
762-409
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62,
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
762-410
762-411
762-413
762-415
762-417
762-419
763-403
763-404
763-405
763-406
763-407
763-408
763-409
763-410
764-389
764-393
764-395
764-397
764-399
764-401
764-402
764-403
764-404
764-405
764-406
764-407
764-408
764-409
764-410
764-411
764-412
764-413
764-415
764-417
764-419
765-401
765-402
765-403
765-404
765-405
765-406
765-407
765-408
765-409
765-410
765-411
765-412
766-393
766-395
766-397
- 58 -
-------
TABLE 9. GRID SQUARE COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
766-399
766-401
766-402
766-403
766-404
766-405
766-406
766-407
766-408
766-409
766-410
766-411
766-412
766-413
766-415
766-417
766-419
767-401
767-402
767-403
767-404
767-405
767-406
767-407
767-408
767-409
767-410
767-411
767-412
768-373
768-381
768-389
768-397
768-401
768-403
768-405
768-406
768-407
768-408
768-409
768-410
768-411
768-412
768-413
768-417
768-421
769^405
769-406
769-407
769-408
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
169.
170.
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176.
177.
178.
179.
180.
181.
182.
183.
184.
185.
186.
187.
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
197.
198.
199,
200.
769-409
769-410
769-411
769-412
770-401
770-403
770-404
770-405
770-406
770-407
770-408
770-409
770-410
770-411
770-412
771-403
771-404
771-405
771-406
771-407
771-408
771-409
771-410
771-411
771-412
772-397
772-401
772-402
772-403
772-404
772-405
772-406
772-407
772-408
772-409
772-410
772-411
772-413
772-417
773-401
773-402
773-403
773-404
773-405
773-406
773-407
773-408
773-409
773-410
774-401
- 59 -
-------
TABLE 9. GRID SQUARE COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
GRID
SQUARE
NO.
UTM
COORDINATES
201.
202.
203.
204.
205.
206.
207.
208.
209.
210.
211.
212.
213.
214.
215.
216.
217.
218.
219.
220.
221.
222.
223.
774-403
774-405
774-406
774-407
774-408
774-409
774-410
774-411
775-4C5
775-406
775-407
775-408
775-409
775-410
776-373
776-381
776-389
776-393
776-397
776-399
776-401
776-403
776-405
224 =
225.
226.
227.
228.
229.
23CL
231.
232.
233.
234,
235.
235.
237.
238.
239.
240.
241.
242.
243.
244.
245.
246.
776-407
776-409
776-411
776-413
778-397
778-399
778-401
778-403
778-405
778-407
778-409
778-411
780-389
780-393
780-397
78C-401
780-4C5
780-409
784-373
784-381
784-389
784-397
784-405
- 6C -
-------
TABLE 10. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TOWNS
Town
Camillas
Cicero
Clay
.Grid Square
19
20
21
65
66
67
68
69
98
99
100
101
131
132
133
146
188
189
205
206
207
208
212
213
214
224
225
226
227
233
234
235
240
241-
246
176
200
201
202
203
204
205
209
210
211
212
220
221
5.6
4.6
1.6
17.8
4.6
3.0
3.0
1.1
4.6
4.6
4.6
1.8
3.1
31.1
9.0
1.5
3.4
4.1
.4
.5
s
. _/
2.0
.6
.7
.7
1.3
2.7
2.7
44.1
1.4
2.7
2.7
4.3
10.6
13.1
.4
2.7
3.0
.6
.6
.6
.1
.8
.8
.8
.1
2.4
3.2
Town
Clay cont'd
Dewitt
Grid Square
222
223
224
228
229
230
231
232
233
237
238
239
240
244
245
246
15
16
30
31
32
33
50
51
52
53
54
63
64
78
79
80
81
82
83
95
96
97
112
113
114
115
128
129
142
143
144
151
152
3.2
3.2
1.7
1.1
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.2
1.6
2.5
12.4
12.4
12.4
.1
15.3
4.7
2.8
2.7
3.3
4.7
4.7
3.4
.6
1.2
4.7
4.7
2.8
.8
1.2
.5
1.2
1.2
1.2
4.7
1.2
.2
.5
.9
.7
1.2
4.7
.9
.6
1.2
.9
1.2
9.6
.4
.9
- 61 -
-------
iown
TABLE 10.
