CONTRACT NO 10571.Od4';j
15 November 1968'
Critical Areas Report
U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Public Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Washington, D.C.
TRW>
SYSTEMS GROUP
WASHINGTON OPERATIONS
-------
10571-W145-TO-00
CRITICAL AREAS REPORT
15 November 1968
Contract No. PH-22-68-32
U. S. Department of Health Education and Welfare
Public Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
Washington, D. C.
TRWi
SYSTIMS GROUP I
r WASHINGTON OPERATIONS
17)5 I SntfT. H w • VMSHtnerOH. DC 200M
-------
FOREWORD
Three problems were addressed in the study reported here:
(a) Determine the U. S. cities with highest potential for air
pollution episodes, considering population exposure;
(b) Rank the cities according to severity of episode poten-
tial;
(c) Evaluate the Emergency Action Plans of the ten most
episode-prone cities.
An earlier ranking by NAPCA showed the 65 SMSA's with the most
severe "chronic" air pollution problems. These same SMSA's were ranked
for episode potential, using five (non-independent) ranking schemes. The
same cities appeared in the upper ranks in all of the schemes, though not
in the same order. Ten cities were thus identified and were visited to
determine the status of their Emergency Action Plans.
Any evaluation of the Emergency Action Plans for high episode poten-
tial cities must consider not only the plans per se, but the nature of
local air pollution experience to date and the state of program development
for overall air pollution control. TRW/RRI wishes to acknowledge and thank
the agency directors of the cities visited, who gave their time to openly
discuss their air pollution problems and programs.
Boston - Mr. J. L. Dallas
Chicago - Mr. W. J. Stanley
Cincinnati - Mr. C. W. Gruber
Cleveland - Mr. A. W. Locuoco
Los Angeles - Mr. R. L. Chass
New Jersey - Mr. W. A. Munroe
New York - Mr. A. N. Heller
Philadelphia - Mr. L. Himmelstein
Pittsburgh - Mr. E. L. Stockton
ii
-------
TRW/RRI further wishes to thank Messrs. R. Yunghans, J. Fensterstock,
G. Ozolins, R. Smith and G. Holzworth of the National Center of Air Pollu-
tion Control for providing data and information used in the ranking of high
episode potential cities, and for their general guidance.
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 CRITERIA DEVELOPMENT AND RANKING PROCEDURE 2-1
2.1 Existing Ranking for Chronic Pollution 2-1
2.2 Ranking for Episode Potential 2-2
2.2.1 Method I 2-2
2.2.2 Method II 2-2
2.2.3 Method III , 2-2
2.2.4 Method IV 2-5
2.2.5. Method V 2-5
2.3 Results , 2-5
2.3.1 Parameter Effect on Ranking 2-5
2.3.2 Cluster Relationships 2-6
2.3.3 Suggested Ranking Improvements 2-6
3.0 REVIEW OF CRITICAL AREAS 3-1
3.1 General 3-1
3.2 Chicago 3-3
3.2.1 Summary 3-3
3.2.2 Program Development 3-4
3.2.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-8
3.2.4 References 3-9
3.3 Boston 3-10
3.3.1 Summary 3-10
3.3.2 Program Development 3-11
3.3.3 Reprint of Massachusetts Air Pollution Emergency
Act , 3-12
3.3.4 Reprint of Boston Air Quality Study 3-15
3.3.5 Reprint of Massachusetts Air Pollution Law Excerpts. 3-19
3.4 Cincinnati 3-23
3.4.1 Summary 3-23
3.4.2 Program Developmant ' 3-24
3.4.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-29
3.4.4 Emergency Action Plans, Current 3-30
3.4.5 References 3-30
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
3.5 Cleveland 3-30
3.5.1 Summary 3-30
3.5.2 Program Development 3-31
3.5.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-32
3.5.4 References 3-32
3.6 Los Angeles 3-32
3.6.1 Summary , 3-32
3.6.2 Program Development 3-34
3.6.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-39
3.6.4 References 3-40
3.7 New Jersey •. 3-50
3.7.1 Summary 3-50
3.7.2 Program Development 3-52
3.7.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-53
3.7.4 Emergency Control Act 3-57
3.8 New York 3-58
3.8.1 Summary 3-58
3.8.2 Program Development 3-59
3.8.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-64
3.8-4 References 3-66
3.9 Philadelphia 3-67
3.9.1 Summary 3-67
3.9.2 Program Development 3-67
3.9.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-68
3.10 Pittsburgh 3-69
3.10.1 Summary 3-69
3.10.2 Program Development 3-70
3.10.3 Emergency Action Plans 3-71
3.10.4 References 3-74
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Page
2-1 Parameters in Various Ranking Options Using Common
Basic Data 2-3
2-2 Meteorological Isolines 2-4
3-1 Episode Activities 3-2
3-2 Air Monitoring Program 3-7
3-3 Organization Chart, Division of Air Pollution Control
and Heating Inspection. 3-26
3-4 Number of First Alerts Called in Los Angeles County 3-36
3-5 Organization Structure of the Air Pollution Control Program... 3-51
3-6 Estimated Emissions in New York 3-60
3-7 37 - Station Aerometric Monitoring Network 3-61
3-8 Location of Proposed Telemetering Stations for Allegheny
County 3-72
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1-1 City Summary of Planning Activities and Program Development... 1-3
2-1 Data For Parameters in Ranking 64 SMSAs 2-7
2-2 Rank Scores - Method 1 2-9
2-3 Rank Scores - Method II 2-11
2-4 Rank Scores - Method III 2-13
2-5 Rank Scores - Method IV 2-15
2-6 Rank Scores - Method V 2-17
2-7 Evaluation of Potential Air Pollution Episode Indicators 2-21
3-1 Contents of Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code of Chicago
Relating to Air Pollution Control 3-5
3-2 Comparison of 1957 and 1967 Particulate Pollutant
Levels in Cincinnati 3-25
3-3 Comparison of 1964 and 1967 Gaseous Pollutant
Levels in Cincinnati 3-25
3-4 Percentage of Contaminants from Major Sources Within
Los Angeles County 3-33
3-5 Alert Stages for Toxic Contaminants, PPM 3-35
3-6 Number of Days State Standards Were Exceeded in
Los Angeles County 3-35
3-7 Current Standard for Air Pollution Alerts 3-63
3-8 Station Sensors Data Remote Telemetering Air
Monitoring Network 3-73
vii
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
This Critical Areas Report is submitted as partial fulfillment of the
Air Pollution Episode Avoidance work performed under Contract No. PH-22-68-
32, Task Order No. 2. The purpose of this report is to document work per-
formed in accomplishing the following tasks:
(a) Develop criteria for selection 40 or more cities with the
greatest episode potential.
(b) Rank the cities according to their episode potential.
(c) Evaluate the emergency plans of the 10 most episode-prone
cities.
Criteria were developed and 64 Standard Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (SMSA) were ranked based on pollutant, meteorological and population
data. Five methods were used to rank cities and ten cities that most con-
sistently appeared to have high episode potential in each option were
visited to gather information on their episode emergency plans.
Evaluation of ten high-episode-potential cities reviews the general
nature of their individual pollution problems, the planning elements con-
sidered in their work, and the completeness and detail of their emergency
plans. Generally, a program that allows for effective control of air pol-
lution episodes provides:
(a) Delegation of authority and responsibility for emergency
actions;
(b) Definition of alert levels;
(c) Knowledge of source emissions, including effect of al-
ternate control strategies;
(d) Current information on air quality;
(e) Some understanding of local meteorological/topographical
effects;
(f) A method of rapid data processing (or rapid reporting);
(g) A formal Emergency Action Plan.
A summary of the programs in each of the high-episode potential cities is
presented in Table 1-1.
1-1
-------
Los Angeles, Chicago, New York City and New Jersey are the only
critical areas with departments that have completed or soon will complete
some documentation on their Emergency Action Plans. Chicago has run city
wide tests to determine the effectiveness of some emergency control
actions (fuel switching).
Boston, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh* have laws or codes defining
responsibility and authority for declaring air pollution emergenices.
Possible control actions have been identified, but implementation or ac-
1tion plans have not yet been formalized. The development of such plans by
these cities appear to have priority in terms of future work.
Cincinnati and Cleveland do not have explicit "episode" regulations
and have not developed emergency action plans for dealing with air pollu-
tion episodes. Program development in these cities is primarily geared to
controlling chronic air pollution.
*Pittsburgh was substituted for Indianapolis from ranking results showing
their approximate-equivalent potential.
1-2
-------
Table 1-1. City Summary of Planning
Activities and Program Development
AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL AGENCY
LEGISLATION, CODES,
OR REGULATIONS
ALERT CRITERIA
EMISSION INVENTORY
AIR QUALITY
MONITORING
METEOROLOGY
DATA PROCESSING
EMERGENCY ACTION OR
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC HEALTH (REPRESENTS BOSTON
APPROVAL SYSTEM AND SOME EMISSION
STANDARDS UTILIZED. EMERGENCIES
DECLARED BY HEALTH COMMISSIONER
WITH APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNOR.
CURRENTLY UNDEFINED, 0.5 ppm SO, HAS
BEEN CONS.IDERED 2
RECENTLY COMPLETED ON A SQUARE
MILE BASIS. PUBLICATIONS RELEASED
SEPTEMBER 16, 1968. DOES NOT CON-
SIDER EFFECTS OF CURTAILMENT OR
SHUTDOWN OF SOURCE EMISSIONS.
FIFTY SAMPLING STATIONS. MANUALLY
OPERATED. RECENT STUDY COMPLETED
ON AIR QUALITY. PUBLICATION RELEASED
SEPTEMBER 16, 1968.
APPF ADVISORIES USED. LOCAL
METEOROLOGY OBTAINED FROM LOGAN
AIRPORT PERSONNEL AND BLUEHILL
OBSERVATORY.
MANUAL-COLLECTION. SOME MACHINE
COMPUTATION OF COLLECTED DATA BY
SHARING DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR
VEHICLE COMPUTER.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS IDENTIFIED. DEVELOP-
MENT OF PLANS NOT YET COMPLETED.
CHICAGO
PERMIT SYSTEM AND SOME EMISSION
STANDARDS UTILIZED. DIRECTOR OF
DEPARTMENT HAS RESPONSIBILITY AND
AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT EMERGENCY
CONTROL ACTIONS.
FIRST LEVEL ALERT AT 0.3 ppm, 0.7 AT
ANY SINGLE STATION UNDER CONSIDER-
ATION CITY WIDE AVERAGE, OR 2ND OR
3RD LEVELS UNDEFINED.