Grid Square
GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS ~ TOWNS
% Town Grid Square
Dewitt cont'd
Elbridge
Fabius
Geddes
Lafayette
153
154
I f,7
163
164
165
172
173
174
175
185
186
187
188
198
199
205
206
207
208
18
19
130
131
3
4
5
9
10
11
69
70
71
72
86
87
88
101
102
103
118
119
132
133
134
135
155
176
8
9
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
4.7
6.0
1.2
1.2
.1
.4
.4
1.3
16.8
38.2
16.3
28.7
10.0
44.8
28.2
1.6
8.3
7.2
5.0
.6
.6
.3
3.5
3.5
.9
8.5
3.5
1.8
3.5
1.2
2.9
26.3
12.6
.9
6.1
18.4
3.6
48.2
Lafayette cont'd
Lysander
Manlius
Marcellus
10
14
15
16
130
131
132
176
215
216
217
218
219
220
228
229
236
237
242
243
244
16
17
33
34
35
36
54
55
56
83
84
85
115
116
117
144
145
146
188
189
6
7
12
13
19
20
21
5.7
3.3
35.6
3.6
.8
2.4
.5
.4
3.3
17.5
1.3
5.2
1.5
1.5
1.0
.1
5.9
4.6
24.6
24.6
4.8
1.6
.7
.8
3.1
3.1
28.7
1.2
3.1
3.1
2.3
3.1
3.1
2.5
3.1
3.1
5.5
11.8
9.6
3.9
6.9
14
4
58
5
,2
,3
,7
Onondaga
2.1
13.7
6.6
1.4
4.0
- 62 -
-------
Town
TABLE 10.
Grid Square
Onondaga cont'd
Otisco
Pompey
Salina
13
14
15
21
22
23
24
25
29
30
37
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
49
50
57
58
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
2
7
8
10
11
16
17
135
150
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
166
167
168
169
170
171
6.8
29.9
32.1
4.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
.4
.6
.1
.4
2.0
2.0
2.0
.5
.4
.4
.3
.2
.4
.4
.1
.7
.7
.8
.4
.5
.1
21.0
16.9
62.2
27.2
19.2
31.9
21.7
1.3
1.5
5.4
2.5
2.1
1.0
1.3
2.1
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5. ...
GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TOWNS
% Town Grid Square
Salina cont'd
Skaneateles
Spafford
Syracuse
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
200
201
202
203
204
205
220
6
12
18
19
1
2
6
7
8
15
26
27
28
29
37
38
39
40
45
46
47
48
49
50
57
58
59
19.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.5
.8
.6
.6
.8
.6
1.0
35.3
48.9
.3
15.6
26.2
32.2
8.3
33.1
.2
1.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
.4
1.3
1.5
1.5
.3
.4
.4
1.5
1.5
.6
.3
.3
.4
1.5
- 63 -
-------
Town
TABLE 10. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TOWNS
Grid Square % Town Grid Square
Syracuse cont'd
60
61
62
63
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
1.5
1.5
1.5
.5
.1
.9
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
.9
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.3
.9
.4
.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
.7
1.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
Syracuse cont'd
Tully
Van Buren
126
127
128
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
147
148
149
150
151
152
157
158
159
160
2
3
8
9
131
132
176
216
217
218
1.5
1.5
.8
.5
4.9
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
.6
1.0
.4
.3
.9
.8
.3
20.0
72.5
.2
7.3
27.1
38.0
.3
19.9
12.7
2.0
- 64 -
-------
TABLE 11. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
Traffic District Grid Square
00
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
Square %
106
107
122
123
123
124
136
137
138
148
149
123
124
125
138
139
108
109
92
108
109
75
91
107
74
89
90
105
106
105
106
121
122
121
122
135
136
136
137
147
148
158
159
6.3
75.0
6.3
12.5
31.0
6.9
3.4
13.8
27.6
6.9
10.3
5.0
50.0
30.0
5.0
10.0
77.8
22.2 .