COMPLETED AND COORDINATED WITH
PERMIT SYSTEM. DOES NOT CURRENTLY
CONSIDER TIMES OF WEEK OR YEAR, OR
BATCH VS. CONTINUOUS PROCESSES.
EIGHT CONTINUOUS TELEMETERED
SAMPLING STATIONS. TWENTY MANUAL
STATIONS.
HAS OWN METEOROLOGICAL CAPABILITY.
APPF ADVISORIES MONITORED.
AUTOMATIC PROCESSING FROM AIR
SAMPLING STATIONS. MODELLING
AND SIMULATIONS BEING DEVELOPED.
REAL TIME ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION.
INCIDENT CONTROL PLAN DEVELOPED.
SOME TESTS RUN TO DETERMINE EFFEC-
TIVENESS OF CONTROL ACTIONS.
CINCINNATI
PERMIT SYSTEM AND SOME EMISSION
STANDARDS UTILIZED. NO EMERGENCY
ACTION AUTHORITY OR RESPONSIBILITIES
DEFINED.
UNDEFINED
PARTIAL EMISSION INVENTORY OBTAINED.
EFFECTS DURING CURTAILMENT OR SHUT-
DOWN NOT CONSIDERED.
TEN STATIONS TOTAL. MAJORITY OF
CONTAMINANTS MEASURED AT ONLY
ONE LOCATION. MANUALLY OPER-
ATED.
NO LOCAL CAPABILITY; RELIES ON APPF
ADVISORIES AND PERSONNEL AT THE
NCAPC.
MANUAL
NONE. MOST WORK is DIRECTED TOWARD
CONTROLLING CHRONIC CONDITIONS.
CLEVELAND
PERMIT SYSTEM AND SOME EMISSION
STANDARDS UTILIZED. NO EMERGENCY
ACTION AUTHORITY OR RESPONSIBILITY
DEFINED.
UNDEFINED
ONLY A "SPOT BASIS" INVENTORY EXISTS.
HOPE TO OBTAIN A COMPLETE INVENTORY
IN THE FUTURE.
FEDERAL GRANT PROVIDES FOR THIRTY
SAMPLING STATIONS. TWENTY-ONE
ARE NOW IN OPERATION. MANUALLY
OPERATED.
USES ESSA METEOROLOGICAL SERVICES
FOR LOCAL DATA COLLECTION AND
EVALUATION.
MANUAL
NONE. MOST WORK IS DIRECTED TOWARD
CONTROLLING CHRONIC CONDITIONS.
LOS ANGELES
PERMIT SYSTEM AND EMISSION STANDARDS
UTILIZED. EMERGENCY ACTIONS ARE DE-
FINED. CONTROL OFFICER CALLS 1ST
STAGE ALERT; NEEDS COMMITTEE CONSENT
FOR 2ND ALERT AND GOVERNOR APPROVAL
FOR 3RD ALERT.
DEFINED IN TERMS OF CONCENTRATION
FOR CO, NOX, SO^, OZONE. THREE
LEVELS IDENTIFIED.
COMPLETED FOR MAJOR SOURCES. DOES
CONSIDER EFFECTS OF CURTAILMENT OR
SHUTDOWN, BATCH OR CONTINUOUS
PROCESS, AND TIME OF DAY, WEEK, OR
YEAR.
SEMIAUTOMATIC (AUTOMATIC RECORDING
BUT NOT NOW TRANSMITTED AUTOMATI-
CALLY). REQUIRES MINIMUM OF SIX
CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED STATIONS
MONITORING THE FOUR POLLUTANTS.
LOCAL CAPABILITY AND MONITORING
STATIONS PROVIDE FORECASTS. APPF
ADVISORIES NOT ALWAYS APPROPRIATE
BECAUSE OF COASTAL EFFECT.
MANUAL; COMPUTER CAPABILITY
AVAILABLE, BUT NOT FOR REAL TIME
DATA PROCESSING.
EMERGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS
ARE PUBLISHED. ALSO, INTERNAL
OPERATING PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN
DEFINED.
NEW JERSEY STATE DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC HEALTH (REPRESENTS JERSEY
CITY AND NEWARK)
PERMIT SYSTEM AND SOME EMISSION '
STANDARDS. STATE HAS LEGISLATION
FOR EMERGENCY CONTROLS. COM-
MISSIONER OF HEALTH NOTIFIES
GOVERNOR WHO MAY THEN DECLARE
AN EMERGENCY.
BASED ON DOSAGE OF SOj, OR CO,
SOILING INDEX AND METEOROLOGY.
FOUR ALERT LEVELS ARE: FORECAST,
ALERT, WARNING, AND EMERGENCY.
("STATUS CRITERIA")
INCOMPLETE EMISSION INVENTORY. IS
DESIRED ON STATE WIDE AND LOCAL
BASIS.
ONE PROCESSING STATION, FOUR
SAMPLING STATIONS AND THREE LABORA-
TORIES. FUTURE PLANS CALL FOR FOURTEEN
ADDITIONAL SAMPLE STATIONS AND ONE
ADDITIONAL LABORATORY. CONTINUOUS
AND TELEMETERED.
RELIES ON INPUTS FROM ESSA AND
WEATHER BUREAU PERSONNEL. APPF
ADVISORIES OBSERVED.
SAMPLING STATION DATA TELEMETERED
(ANALOG) TO PROCESSING STATION
FOR REAL TIME ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION,
EMERGENCY ACTION (IMPLEMENTATION)
PLAN BEING REVIEWED BY GOVERNOR.
IF APPROVED, WILL BECOME A CODE AND
IMPLEMENTED BY CONTROL DEPARTMENT.
COORDINATION WITH ISC ACCOMPLISHED.
NEW YORK
PERMIT SYSTEM UTILIZED. MAYOR'S
EXECUTIVE ORDER ESTA8LISHES EMERGENCY
CONTROL ACTIONS. DIRECTOR OF DEPART-
MENT NOTIFIES MAYOR WHO MAY THEN
DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. NEW CODE IN
PREPARATION.
BASED ON DOSAGE OF SOj, OR CO,
SOILING INDEX, AND METEOROLOGY.
FOUR LEVELS OF ALERT SIMILAR TO
NEW JERSEY.
COORDINATED WITH PERMIT SYSTEM.
DOES NOT CONSIDER EFFECT OF CURTAIL-
MENT OR SHUTDOWN, NOR TIME OF DAY
WEEK, OR YEAR.
THIRTY-EIGHT STATIONS. TEN OF THESE
WILL BE CONTINUOUS AND TELEMETERED.
LOCAL DATA COLLECTED AND SERVES TO
REFINE APPF ADVISORIES. HAVE STAFF
METEOROLOGIST.
AUTOMATIC PROCESSING OF TELEMETERED
SAMPLE STATION DATA FOR REAL TIME
ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION. SYSTEM
NOW IN CHECKOUT.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN BEING REVIEWED
PRIOR TO RELEASE. ACTIONS COORDINATED
WITH INTERSTATE SANITATION COMMISSION
PHILADELPHIA
NSTALLATION PERMITS AND SOME EMISSION
STANDARDS UTILIZED. A NEW CODE IS BEING
WRITTEN AND DUE FOR RELEASE SOON.
COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH MY DECLARE AN"
iWERGENCY STATUS.
NONE OFFICIALLY ADOPTED, BUT
CURRENTLY USE PROVISIONS OF STATE
REGULATION '5 WHICH IS SIMILAR TO
THE "STATUS CRITERIA".
HAS RECENTLY BEEN UPDATED FROM ONE
PERFORMED SEVERAL YEARS AGO. DOES
NOT CONSIDER BATCH VS. CONTINUOUS
PROCESS, NOR TIME Or DAY OR YEAR,
NOR EFFECT OF CURTAILMENT.
TWO STATIONARY AND ONE MO9ILE
SAMPLING STATIONS. SIX ME1.'/ PERMA-
NENT STATIONS PLANNED DURING THE
NEXT YEAR. MANUALLY OPERATED.
NO LOCAL FORECASTS. USE SERVICES
OF WEATHErt BUREAU PEOPLE AND APPF
ADVISORIES.
MANUAL; DESIRES AN AUTOMATIC SYSTEM.
NONE DEVELOPED YET, BUT PLANS ARE
BEING MADE TO PERFORM NECESSARY
V/ORK.
ALLEGHENY COUNTY
(REPRESENTS PITTSBURGH)
PERMIT SYSTEM AND EMISSION STANDARDS
UTILIZED. IN PROCESS OF ADOPTING NEW
REGULATION FOR EMERGENCY CRITERIA.
USE PROVISIONS OF STATE REGULATION
'5 (SIMILAR TO "STATUS CRITERIA")
UNTIL EMERGENCY CRITERIA LEVELS ARE
ADOPFED.
COMPLETED ON MAJOR SOURCES. DOES
NOT FULLY CONSIDER EFFECTS OF CUR-
TAILMENT, BATCH VS. CONTINUOUS
PROCESS, TIME OF DAY OR YEAR.
FORTY-FOUR MONITORING STATIONS
IN ALLEGHENY COUNTY. EIGHTEEN
OF THESE STATIONS WILL BF CONTINU-
OUS AND TELEMETERED.
LOCAL METEOROLOGIST COLLECTING
DATA TO PROVIDE REFINEMENTS ON
APPF ADVISORIES.
AUTOMATIC PROCESSING OF TELEMETERED
AIR QUALITY DATA. ALSO, EMISSION
INVENTORY, GENERAL ACCOUNTING...
ETC. BEING AUTOMATED.
NONE DEVELOPED YET, BUT PLANS BEING
MADE TO PERFORM NECESSARY WORK.
POSSIBLE CONTROL ACTIONS 3EING
IDENTIFIED.
1-3
-------
2.0 CRITERIA DEVELOPMENT AND RANKING PROCEDURE
2.1 EXISTING RANKING FOR CHRONIC POLLUTION
A ranking analysis, made before this report was compiled, was done by
the National Center of Air Pollution Control, and was based upon data from
the 65 standard metropolitan statistical areas with an industrial popula-
tion of .40,000 or more. The parameters were pollutant observations taken
by the National Air Sampling Network, and fuel use information provided by
the Bureau of the Census. The parameters were categorized in three broad
classifications:
(a) Suspended Particulates (measured concentrations)
(1) Arithmetic average - total particulates
(2) Standard geometric deviation - total particulates
(3) Arithmetic average - Benzene-soluble fraction
(b) Gasoline (calculated from fuel use data)
(1) Total consumption
(2) Density of automobile emissions
(c) Sulfur Dioxide
(1) Arithmetic average (measured concentration)
(2) Total emissions (calculated from fuel use data)
(3) Emission density (calculated from fuel use data)
Fuel use data were converted to emissions by the method of Ozalins.
The measured concentrations cover the time period from 1961 to 1965; fuel
use information is related to the 1960 census. The suspended particulate
standard geometric deviation was intended as an index of episode frequency.
Equal weight was given to each of the above eight parameters; for
each of these factors, a rank order was determined, from lowest (cleanest)
to highest (dirtiest), and a total score (the sum of the eight ranks) was
calculated for each SMSA.
Ozolins, G. and Smith, R., "Rapid Survey Techniques for Estimating Commu-
nity Air Pollution Emissions," U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, PHS No. 999-AP-29.
2-1
-------
The document itself points out several limitations: Variations in
kind and amount of pollutants from place to place and time to time; selec-
tion of pertinent parameters; some data are not available, and even those
available are not, in some cases, the most desirable; and because of the
way SMSA's are defined, the geographic basis for some of the information
does not coincide with a logical regional arrangement for study.
2.2 RANKING FOR EPISODE POTENTIAL
In order to determine the 10 most critical areas for this report, it
was decided to use available data on five of the NCAPC ranking factors and
to add two other parameters appropriate for episode emergencies. Five op-
tions or ranking methods were selected so the parameters could be weighted
to determine if any significant differences in results would occur with
different methods. The five options are presented in Figure 2-1.
2.2.1 METHOD I
NCAPC ranking factors of average total particulates, average benzene-
soluble fraction, average S0_ concentration, gasoline emission density, and
SO- emission density parameters were used. A new factor introduced was
total number of days of air pollution potential forecasts for 1963 to 1968
(APPF meteorological isolines, Figure 2-2). This factor was considered to
be a sturdier reflection of episode potential than the particulate geomet-
ric deviation; the other was population density (relative to the 1960
census), as an epidemiologic component. Values are shown in Table 2-1.
Rank scores were calculated in the same fashion as in the chronic
pollution ranking scheme with all factors equally weighted. Results of the
analysis are presented in Table 2-2.
2.2.2 METHOD II (See Table 2-3)
The average rank of predicted SO™ and gasoline emissions, average
rank of all measured pollutants (particulates, benzene-soluble fraction,
and SO- concentrations), rank of population density, and isolines rank were
included in this method.
2.2.3 METHOD III (See Table 2-4)
The average rank of all pollutants, population density rank, and
isolines rank were included in this method.
2-2
-------
OPTION I
*OPTION II
*OPTION III
*OPTION IV
OPTION V
Basic Data for 64 SMSA'S
Automotive
Emission
Density
X
S02
Emission
Density
X
«Y k
S02
Cone.
X
Particulate
Cone.
X
B-S Organic
Particulates
X
4 X fc
^ n p
4 v fc
X
X
«v ^
A W
X
4v ^
A P
Population
Density
X
X
X
X
X
Meteorology
X
X
X
X
X
Total
Para-
meters
Equally
Weighted
7
4
3
5
4
N)
Arrows indicate that parameters of the inclusive columns have been ranked, summed, and averaged to provide
a new single parameter for that ranking option.
Figure 2-1. Parameters in Various Ranking Options Using Common Basic Data
-------
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, URBAN AND RURAL IN THE UNITED STATES: 1960
URBAN POPULATION
URBANIZED AREAS
i . i —,-H .-j— ;H • T4 '
iJ>i -PI T'l.'l' s
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
2,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
250,000
50,000
•— 25,000-50,000
10,000-25,000
2,500-10,000
Places of 1,000-
2,500
Each dot represents
500 inhabitants
Prepared by Geography Division. Bureau of lh« Cenwt.U. S. Department of Commerce.
Subject data from the 1960 Cemu* of Population.
POPULATION DISTRIBUTION, URBAN AND RURAL, IN THE UNITED STATES: I960
-------
2.2.4 METHOD IV (See Table 2-5)
The SO emissions rank, average ranks of participate and benezene-
solubles, gasoline emissions rank, population density rank, and isolines
rank, were used in this method.
2.2.5 METHOD V (See Table 2-6)
The isolines, gasoline emissions density, S0~ emissions density, and
population density, were used in this method.
2.3 RESULTS
A composite of all give schemes indicated that the ten cities listed
below ranked most consistently among the ten highest scores:
Chicago
-=e>Boston *^
-=? Cincinnati \^
-~=? Cleveland ^^
—^ Indianapolis*^
Jersey City
.> Los Angelest^^"
Newark
New York
Philadelphia
2.3.1 PARAMETER EFFECT ON RANKING
To investigate the influence of each parameter upon overall rank, the
seven factors of Method I were examined by multiple correlation analysis,
with the factors as independent variables and overall rank as the dependent
variable. The analysis is presented in Table 2-7. Gasoline emissions
density carried the most weight (b1 = 1.144). The multiple regression
coefficient was 0.916 and the coefficient of determination 0.839, indicating
83.9 percent of the variation in overall rank to be attributable to the
variation in the parameter values.
2-5
-------
2.3.2 CLUSTER RELATIONSHIPS
The data were also examined by discriminant function analysis to
determine if there were "clusters" of cities having like relationships among
the factors. . Using gasoline emission density as an a_ priori basis for
classification, the cities were divided into five groups according to the
rank of gasoline emission density. The analysis revealed five cities to be
in one "cluster": St. Louis, New York, Newark, Chicago, and Philadelphia;
the other 59 all fell into a second "cluster". No further analysis or
interpretation of these results has been attempted.
2.3.3 SUGGESTED RANKING IMPROVEMENTS
Future ranking of SMSAs as to air pollution episode potential will be
helpful for comparing regions and for monitoring changes in chronic condi-
tions. However, if it is to be used, certain improvements are in order:
(a) The system should be dynamic. Current data should be used
whenever available.
(b) Population-dosage should be considered.
(c) Each parameter should be "normalized," (that is expressed
as a function of parameter mean and standard deviation) so
that ranking and other statistical treatment are performed
on data expressed in the same units of measurement. Much
of the bias to relative severity is circumvented by this
procedure.
(d) Before any scheme can stand as valid, its parameters must
be accurate and pertinent. Topography and proximity to
large bodies of water are important local factors not yet
considered directly in ranking.
2-6
-------
TABLE 2-1. DATA FOR PARAMETERS IN RANKING 64 SMSAs
S02 GASOLINE POPU-
SMSA EMISSION SALES LATIflN
DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
I03tons/mi2/yr I06gal/mi2/yr 1000/mi2
AKRON 0.39 0.57 1 .24
ALBANY TROY SCH
ALLENTOWM
ATLANTA
BALTIMORE
BIRMINGHAM
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
BUFFALO
CANTON
CHATTANOOGA
CHICAGO
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
COLUMBUS 0
DALLAS
DAYTON
DENVER
DETROIT
FLINT
FORT WORTH
GARY
GRAND RAPIDS
GREENSBORO
HARTFORD
HOUSTON
INDIANAPOLIS
JERSEY CITY
i KANSAS CITY
; LANCASTER
LOS ANGELES LOB
LOUISVILLE
MEMPHIS
MIAMI
0.02
0.12
..0..03
0.09
0.00
0,17
0.39
0.07
0.09
0.01
0.26
0.16
0.42
0.08
0.00
0.08
O.OO
O...JLO ...
0.02
0.00
0.36
• o.oo
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.24
2.00
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.30
0.08
0.00
0.09
0.14
0.27
0.27
0.24
...0 • 92.
1.37
0.27
0.22
0.12
0.51
. 0.5L
0.98
0.56
0.17
0.20
0.09
0.66
0.26
0.18
0.25
0.19
0.14
0^53
0.40
0.87
3.13
0.26
0.10
0.59
0.35
0.32
0.16
0.29
0.45
0~!95~
0.56
2,6_7 ...
2.08
0.82
0.59
0.27 .
1.67
K4_6_
2.61
1.27
0.29
0.53
0.25
dt~5~8 ~
0.35
0.61
0.42
0.37
1.02
0.72
1.73
13.57
0.63
0.29
1.39
0.79
0.83
0.45
SUSP.
PARTIC.
fjg/m
133.00
87.00
120.50
98. OO
141.00
141.00
.... 13.5_.£Q_.
93.00
126.00
158.00
181.00
154.00
134.00
113.00
100.00
125.00
148.00
143.00
92.00
104.00
151 .00
132.00
70.00
104.00
101.00
158.00
136. OO
139.50
108.00
145.50
152.00
112.00
59.00
ORGANICS
/ig/m
6.10
6.95
7.80
11.00
10.90
11.70
7.20
6.00
' 12.20
14.50
10.10
8.80
8.30
7.50
8.80
7.90
11.70
8.40
5.30
7.70
9.3^ _
7.20
6.30
7. 10
6.50
12.60
10.00
8.95
6.80
15. 5O
9.60
7.60
5.70
.AMR.
T <;n-
CONC. LINES
>ig/m3 Total APPF Days
58.00
110.50
1 8 .no
87.00
16.00
85.00
39.00
83.00
38.00
372.00
84. OO
92.00
13.00
5.00
40.00
55.00
27.00
32.00
5.00
R?. ^
60.00
41.00
81 -00
4.00
52.00
1 21 ,.00
4.00
97.00
65.00
58.00
23.00
17.00
21.00
31.00
55,00
31.00
50.00
R. 00
15.00
13.00
29.00
62.00
33..00
28. OO
23.00
29.00
0.00
28.00
2.00
1 1 -OO
6.00
0 .00
7. nO
5.00
35.00
Ift.OO
1.00
18.00
1 9. no
1.00
33.00
4?. on
28.00
15.00
0.00
TOTAL
SCORE
•*! s .so
120.00
224.00
318.50
234.50
^7.00
282.00
186.00
299.00
244.00
384.00
^14. SO
345.00
237.00
90.50
205.50
172.00
? 71 ,50
113.50
85.50
2^4.00
145.50
129.50
??4. SO
145.50
346.00
17A , so
182.00
178.00
309.50
202.00
OVER-
ALL
RANK
• ^3 . 00
8.00
32.00
24 00
55.00
35.00
SR. no
. 46 .00
21.00
49^00
38.00
63.00
S£ . nn
59.00
37.00
4.OO
28.00
18.00
44, no
7.00
3.00
4 1 00
12.50
10.00
"^ , 00
12.50
60.00
A2 . 00
20.00
19.00
S7 . nn
.51.00
26.50
MILWAUKEE
0.08
0.54
1.50
134.00
7.40
27.00
1.00
226.00
34.00
-------
TABLE 2-1. DATA FOR PARAMETERS IN RANKING 64 SMSAs (CONTINUED)
ro
oo
MJ.NNt.AP ST PAUL
NASHVILLE
MFWARK
NEW HAVEN
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
PATERSOW
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
PORTLAND ORE
PROVIDENCE
RFAOING
..RICHMOND.