63.2
26.3
10.5
33.3
57.1
9.5
23.1
23.1
46.2
3.8
3.8
20.0
50.0
10.0
20.0
21.8
30.4
30.4
17.4
20.6
23.5
8.8
14.7
26.5
5.9
Traffic District Grid Square "L_
20
21
22
23
138
139
148
149
150
151
159
160
161
162
169
170
125
126
128
139
140
141
142
150
151
152
78
93
94
95
96
97
109
110
111
112
125
126
127
128
48
49
50
61
62
63
76
77
78
94
37
38
5.3
1.8
8.8
15.8
7.0
3.5
14.0
21.1
8.8
1.8
5.3
7.0
5.9
8.8
4.4
13.2
17.7
17.7
5.9
11.8
10.3
4.4
19.0
4.3
7.8
10.3
6.0
1.7
6.9
10.3
10.3
4.3
1.7
5.2
7.8
4.3
7.7
7.7
2.6
12.8
15.4
6.4
12.8
15.4
15.4
3.8
4.1
9.6
- 65 -
-------
TABLE 11. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
Traffic District Grid Square % Traffic District Grid Square
24 cont'd
25
26
27
39
46
47
48
49
59
60
61
74
75
76
43
45
46
47
57
58
59
70
71
72
73
74
88
89
70
71
86
87
88
89
102
103
104
105
118
119
120
101
104
105
118
119
120
121
133
134
135
155
176
5.5
6.8
15.1
5.5
5.5
2.7
16.4
2.7
2.7
6.8
16.4
2.5
3.7
4.9
1.2
3.7
11.1
12.3
6.2
11.1
12.3
14.8
4.9
6.2
4.9
2.2
2.2
10.9
13.0
7.6
2.2
9.8
13.0
9.8
2.2
7.6
8.7
10.9
7.7
1.9
3.2
2.6
2.6
1.3
3.2
15.4
26.9
19.9
14.1
1.3
28
30
31
135
147
155
156
157
158
159
166
167
168
169
176
177
179
180
161
162
167
168
169
170
171
181
182
183
184
194
195
196
197
202
203
204
205
206
207
210
211
212
213
214
223
224
225
142
144
151
152
153
154
162
10.0
10.0
4.4
13.2
13.2
3.3
2.2
6.6
12.1
7.7
3.3
4.4
5.5
2.2
2.2
2.5
.4
.4
1.8
2.1
2.9
4.3
3.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
1.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
1.1
4.3
4.3
4.3
1.8
.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
1.8
3.9
11.4
5.0
.4
16.0
.7
.2
2.6
2.6
2.2
- 66 -
-------
TABLE 11. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
Traffic District Grid Square
Traffic District Grid Square
31 cont'd
32
33
163
164
165
172
173
174
175
185
186
187
188
198
199
206
207
208
214
225
226
31
32
33
52
53
54
63
64
78
79
80
81
82
83
96
97
113
114
115
128
129
142
143
144
15
16
29
30
31
32
33
40
50
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
10.4
16.5
2.6
2.6
1.5
2.4
9.0
1.1
3.7
2.6
.6
.2
1.0
7.1
8.1
5.4
.6
.4
1.0
1.7
2.3
2.3
9.0
2.7
1.0
1.9
2.3
9.0
2.1
.8
2.3
1.2
2.3
34.8
39.1
5.2
1.9
11.0
10.3
10.8
6.8
2.3
2.3
33 cont'd
34
35
36
37
51
52
53
63
64
79
14
15
26
27
28
29
39
40
48
49
14
23
24
25
37
41
42
43
44
45
46
57
58
69
70
71
72
41
42
67
68
69
70
86
99
100
101
102
118
37
98
99
100
101
2.8
2.3
1.2
.9
2.3
.7
8.8
51.9
8.8
8.8
8.8
2.9
5.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
15.2
5.0
13.2
14.7
.07
3.0
13.2
14.0
4.0
4.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
1.3
3.0
.7
6.5
2.0
9.0
23.6
19.1
.5
1.0
7.5
14.1
14.6
1.5
.5
1.5
5.0
3.9
4.1
1.3
- 67 -
-------
TABLE 11. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS --'TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
Traffic District Grid Square % Traffic District Grid Square
37 cont'd
38
40
41
42
132
133
134
176
155
166
176
177
178
179
180
181
190
191
192
193
194
200
201
202
209
220
221
222
223
229
230
224
225
226
227
233
234
235
240
241
246
144
145
146
188
189
208
226
227
235
16
17
33
34
35
34.0
33.8
1.1
15.5
4.6
1.3
19.5
1.6
2.7
2.7
2.2
.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
1.8
10.4
10.4
2.0
1.5
9.1
10.4
5.3
.4
1.8
1.1
.7
3.3
.7
30.3
2.8
5.2
4.7
7.1
20.2
25.0