ROCHESTER
ST LOUIS
SAN D.1EGD _.
S F OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
.SEATTLE
SPRINGFIELD WASS
SYRACUSE
JJQLED.O.... .
UTICA ROME
WASHINGTON
.MJCHITA
WILMINGTON
WORCESTER
YORK ._.
YOUNGSTOWN
0.08
0.03
0.1).
0.24
0.01
0.23
0.21
0.17
0.13
0 . 0 0
0.03
0.05
. 0.05
0.08
0.14
0.00
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.15
0.02
0.41
0.00
0.06
0.00
0.25
0.02
Q 0?
JJ • \J.£.
0.09
0.29
0 . 3 9
0.77
1.02
0.22
1.22
1.10
0.34
0.24
0.08
0.38
0 . 0 7
0.24
0.34
0.27
0.09
0.29
0.22
0.12
0.39
0.07
0.69
0.03
0.42
0.19
0.26
0.42
0 10
1 J • J. \J
0.16
0.70
0.75
?.41
1.56
0.77
4.97
2.77
1.22
0.78
0.22
1.28
0.31
0.56
0.87
0.64
0.24
0.84
0.49
0.26
1.11
0.23
1 .33
0.12
1.34
0.34
0.46
0.75
0.26
0.48
90.00
12H.OO
117.00
97.OO -
93.00
189.00
95.00
169.00
163 .00
108.00
107.00
125.00
98. OO
106 .00
139.00
89.00
80.00
104.00
76.00
71.00
129.00
105.00 -
105.00
104.00
96 .00
154.00
90.00
i 4- n no
148.00
6 . 50
11.90
9.80
7 . 30
9.70
13.60
6.90
10.70
10.70
9. 50
7.70
8.80
' 8 . 30
6.10
9.90
8.50
8.00
14.00
8.30
7.00
9 . 30
5 .60
7.00
9.40
5 . 20
10.20
8.20
8, 10.
10.50
28.00
34. 00
186.00
83.00
26.00
389.00
131.00
209.00
82.00
28, OO
117.00
1)4.00
68.00 . .
52.00
141.00
28.00
25.50
15.00
41.00
63.00
52.00
78.. 00
52.00
131.00
4.. 00
89.00
83.00
ay no
- - - - >• t: • A>A>- • •-—
79.00
0 . 00
31.00
19.00
1-3.00
9.00
15.00
22.00
23.00
38.00
-..A ft. .00 _
8.00
32.00
1H.0O -
13.00
9.00
31,00-
68.00
6.00
15,00
18.00
16.00
j c rv/j
16.00
31.00
-0-.-0Q
25.00
12.00
"•i L. nn
29.00
lAl^QO-
265.00
332.50
;*67-,.^()
158.00
392.00
-295.50 -
350.00
317.50
1^8 ,-5 O--
235.00
223.50
) 94.0O
194.00
280.50
....j_2 -3-^00
201.00
147.00
-44 1-. OO -
217.50
160.50
? 5 5 5 n
fc-,^ — ' • -F V
106.50
298.00
c 7 nn
299.50
202.00
^ 1 A S/l
263.50
14-.00 i
42.00
56.00
4^., &Q-
15.00 1
64.00 ;
A7.OO i
61.00
54.00
1 ^ QQ
36.00
31.00
. . 22-,.!ifl .. ..
22.50
^5.00
QT0£.
25.00
14.00
&.OO
3O.OO
17.00
•aq nn
19 ^ m \r\j
5.00
48.00
2 00
50.00
26.50
p Q OO
40.00
-------
TABLE 2-2. RANK SCORES
NJ
v£>
S02
SMSA EMISSION
DENSITY
AKkON
ALBANY TROY SCH
ALLENTOWN
ATLANTA
BALTIMORE
BIRMINGHAM
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
BUFFALO
CANTON
CHATTANOOGA
CHICAGO
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
COLUMBUS 0
DALLAS
DAYTON
I.1FNVER
LlFTkOlT
FLINT
FORT WORTH
GARY
GRAND RAPIDS
GREENSBORO
HARTFORD
HOUSTON
INDIANAPOLIS
JERSEY CITY
KANSAS CITY
LANCASTER
LOS ANGELES LOB
LOUISVILLE
MEMPHIS
MIAMI
MILWAUKEE
6 1 . 00
23.00
45.00
26.00
4J,00
13.00
50.00
60.00
33.00
42.00
16.00
57.00
49.00
63.00
35.00
1.00
37.00
12.00
43.00
17.00
2.00
59.00
11.00
10.00
27.00
32.00
54.00
64.00
28.00
15.00
21.00
58.00
38.00
7.00
39.00
GASOLINE
SALES
DENSJTY
52.00
7.00
12.00
32.00
25.00
58.00
63.00
31.00
22.00
10.00
48.00
47.00
59.00
51.00
16.00
20.00
6.00
54.00
29.00
17.00
27.00
19.00
13.00
49.00
44.00
57.00
64.00
30.00
8.00
53.00
40.00
37.00
14.00
50.00
POPU-
LATION
__DENSJJY. ..
46.00
10.00
17.00
26.00
42 .00
24.00
61.00
58^00
38.00
27.00
55.00
52.00
60.00
47.00
11.00
5.00
57.00
25.00
14.00
28.00
16.00
15.00
43.00
32.00
56.00
64.00
29.00
9.00
51.00
37.00
39.00
18.00
53.00
SUSP. B-SC1L.
PARTIC. ORGANICS
40.50
6.00
33.00
16.50
49.50
49.50
44.00
11,50
36.00
59.50
.. - 63.0.0
57.50
40.50
42,50
31.00
18.00
3_4_,50
53.50
51.00
'"" 21.50
55.00
39.00
2.00
21.50
19.00
59.50
45.00
28.50
52.00
56.00
30.00
1.00
42.50
31.50
6.50
13.00
25.00
.55.00
54.00
56.50
. 17.50
5.00
59.00
63.00
49.00
37.00
31 .50
21.00
37.00
26.00
56. bO
34.00
2.00
23.50
41.00
IJ.. 50
8.00
16.00
9.50
60.00
48.00
_3_9.00
11.00
64.00
44.00
22.00
4.00
20.00
AMB.
S02
.CONC.
43.50
.. 31.50 ..
54.00
10.00
48.00
H.OO
53.00
. . 47.0.0...
72.00
43.50
21.00
63.00
46.00
50 . Ml _
6.00
4. 50
23.00
30 .00
14. tO
19.00
:4.50
41.00
33.00
24. 50
39.00
2.00
27.50
57.00
--2.0.Q. ...
52.00
35.00
31.50
11.00
9.00
14.50
I sn-
LINES. . .
41.00
36. an
50 . 00
62.00
.50... DO..
61.00
14.50
25. 00
21.00
46.00
63.00
'b^.50
43.00
38.50 ..
46.00
3.0-0
43.00
9.00
IH. no
11.5.0.,-
3.00
13.00
10^0 .
57.00
29.00
. 7^.0.0. ._..
32.00
34.50
54.50
59.00
43.00
25.00
3.00
7.00
TOTAL
..JiCDRE.
315.50
_ .120.1)0
224.00
197.50
318.50.. . .
734.50
337.00
186.00
299.00
244.011
3K4.00
31.4.50
737.00
90.50
...205.5.0 ...
I 77 . 00
771.50
1 1 1.SO
85.50
264.00
_1 4.5...5.Q- .
1.29.50
724.50
346.00
376.50
1.82,. 0.0
17H.OO
335.00
202.00
56.00
776.00
I1VF.R-
ALL
RANK _ .
53.00
.. H.OO . ...
32.00
24.00
55.00
35.00
58.00
. . 46.0Q
21.00
49.00
.38.00 ....
63.00
52.00
.... 59.00
37.00
7R.OO
IP. 00
44 . 00
7, no
3.00
41.00
10.00
33.00
i 7-sn
60.00
62.00
?n,oo
19.00
57.00
26.50
1.00
-------
TABLE 2-2. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
N>
SMSA
.JHfM£AP_ST £A1U
NASHVILLE
NEWARK
NFW HAVFN
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
-EAIE&SON
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
-PORTLAND Jl.R.F.
PROVIDENCE
READING
_ R ICJiMDND ....
ROCHESTER
ST LOUIS
SAN DiEan
S F OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
SFATJL£— .. ...
SPRINGFIELD MASS
SYRACUSE
TOLEDO
UTICA ROME
WASHINGTON
WICHITA
WILMINGTON
WORCESTER
YORK
YOUNGSTOWN
S02 GASOLINE
FMT SSION SA1 F$
DENSITY DENSITY
36.00
24.00
44.00
55.00
14.00
53.00
.5Z.O.O
51.00
46.00
.4..00...__
25.00
30.00
?9.nn
34.00
47.00
•5.00
18.00
3.00
_.. -.-..a. oo — —
48.00
20.00
62-00
9.00
31.00
6. OO
56.00
22.00
19.00
40.00
36.00
43.00
56.00
60.00
23.00
62.00
61.00
39.00
24.00
4.00
41.00
2.00
26.00
38.00
34.00
5^Qll
35.00
21.00
11.00
42.00
3.00
55.00
1.00
45.00
18.00
28.00
46 . 00
9.0.1)
15.00
POPII-
-LATION
DENSITY
31.00
33.00
59.00
54 00
35.00
63.00
62.00
45.00
36.00
2.0Q
48.00
12.00
23.00
41 .00
30.00
4.00- -
40.00
21 .00
7.00
44.00
3 . 00
49.00
1.00
50.00
13.00
19.00
34.00
6.00
20.00
SUSP.*..
PART 1C. r
..—.8.50
37.00
32.00
15.00
11.50
64.00
13 .00
6 2 . 00
61.00
28.50
27.00
34.50
16.50
26.00
46.00
7.00
5.00
21.50
4.0O
3.00
38.00
24.50
24.50
21.50
14.00
57.50
a. 50
48.00
53.50
B-SOL.
9.50
58.00
46.00
19.00
45.00
61.00
12.00
52.50
52.50
43.00
23.50
37.00
31.50
6.50
47.00
35.00
27.00
62.00
31. 50
14.50
40.00
3.00
14.50
42.00
] .00
30.00
24.00
2H.UO
51.00
Af-iB.