8.3
4.6
4.5
14.4
24.0
.8
3.9
38.9
.7
14.3
4.0
2.1
7.6
7.6
42 cont'd
43
44
45
46
47
36
54
55
56
83
84
85
115
116
144
145
10
15
16
8
9
14
15
7
8
13
14
21
22
23
24
41
42
12
13
19
20
21
65
66
67
98
99
131
132
131
132
176
216
217
218
219
220
228
229
14.3
3.0
7.6
7.1
5.3
4.0
3.2
5.9
4.0
3.2
6.8
41.3
45.8
12.9
3.9
52.0
7.5
36.6
3.1
9.0
14.6
56.5
3.2
4.4
3.0
.7
4.2
1.2
.4
4.0
10.7
18.6
15.1
18.6
4.8
3.0
2.6
1.4
3.2
17.4
15.5
41.9
1.5
1.7
1.1
17.6
4.6
.6
3.4
.3
- 68 -
-------
TABLE 11. GRID SQUARE ALLOCATIONS TRAFFIC DISTRICTS
Traffic District Grid Square
Traffic District
Grid Square
47 cont'd
52
53
54
236
237
209
222
223
224
228
229
230
231
232
233
237
238
239
240
245
246
36
56
84
85
116
117
145
146
3
4
5
9
10
11
16
17
1
2
3
6
7
8
9
2.3
9.5
.5
2.1
3.2
.8
1.1
3.3
3.9
4.4
4.4
2.0
2.9
16.8
16.8
10.8
20.7
6.4
43.9
.4
2.7
3.5
2.7
6.3
13.1
27.5
9.0
19.0
11.0
1.0
14.0
19.0
15.0
12.0
14.0
24.0
22.0
3.4
18.2
17.0
1.4
55
56
57
6
7
12
13
18
19
18
19
130
131
130
131
215
216
217
236
237
242
243
244
22.0
6.2
38.0
22.9
.03
10.6 ,
17.
35.
16.9
30.5
1.7
10.9
5.2
41.0
1.2
7.8
1.9
1.9
15.7
12.7
- 69 -
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Inuructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-902/4-77-003
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE |
Emissions Inventory Projections and Allocation Projec-
tions to Sub-County Areas for the Syracuse Air Quality
Maintenance; Area
AuTHORTsrciritTaTlfe^ & Develop-
ment Board, Midtown Plaza, 700 E. Water St., Syracuse,
New York. 13210 :
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
5. REPORT DATE
15 July 1977
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION RF.PORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Central New York Regional Planning & Development B'oard
Midtown Plaza, 700 E. Water Street
Syracuse, New York 13210
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-2302
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air Branch
Region II, 26 Federal Plaza
New York, New York 10007
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final 12/1/75-6/15/76
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report provides a disaggregated particulate matter emissions inventory suitable
for use in both base year and projection year air quality dispersion modeling required
for the Syracuse AQMA. The allocation and projection methodology is essentially that
of volumes 7 and 13 of the Guidelines for Air Quality Maintenance Planning series
(U.S. EPA). Allocations were made for population, transportation, commercial/
institutional, industrial, and solid waste-based emissions. The study results clearly
indicate that the dominant sources of particulate emissions in Onondaga County are
industrial process and fuel point sources.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Particulate emissions, Syracuse AQMA, allo-
cation projections
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATi Field/Group
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
National Technical Information Service,
2285 Fort Royal Rd., Springfield, Va. 22151
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
78
2O. SECURITY CLASS (This page}
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Perm 2220-1 (9-73)
- 70 -
------- |