SU2
CONC.
. 17.00
20.00
61.00
43. .50.
13.00
64.00
58.50
62.00
4O.OO
17..UO
56.00
55.00
36. OO
27.50
60.00
1 7 1111
12.00
7.00
24.50
34.00
27.50
37.00
27.50
58.50
2.00
^9.00
43.50
50 . 5ft
38.00
. -.. 1 SO"-
•LINES
. ...3.0O. .
50.00
34.50
21.00
16.50
25.00
37.00
3 ft . 5 n
58.00
60.00
: 14.50
53.00
3?. no
21.00
16.50
- -• so. on
' 64.00
11.50
2-5,-on
32.00
29.00
2^, 00
29.00
50.0O
3 -On
40.00
1.9. 00
^ 6 . 0 0
46.00
T'UAL
SCORF
I4i.no
265.00
332.50
267, 5fJ
158.00
392. OO
295.50
35(i.0'i
317.50
158.50
235.00
223.50
_194,00
194.00
280.50
123 OO
201.00
147.00
-14 1.4)0 —
217.50
160.50
2^5 50
106.50
298.00
57,00
299.50
202.00
216*50
263.50
ALL - -
RAi-IK
junn ...
42.00
56.00
43, no
15.00
64.00
47.no
6 1 . on
54. Of)
16.iUi-
36.00
31.00
22.50
22.50
45.00
9 OO
25.00
14.00
<».~OO
30. no
17.00
39 j. 00
5.00
48.00
-> ()Q
50.00
26.50
^ 9 OO
40.00
-------
TABLE 2-3. RANK SCORES
SMSA
AKRON
ALBANY TROY SCH
ALLENTOWN
ATLANTA .
BALTIMORE
BIRMINGHAM
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
BUFFALO
CANTON
CHATTANOOGA
CHICAGO
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
COLUMBUS 0
DALLAS
DAYTON
DENVER
DETROIT
FLINT
FORT WORTH
GARY
GRAND RAPIDS
GREENSBORO
HARTFORD
HOUSTON
INDIANAPOLIS
JERSEY CITY
KANSAS CITY
LANCASTER
LOS ANGELES LOB
LOUISVILLE
MEMPHIS
MIAMI
MILWAUKEE
MINNEAP ST PAUL
NASHVILLE
NEWARK
. NEW HAVEN
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
PATERSON
S+G DENS
57.50
16.50
25.50
27.50
37.50
20.00
55.00
63.00
29.50
29.50
14.00
54.00
50.00
62.00
45.50
4.00
25.50
5.00
51.00
21.00
6.50
45.50
16.50
10.00
41.00
41.00
56.00
64.00
27.50
10.00
37.50
52.00
39.00
8.00
47.00
35.50
32.00
53.00
59.50
19.00
59.50
57.50
P+0+S02
41.00
7.50
36.00
10.50
56.00
39.00
58.50
22.00
17.50
61.00
52.50
62.00
43.00
44.00
12.00
14.00
27.50
50.00
35.00
4.00
9.00
48.00
32.00
5.00
23.00
3.00
52.50
54.00
30.00
34.00
55.00
47.00
17, 50
1.00
24.00
6.00
40.00
49.00
25.00
21.00
64.00
27.50
POP DENS
46.00
10.00
1.7.00
26.00
' 42.00
24.00
61.00
58.00
.... 38^00
27.00
8.00
55.00
52.00
60.00
47.00
11.00
22.00
. -5,00
57.00
25.00
. 14.00
28.00
16.00
15,00
43.00
32.00
56.00
64.00
29.00
9.00
51 .00
37.00
39,00
18.00
53.00
31.00
33.00
59.00
54.00
35.00
63.00
62.00
ISOLINES
41.00
36.00
50.00
62.00
50.00
61.00
14.50
25.00
46.00
63.00
54.50
43.00
38.50
46. 00
3.00
43 . 00
. 9.00
18. 0()
11.50
._3.00
13.00
10.00
57.00
29.00
7.00
.. . 32.00
34.50
7.00
54.50
59.00
43.00
. 25. W . .
3.00
7.00
3.00
50.00
34.50
^1,00
16.50
25.00
37.00
SCORE
185.50
70.00
_JL28.»5.0 .
126.00
185.50
1 44 . OJj . _
189.00
168.00
106.00
163.50
137.50
225.50
188.00
204.50
150.50 .
32.00
118.00
69,0.0 „
161.00
61.50
..32.50
134.50
74.50
... 87.00..
136.00
83.00
.196^50 .
216.50
93.50
107 _.5i>
202.50
179.00
-120.30
30.00
131.00
155.00
195.50
91.50
211.50
184.00
RANK
52. 50
10.00
25.50.-. _
28.00
52. 50
.. 3.9.00...... ... . . ._.._
56.00
48.00
20.00
47. (10
37.00
. 64.QO .... . _.-
55.00
' 61.00
41.00
3.on
25.00
8.00
45.00
7.00
4.00
34.00
11.00
1 6.00
36.00
15.00
59.00
63.00
18.00
21. 50
60.00
49.00
26.00
1 .00
31.00
1 2 . (10
43.00
58.00
44.00
17.00
62.00
51.00
-------
TABLE 2-3. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
I
M
N3
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
PORT! AND flHF
:B8*l8fP-
ROCHESTER
ST LOUIS
SAN nipr,n
$ f OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
SEATTI F
SPRINGFIELD MASS
SYRACUSE
TOLEDO
UTICA ROME
WASHINGTON
UITHITA
WILMINGTON
WORCESTER
YORK
YOUNGSTOWN
48.50
34.00
31.00
18. OO
35.50
43.00
?. in
22.OO
12.50
ft, sn
48.50
10.00
M .no
2.50
41.00
1 2, m
44.00
33.00
23.50
63.00
58.50
1] .nn
38. OO
45.50
15.50
57.00
7.50
33.00
10.50
37.00
i q.nn
20.00
42.00
2 nn
60.00
26.00
51.00
45.00
36.00
2 ,pn
*8i.OO
12.00
41.00
30.00
40.00
21.00
7.00
44.00
3.00
1.00
50.00
13 . 00
19.00
34.00
20.00
38.50
58.00
An nn
14.50
53.00
21.00
16.50
in nn
64.00
11.50
32.00
29.00
2i, nn
29.00
50.00
3 4.00
40.00
19.00
46. OO
195.00
186.50
O A O O
131.50
128.50
107 10
113.00
146.50
A 9 ^o
133.50
78.00
14.00
135.00
79.00
52.50
183.00
30 50
163.00
112.00
122^.50
140.50
57.00
54.00
19 00
32.00
29.50
21. 10
24.00
40.00
9 00
33.00
13.00
35.00
14.00
42 On
5.00
50.00
•} r»n
46.00
23.00
27.ofi
38.00
-------
TABLE 2-4. RANK SCORES
SMSA
AKRON
ALBANY TROY SCH
ALLENTOWN
ATLANTA
BALTIMORE
BIRMINGHAM
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
BUFFALO
CANTUM
CHATTANOOGA
CHICAGO
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
COLUMBUS 0
DALLAS
DAYTON
DENVER
DETROIT
FLINT
FORT WORTH
GARY
GRAND RAPIDS
GREENSBORO
HARTFORD
HOUSTON
INDIANAPOLIS
JERSEY CITY
KANSAS CITY
LANCASTER
LOS ANGELES LOB
LOUISVILLE
MEMPHIS
MIAMI
MILWAUKEE
MINNEAP ST PAUL
NASHVILLE
NEWARK
NEW HAVEN
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
PATERSON
POL INDEX
53.00
6.00
33.00
16.00
52.00
30.00
60.00
46.00
20.00
51.00
38.00
62.00
47.00
58.00
27.00
7.50
25.00
34.00
42.50
9.00
4.00
48.00
19.00
3.00
31.00
13.50
59.00
63.00
28.00
17.50
50.00
54.00
23.00
1.00
36.00
15.00
40.00
56.00
41.00
13.50
64.00
42.50
POP DENS
46.00
10.00
17.00
26.00
42.00
24.00
61.00
58.00
38.00
2 7 . 00
8.00
55.00
52.00
60.00
47.00
11.00
22.00
5.00
57.00
25.00
14.00
28.00
16.00
15.00
43.00
32.00
56.00
64.00
29.00
9,00
51.00
37.00
39.00
18.00
53.00
31.00
33.00
59.00
54.00
35.00
63.00
62.00
ISOL INES
41.00
36.00
50.00
62.00
50.00
61 .00
14.50
25.00
21 .00
46.00
63.00
54.50
43.00
38.50
46.00
3.00
43 .00
9.00
18.00
11.50
3.00
13.00
10.00
57,00
29.00
7.00
32,00
34.50
7.00
54.50
59.00
43.00
25.00
3.00
7.00
3^00
50.00
34.50
21 .00
16.50
25.00
.3.7.00
SCORE
140.00
52.00
IQQ,_QO
104.00
144.00
115.0Q
1.35.50
129.00
79. .00
124.00
109.00
171.50
142.00
156.50
1 20 . 00
•21. SO
90.00
48,00
117.50
45.50
21.00
89.00
45.00
75 .00
103.00
52.50
J.47.00
161.50
64.00
J11..00
160. OO
134.00
87.00
22.00
96.00
49.0Q
123.00
149.50
116.00
65 .00
152.00
141.50
RANK
51.00
12.00
31.50
36.00
bS.no
4(1.00
50.00
4H.OO
2Q.5Q
47.00
• 37.00
64. Of
53.00
61.00
45.00
3.00
27.00
9 .OO
44.00
H.OO
2.00
26.00
7.00
„ 19.00
35.00
13.00
58.00
63.00
16 .OO
.. 22.00
62.00
49/00
25.00
4.00
29.00
....LU.Q.O
46.00
59.00
....42.00
17.00
60.00
-------
TABLE 2-4. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
I
I-1
-f>
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
fROVIOtNCE
READING
ROCHESTER
ST LOUIS
S F OAKLAND
SAN JOSE
SFATTl F
SPRINGFIELD MASS
SYRACUSE
UTICA ROME
WASHINGTON
WICHITA
WILMINGTON
WORCESTER
YOUNGSTOWN
61.00
49.00
37.00
35.00
?*.nn
22.00
55.00
">_nn
12.00
17.50
_LO_QO
26.00
21.00
^9.00
7.50
45.00
?rnn
57.00
29.00
32.nn
44.00
45.00
36.00
2rO<">
48.00
12.00
P^.OO
41.00
30.00
-_4._£}Q._. ..
40.00
21.00
7..J10
44.00
3.00
49, nn
1.00
50.00
l^.nn
19.00
34.00
.6.00
20.00
38.50
58.00
#,n .nn
14.50
53.00
-32.00
21,00
16.50
*sn,nn
64.00
11.50
--.25-00.- _
29.00
2_5-^OQ_. .. ..
29.00
50.00
.. -3,00
40.00
19.00
... 56.00 . .
46.00
144.50
143.00
73 .00
99.50
100.00
7Q.nn
84.00
101.50
SQ.OO
116.00
50.00
4.2^00
102.00
53.00
m.no
37.50
145.00
.. is^oo.
116.00
82.00
..-94.. no
110.00
56.00
54.00
18 .00
30.00
31.50
20.50
24.00
33.00
-1-5-.00- -
11.00
- -.. .6.00
34.00
14.00
39.00
57.00
_ -. 1.00 .-
4?. 00
23.00
2K.OO
38.00
-------
TABLE 2-5. RANK SCORES
N3
I
SMSA
AKRON
v ALBANY TROY SCH
AtLENTOHN
ATLANTA
BALTIMORE
BIRMINGHAM
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
BUFFALO
CANTON
CHATTANOOGA
CHICAGO
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
COLUMBUS 0
DALLAS
DAYTON
DENVER
DETROIT
FLINT
FORT WORTH
GARY
GRAND RAPIDS
GKcE^SBORO
hARTcORD
HOUSTON
INDIANAPOLIS
JERSEY CITY
KANSAS CITY
LANCASTER
LOS ANGELES LOB
LOUISVILLE
MfMPHIS
MIAMI
MILWAUKEE
MINNEAP ST PAUL
NASHVILLE
NEWARK
NEW HAVE*
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
PATERSON
S02
54.00
37.00
50.50
15.50
45.00
6.50
53.00
57.50
28.00
A3. 00
18.00
63.00
48.00
61.00
19.00
1.00
31.00
20.00
30.00
15.50
2.00
52.00
21.50
14.00
35.00
13.00
40.00
64.00
10.150
36.00
29.00
46. SO
24. QO
5.00
26.00
25.00
21.50
55. 5O
49*00
9.00
62.00
59.00
P+0
37.00
4.00
24.00
21.00
53.50
52.00
51.00
11.00
20.00
61.00
64.00
55.00
40.00
38.00
27.50
29.00
32.00
57.00
44.00
3.00
23.00
49.00
30.50
2.00
16.50
10.00
62.00
46.50
45.00
19.00
60.00
50.00
2 /.50
1.00
33.00
7.00
48.00
41.50
14.00
30.50
63.00
8.00
GAS
52.00
'7.00
12.00
32.00
33.00
25.00
58.00
63.00
31.00
22.00
10.00
48.00
47.00
59.00
_ __51.»00_
16.00
20.00
6.0Q
54.00
29.00
A7iflO
27.00
19.00
13.00
49.00
44.00
57.00
64.00
30.00
8 ,no
53.00
40.00
37.00
14.00
50.00
36.00
43.00
56. OO
. 60.00 .
23.00
62.00
61.00
POP DENS
46.00
10.00
17.00
26.00
42.00
24.00
61.00
58.00
38.00
27.00
8.00
55»00
52.00
60.00
47,00 .
11.00
22.00
.. 5.00.
57.00
25.00
14.00
28.00
16.00
15,00
43.00
32.00
56tOO
64.00
29.00
9.00
51.00
37.00
39.00
18.00
53.00
31.00
33.00
59.00
54.00
35.00
63.00
62.00
ISOLINES
41.00
36.00
50.00
62.00
50.00
61,00
14.50
25.00
.... 21..Q&
46 .HO
63.00
54JL50...
43.00
38 . 50
46.00
3.00
43.00
9..QO.
18.00
11.50
3.00
13.00
10.00
57,00
29.00
7.00
32_»QQ .
34.50
7.00
5.4. 5Q
59.00
43.00
25 .DO
3.00
7.00
3.00
50.00
34.50
21.00
16.50
25.00
37.00
SCORF
230.00
84.00
L53-*iO
156.50
223.50
168..50
237.50
214.50
.138.00 ...
199.00
163.00
275..5Q
230.00
256.50
19Q.5Q....
60.00
148.00
97.UO-
203.00
«4.00
59.110
169.00
97.00
101.00
172.50
106.00
247.00
273.00
121.50
176.50
252.00
216.50
152..M1
41.00
169.00
10?. 00
195.50
246.50
198.00
114.00
275.00
227.00
RANK
54.50
7.50
29.00
30 . oo
51.00
34.50
56.00
4R. 00
.21.00 ... _
46. OO
3?. 00
64.00 .
54.50
61.00
. 42. oa
4. OO
26.00
LQ. 5.0
47.00
7.50
3.QO
36.50
10.50
14.00
38.50
16.00
59.00
6?. 00
19.00
60.00
49.00
j>a._Q.a
1.00
36.50
15.00
43.00
58.00
44.00
18.00
63.00
53.00
-------
TABLE 2-5. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
NJ
I
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
ffjTi 4Nr> nop
0V10ENCE ~-M .'A'"'....
... ADH* -yfcif-
•:uik*IEH»lf1*in- •"" '•-%•; - ".•••
ROCHESTER
ST LOUIS
<;»N nipr,n
'""" S f OAKLAND t .
SAN JOSE
XF4TTIF
SPRINGFIELD MASS
SYRACUSE
TDLFfin
UTICA ROME
WASHINGTON
Ullf HITA
WILMINGTON
WORCESTER
YOUNGSTOWN
60.00
44.00
A. sn
39.00
42.00
•«-nn
32.00
57.50
«,r»n
10.50
4.00
i p. no
41.00
23.00
sn.sn
17.00
46.50
3. pn
55.50
34.00
3.7. QO
38.00
59.00
58.00
•*«;, "in
26.00
35.50
P5.nn
13.00
46.50
2?. 00
12.00
43.00
i t;Tno
6.00
41.50
q.on
18.00
34.00
5.00
56.00
16.50
3 a. oo
53.50
39.00
24.00
L. ,pn
41.00
2.00
?A.nn
38.00
34.00
* .00
35.00
21.00
11 .00
42.00
3.00
".GO
1.00
45.00
la.on —
28.00
46.00
9. DO
15.00
45.00
36.00
2 00
48.00
12.00
??,nn
41.00
30.00
4.00
40.00
21.00
7.00
44.00
3.00
4. Q . nn
1.00
50.00
13-. OO
19.00
34.00
.. 6.00
2O .OO
38.50
58.00
60 00
14.50
53.00
^2 .OO
21.00
16.50
50 . 00
64.00
11.50
- 2&.00
32.00
29.00
... . 2!i»00
29.00
50.00
a»oa-_
40 .00
10.00
56.QO— -
46 .00
241.50
220.00
10R 00
168.50
144.50
13Q.OO
145.00
184.50
.- - 89.00 -
161.50
100.50
70.00
165.00.
99 . 50
Ififi. 5O
66.00
225. 50
42.00
19H.50
149. 50
1 4-7 OO
172.50
57'. 00
50 . 00
1 7 00
34.50
23.00
'?. 00
24.00
40.00
. .9^00-. —.
31.00
13.00
6.00
33.0O
12.00
. 4;i,oa
5.00
52. 00
? . OA .
4-5.00
27 . 00
25.00. -
3 « . S 0
-------
TABLE 2-6. RANK SCORES
N>
SUBJECT ISOLlNcS
AKRON 41*000
ALBANY TROY SCH
A4rtENTQWN
ATLANTA
BALTIMORE
-_ W*MWGHA*~--
BOSTON
BRIDGEPORT
RUFF Al n
CANTON
CHATTANOOGA
e+HCAGO --
CINCINNATI
CLEVELAND
€OLUM«US O—
DALLAS
DAYTON
DENVER
DETROIT
FL INT
£ORT- WORTH—
36.000
50-»O0e-
62.000
150.000
6-trOOO
14.500
25.000
24,000
46.000
63.000
54»50O
43.000
38.500
46*000
3.000
43.000
<.^r«OO
1P.OOO
U .500
- 3-ireM'-
GAS. DENS
52.000
6.000
-12.5O0-.
32.500
32.500
25.00O
58.000
63.000
32.5OO
22.000
10.500
47.500
47.500
59.000
51.000
If., TOO
20.000
&.OOO
5'foOOO
39.000
17.000
S02 DENS
60.500
20.000
45.00O
25.500
41.000
7.000
50.500 ..
60.500
32.500
41.000
15.000
57.000
49.000
63.000
36.500
7.000
36.500
7.0OO
43.000
20.000
7.000
POP DENS
46'. 000
10.000
17.500
26.500
42.000
23.500
61.000
58.000
38.000
26.500
8.000
55.000
52.000
60.000
47.000
10.000
22.000
5.000
57.000
?.:• .000
1--.000
i , * -• 0
220.50
180.50
36.00
121.50
27. OO
172.00
85.50
41. 0^
RANK
57.50
12.00
30.00
39.00
44.00
25.00
0.00
'.00
.00
-J.OO
62.00
55.00
63.00
50.00
2.00
27.50
1 . 00
46.00
14.00
4.00
-------
TABLE 2-6. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
GARY
GRAND RAP 10$
HARTFORD
HOUSTON
JERSEY CITY
KANSAS CITY
tANC ASTER '
LOS ANGELES
LOUISVILLE
MIAMI
MILWAUKEE
13.000
10.000
57.000
29.000
7.000
32.000
34.500
7.000
54r5OO
59.000
43.000
3.000
7.000
27.000
18.500
49.000
44.000
5r;OOO
64.000
29.000
friSOO
53.000
40.000
37.OOO
14.500
50.000
59.000
7.000
• T-.OOO
25.500
32.500
54.500
64.000
28.000
15.000
20.000
58.000
36. 500
7.000
36.500
28.000
16.000
43.000
32.000
56.000
64.000
29.000
10.000
51.000
37.000
39.000
17.500
53.000
127.00 32.00
51.50 8.00
91.50 18.00
146.50 39.00
115.50 24.00
199.50 57.50
226.50 64.00
93.00 19.00
88.00 15.00
i 183.00 51.00
178.00 49.00
00 FiLPirrtl a ZS.OOO -37iOOO 36.500 39.000 137.50 36.00
42.00 6.00
146.50 39.00
-------
l-o
I
SUBJECT
NINMCAP.ST PAUL
. UA4HVI 1 1 f *
NEWARK
NEN HAVEN
NEW ORLEANS
NEW YORK
PATERSON
PHILADELPHIA
PITTSBURGH
PORTLAND ORE
pfifiv i nFNr F
READING
RICHMOND
RnrwFr TFH
ST LOUIS
SAN DIEGO
«TF flAK 1 AMD
SAN JOSE
SEATTLE
SPRINGFIELD MASS
SYRACUSE
TOLEDO
ISOLINES
3.000
50 000
34.500
21.000
i & ft fin
25.000
37.000
-in enn
58.000
60 .OOO
i & &nn
53.000
32.000
C X • \J\J\J
16.500
50.000
A 4 nnn
11.500
25.000
T1 nnn
29.000
25.000
TABLE 2-6.
f-»c ncuc cro? nFMI
35.500 36.500
56.000
60.000
62.000
61.000
->n cnn
25.000
4.000
2.500
25.000
32.500
6.000
— 35*5Oe
22.000
10.500
2.500
55.000
44.000
54.500
IrS.OOO-
53.000
52.000
" ~ 9\J v 3^ WT~
46.000
7.000
25.500
29.500
29.500
47.000
7.000
2O.OOO
7.000
7.000
20.000
62.000
RANK SCORES (CONTI
prip riFMC
31.000
J 3 . *r\f\J
59.000
54.000
63.000
62.000
45^000 -
36.000
2.000
48. OOO
12.000
23.500
41.000
30.000
4.000
40-iOOO
21.000
6.500
3.000
49.000
S€0ftE
106.00
151.50
193.50
189.50
88.50
203.00
212.00
172.50
165.00
73.00
129.00
97.00
110.00
137.00
126.00
67.00
159.50
61.50
49.00
166.5O-
54.50
191.00
RANK
22.00
41.0?
56.00
53.00
16.00
59.00
61.00
47.00
43.00
13.00
33.00
21.00
23.00
35.00
31.00
11.00
42.00
10.00
7.00
45.00
9.00
54.00
-------
NJ
o
TABLE 2-6. RANK SCORES (CONTINUED)
^S^,Gfiy:::':
WICHITA
NOftCESTER
YORK
cv.wvu —
50.000
3.000
.uuu
19.000
56.000
A/, nnn
• i.uuu •
45.5OO
18.500
2 7. UUU
45.500
8.500
31.000
7.000
96.000
20.000
20.000
-^ 1 — «WWV
1 .UUU
50.000
13.000
33.500
6.500
-38. OO-
176.50
41.50
144. OO "
118.00
91.00
12ti30 —
••• — 3-.oir
48.00
5.00
— 37;OO
26.00
17.00
27.50
-------
TABLE 2-7. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL AIR POLLUTION EPISODE INDICATORS
I
N>
NUMBER OF VARIABLES ~
Q
NUMBER OF SUBJECTS7*" 64
MEANS
c T A kin A o n
CORRELAT
ROM
2
3
5
6
7, ,
8
MULTIPLE
VARIABLE NO.
VARIABLE NO.
VARIABLE NO*
VARIABLE NO.
VARIABLE NO.
VARIABLE NO.
VARIABLE NO.
0 130
DEVIATIONS
0.264
ION MATRIX
1
0.868
0.908
0.068
0.255 ,
0.465
^~SQUAgf - 0
1 - S02 EMIS. DENSITY
2 - GAS SALE DENSITY
3 _ pop DENSITY
4 - SUSP.PARTIC.
5 - B-SOL.ORGANICS
7 - ISOLINES
8 - OVERALL RANK
n A i a
0.456
2
0.868
1.000
0.939
0. 140
0.113
0.334
0.553
.838967?
41 R^
1.777
3
0.908
0.939
1.000
Oil 92
0.157
0.362
• 05?
0.477
28.236
.
0.202
0.140
0.192
1.000
0.679
0.435
0 . 194
0.665
2.300
5
0 .OlSfl
0.113
0.157
0.679
1.000
0.282
0.308
0.523
70.371
6
0.255 '
0.334
0.362
" O.435 "
0.282
1.000
0.083
0.616
15.412 18.618
7 8
-0.033 U.465
-0.091 0.553-
-0.052 0.477.
0. Ivf 0 . 66b-r
0.308 0.523
0.083 0.616-
1 .000 (1. 293
fl.293 1.000
MULTIPLE R = 0.9159515
-------
TABLE 2-7. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL AIR POLLUTION EPISODE INDICATORS (CONTINUED)
D.F.I = 7
D.F.2 = 56
F FOR ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE ON R =
VARIABLE
1 S02 DENS.
2 GAS. SALES DENS.
3 POP. DENS.
4 SUSP. PART.
5 B-S ORG.
S02 CONC.
ISOLINES
41.67928
BETA WEIGHT
0.1838044
1.1435866
-0.9603976
0.4027589
0.1033049
0.3128788
0.2175443
SQUARED BETA WEIGHT
0.0337840
1.3077901
0.9223634
0.1622147
0.0106719
0.0978931
0.0473255
B WEIGHT
12.9569735
46.6736050
-10.0609659
0.2655634
0.8359207
0.0827794
0.2627971
INTERCEPT CONSTANT =
-27.9601185
-------
3.0 REVIEW OF CRITICAL AREAS
3.1 GENERAL
Visits with air pollution control agencies in the following seven
cities and two states were made to determine the nature of their air pollu-
tion problems, the state of their program development and the details of
their emergency action plans:
Cities States
Chicago Massachusetts
(representing Boston)
Cincinnati
New Jersey
Cleveland (representing Jersey City and
Newark)
Los Angeles
New York
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Figure 3-1 indicates schematically the basic planning elements for
routine or episode activity. All departments visited are aware of these
elements. Levels of detail in each of the elements vary from one. depart-
ment to another and in some cases no episode planning is underway. Some
of the departments (e.g., Chicago, New York, New Jersey, and Pittsburgh)
are quite dynamic and are utilizing or installing automatic equipment and
high-speed computers for processing data. Forecast modelling (predictive
analysis) is being considered by some agencies so that control actions
can be defined and preplanned.
Los Angeles, Chicago, New York and New Jersey are the only agencies
that have completed (or soon will complete) some documentation on their
Emergency Action Plans. Chicago is actively engaged in predictive analyses
(i.e., dispersion of sulfur dioxide and statistical modelling) and has run
some city-wide tests to determine the effectiveness of selected control
actions.
3-1
-------
ROUTINE ACTIVITIES
EPISODE ACTIVITIES
LO
I
to
Figure 3-1. Episode Activities
-------
All departments visited carry on local interagency coordination to
some extent. Also, all agencies are expecting guidance from the Federal
criteria on sulfur dioxide and particulates.
It was observed that several cities do not as yet have adequate emis-
sion inventories to design emergency action plans.
3.2 CHICAGO
3.2.1 SUMMARY
Historically, the air pollution problem in Chicago has been caused
by smoke and sulfur dioxide emissions from industrial processes. Today
the nature of the problem is much the same, but automotive pollution is
becoming a larger contributor.
Chicago's Department of Air Pollution Control (DAPC) was officially
designated and given broad enforcement and administrative powers in 1959.
The city ordinance providing these powers is known as "Chapter 17 of the
Municipal Code of Chicago Relating to Air Pollution Control." An important
section in the code (paragraphs 17-25, (3) (d)) provides that:
"when periods of stagnation, for 24 hours or greater, occur,
the director shall have the power to implement a Pollution
Incident Control Plan, whereby plants that have an annual fuel
consumption of 60,000 tons of coal or 14,500,000 gallons of
oil are required either to switch to a low sulfur fuel (less
than 1.5% sulfur by weight) or curtail emission of sulfur di-
oxide pollution during this period until the director deter-
mines that the stagnation period no longer exists."
With the director of the DAPC having sole authority as described
above, considerable work has been completed or is in progress to provide
the director with a dynamic and well integrated total management informa-
tion system. Key elements of this system include a detailed emission in-
ventory, a real-time air monitoring program, an air pollution dispersion
model, and automatic data processing. Additionally, a suggested "Pollution
Incident Control Plan" has been prepared and limited aspects of control
actions results have been tested.
The present air quality for the city of Chicago is about 0.03 ppm
S0? annually and a three-year goal is to reduce the SO- level to 0.015 ppm.
This 50 percent cutback in S0« pollution is expected to result from cur-
rent and future restrictions on the sulfur content of fuels. Emission
3-3
-------
studies indicate that electric utility production generates about 65 per-
cent of the SCL within the city of Chicago.
The city of Chicago has approximately 200 square miles with 3.5 mil-
lion people. The DAPC has jurisdiction over all areas within the city
limits plus one mile outside; approximately 18,000 industrial plants are
located in this area. The yearly budget of the DAPC is approximately
$1.4 million. Permit fees return about 40 percent of this amount. Addi-
tionally, grants from the government provide about one million dollars.
Approximately 170 personnel are employed in the DAPC.
3.2.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
This provisions of "Chapter 17 of the Municipal Code of Chicago
Relating to Air Pollution Control" are many, and Table 3-1 presents the
titles of specific provisions. The DAPC operates on the basis of emission
standards and a permit 'system. Requirements for air monitoring meteorology,
etc., are internal to the efficient operation of the DAPC and thus not
specifically noted in the legislation of Chapter 17.
The emission standards and the permit system allow the DAPC to main-
tain an up to date and detailed emission inventory. The permit syste, as
applied by Chicago, provides for review of all potential-source equipment
(i.e., fuel burning, process equipment or control device) before it is
installed, and periodically during operation. Additionally, data collected
during the process of authorizing a permit allows: coordinating of infor-
mation with all bureaus of the city; definition of types and quantities
of emissions expected; and location, activity and size of the plant; main-
tenance of a "checklist" of all equipment and control devices together with
their code numbers that need to be periodically inspected.
Central data processing capability in the city of Chicago provides
timely and detailed information from the permit system data for the pur-
pose of maintaining an emission inventory. The computer capability allows
any of the stored information to be correlated in a multitude of ways and
retrieved almost instantly. Yearly updating of permit authorizations al-
lows DAPC personnel to continually maintain a current emission inventory
which is coded into four major source categories: fuel burners, solid
waste, transportation and industrial.
3-4
-------
TABLE 3-1
CONTENTS OF CHAPTER 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF CHICAGO
RELATING TO AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
17-1 Chapter THle 17-46
17-2 Definitions 17-47
17-3 Department established 17-48
17-4 Employees
17-5 Director of air pollution control 17-49
17-6 Qualifications of assistant director 17-50
17-7 Assistant director 17-51
17-8 Qualifications of assistant director 17-52
17-9 Clerical and stenographic assistants 17-53
17-10 Engineers 17-54
17-11 Inspectors 17-55
17-12 Other employment
17-13 Duties of director 17-56
17-14 Supplies 17-57
17-15 A1r pollution control committee 17-58
17-16 Qualifications of committee members , 17-59
17-17 Duties of committee 17-60
17-18 Policiy research programs 17-61
17-19 Technical advisory board 17-62
17-20 Appeal Board 17-63
17-21 Appeals 17-64
17-22 Classes of fuel burning, combustion and process equipment established 17-65
17-23 Emission of smoke - smoke units 17-66
17-24 Emission of partlculate matter 17-67
17-25 Limitations for particular operations 17-68
17-26 Research for particular processes 17-69
17-27 Nuisance: abatement . 17-70
17-28 Nuisance: preservation ofcommon law rights 17-71
17-29 Failure of owners and operators 17-72
17-30 Open fires 17-73
17-31 Construction, demolition or wrecking fires 17-74
17-32 Emission of smoke and gases from internal combustion engines of 17-75
vehicles 17-76
17-33 Handling of materials susceptible to becoming wind-borne 17-77
17-34 Storage of materials susceptible to becoming wind-borne 17-78
17-35 Director to have Jurisdiction of wind-borne violations
17-36 Notices of violations 17-79
17-37 Automobile and/or truck parking and sales lots or private roadway - 17-80
Surfacing of 17-81
17-38 Low volatile solid fuel required for surface-burning type (hand- 17-82
fired) of equipment 17-83
17-39 Solid fuel - conditions for use of 17-84
17-40 Solid fuel when not low volatile - equipment required
17-41 Allowable fuel certificates
17-42 Contents of allowable fuel certificates
17-43 Surface-burning types (hand-fired) of equipment - Issuance of
Installation permits, certificates of operation and allowable
fuel certificates
17-44 New type of surface-burning type (hand-fired) of equipment - Tests
to determine suitability for fuel - allowable fuel certificate
17-45 Sale of solid fuel for surface-burning types (hand-fired) of equip-
ment
3-5
Refuse-burning equipment - sale of
Refuse-burning equipment - types of, plates or tags for; tests of
Installation permit required for fuel-burning, combustion and process
equipment and for high pressure bioler furnace repair
Contents of plans and specifications
Approval by registered engineer
Conformity to plans and specifications
Acting on application; issuance of permit
Secret process - plans for, suspended when affidavit filed
Proof of responsibility for issuance of permit: Bond
Certificate of operation for new fuel-burning combustion or process
equipment or devices
Failure to procure or; violation of; installation permit
Penalty for installing without a permit
Time work must be started
Duty to report discontinuance or dismantlement of equipment
Annual inspection - certificate of operation
Certificate of operation to be posted - contents
Certificate of operation required
Government and municipal fuel-burning, combustion or process equipment
Permit fees
Original inspection fees
Annual inspection fees
Payment of fees
Fees are debt due the city - suit for
Refund of permit fees
Remittance of fees
Breakdown of equipment report of; immunity from prosecution
Tests of fuel-burning, combustion or process equipment
Period of grace
Variances
Citation, hearing and sealing of equipment
Sealing of fuel-burning, combustion and process equipment
Breaking seal
Power of director to enter premises for Inspections—interference
with inspection
Penalties
Persons liable for violations
Prosecutions for violations
Severance clause
Saving clause
Interpretation
-------
Limitations of the current emission inventory are that data are not
related to time of day or week, nor are batch, continuous or different work
shifts of the plants considered. These refinements are being considered by
the DAPC for evaluating effects of possible emergency control actions.
The Chicago Air Monitoring Network in shown in Figure 3-2, and
consists of:
(a) Continuously telemetered data (15-minute averages) of
wind speed, wind direction, and sulfur dioxide levels
for 8 stations.
(b) Twenty-four hour mean concentration of suspended particu-
lates and sulfur dioxide for three days of each week on
20 stations.
(c) Accumulating settleable particulate data from 20 stations
on a monthly basis.
By the end of the year, the DAPC plans to have on-line telemetry
of suspended particulates, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide at ex-
pressway interchanges.
The DAPC telemetry and computer system has built both manual and
computerized validation checks. A variation of 0.15 ppm S0~ in any 15
minute period sends a validation warning to control headquarters; there
have been validated instances of 0.5 to 0.7 ppm actually occurring. The
sensor systems are purged at midnight and any draft corrections are added
to the computer data reduction.
Chicago DAPC uses 0.3 ppm SO- (citywide average) as the level at
which the director may institute an "emergency" control plan. A criteria
of 0.7 ppm S02 for any single sampling station is being considered as an
additional descriptor of emergency conditions.
The meteorological section of the technical services division carries
out functions of research as well as providing local forecast information.
APPF data are used.
The primary control action of the DAPC in event of an episode is
fuel use change over by major S0» pollution sources. In 1967 .and 1968 the
DAPC conducted a series of tests to determine the effects of this control
action. Notification and actual switchover of all plants involved was
3-6
-------
Figure 1
AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
D
AIR MONITORING STATIONS
If Continuous Air Monitoring Station
• Participate Matter
O Sulphur Dioxide
A Corrosion
A Dust Fall
(D Telemetered: Wind and SO, Sensors
O Hygrothermogrophs: 7-Day Charts
& Hygro+hermogrophs: 31 Day Charts
D Pyrhellometen
5 i
Figure 3-2. Chicago Air Monitoring Program
3-7
-------
completed is less than 30 minutes, and effects on SO- concentration were
observed within 90 minutes at the sampling stations.
The Chicago DAPC, HEW, and Argonne National Laboratory are conducting
a joint effort to develop a computer program and dispersion model for S0_
to:
(a) Forecast the severity of air pollution incidents such
that effective warnings can be established;
(b) Allow development of economical and optimal air pollution
abatement strategies;
(c) Allow long range city and county planning to take account
of air pollution in development of zoning ordinances and
layout of residential, industrial, and commercial areas.
Data on meteorology, air quality, and emission inventory are inputs
to the dispersion model.
Each afternoon the DAPC issues information to the news media on air
pollution for Chicago. This information is in the form of a pollution in-
dex and is routinely broadcast to the general public. In event of an
emergency, this same information exchange is utilized, but plans and for-
mats for detailed instructions to the public are not developed.
3.2.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
Chicago's current effort in developing a Pollution Incident Control
Plan is based on the prinqiple that acceptable ambient air quality levels
can be maintained by varying emissions according to the atmosphere's
capability to disperse pollutants. The continuous air pollution and
meteorological monitoring, coupled with ESSA's Air Pollution Potential
Forecasts (APPF) data, provides the basis for implementing control action.
The action part of the plan is effected at three alert levels. At
the first alert (0.3 ppm SO,,), air monitoring is intensified and local or-
dinances are strictly enforced. Also, requests are made for electric
utilities to shift production to nonurban stations and for a shift to low-
sulfur fuels or burn natural gas, if available. Municipal incinerators
i
are requested to limit operation.
If conditions worsen (undefined in terms of magnitude or duration),
second level alert actions further include: notifying health agencies and
3-8
-------
medical societies; reducing emissions of the 25 largest industrial and
commercial plants; request municipal incinerators to hold and commercial
incinerations to reduce activity; limit motor vehicle traffic; and initiate
special vertical temperature soundings to assist in dispersion forecasting.
If conditions continue to deteriorate (magnitude undefined), third
level actions include: requesting the 100 largest industrial and commer-
cial plants to reduce fuel consumption; municipal incinerators stop and
commercial incinerators hold; further reduce motor vehicle traffic; and
request all industrial processes to reduce activity.
Details of second or third level alert criteria, information dis-
semination, coordination of enforcement capabilities, and DAPC internal
operating procedures are not yet developed or published.
3.2.4 REFERENCES
"Air Resource Management in the City of Chicago Pollution Incident
Control Plan," W. J. Stanley, APCA No. 68-56, June 27, 1968.
"1967 Annual Report," W. J. Stanley, Department of Air Pollution
Control.
"City of Chicago Air Quality Telemetering System", S. G. Booras,
Proc. of IBM Scientific Computing Symposium on Water and Air
Resource Management, October 23-25, 1967.
"Chicago's Air Resource Management Program Planning for Clear
Air," W. J. Stanley, APCA No. 68-172, June 27, 1968.
"How an Effective Permit System Works", P. E. Loquercio and W. J.
Murphy, APCA No. 68-111, June 27, 1968.
3-9
-------
3.3 BOSTON
3.3.1 SUMMARY
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has legislation that provides for
the declaration of air pollution emergencies. A reprint of the act is
presented in paragraph 3.3.3. While the alert levels are not identified,
nor is the implementation plan prepared, a few observations can be made:
(a) 0.5 ppm SOo has been considered as an alert criteria
(b) Emergency measures considered include:
(1) Cut back on all power usage (public);
(2) Hold burnable refuse in the homes;
(3) Switch electrical load;
(4) Switch to low-sulfur fuel.
No date has been set for preparation of the emergency action implementation
plan.
Boston's air pollution problem results from particulate and sulfur
dioxide emissions from domestic, municipal, and utility sources. Compli-
cating the problem of controlling pollution is the very small budget and
number of personnel available to perform the necessary work.
3-10
-------
A reprint of Chapter V Observations and Findings, from a recent
comprehensive study of Boston's air quality is presented in paragraph 3.3.4.
Air pollution in Massachusetts is controlled by regional organization.
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health through its Division of
Sanitary Engineering provides administration, engineering, technical ser-
vices, laboratory analysis, and legal support to districts or municipalities
throughout the commonwealth. Boston and Springfield represent two districts
that have been formed and as such carry out local field inspection and
enforcement duties.
The Boston region is called the Metropolitan Air Pollution Control
District and consists of about thirty contiguous municipalities in the
Boston area. This area is less than 400 square miles, and the population
is about two million. The district was established in 1961 and has con-
sistently employed about nine people.
The Springfield district consists of ten contiguous municipalities
representing a land area of less than 300 square miles and a population of
about 500,000. Five personnel work to control air pollution in this dis-
trict.
A summary of laws relative to air pollution control in Massachusetts
is presented in paragraph 3.3.6. The most recent of these laws provides for
the Commissioner of the Public Health Department, with approval of the
Governor, to declare air pollution emergencies whenever necessary to protect
and maintain public health. Emergency action implementation plans are to
be developed and utilized in connection with declaring emergencies; how-
ever, official alert levels, emergency actions, or implementation plans
have yet to be prepared.
Generally, the Massachusetts Department of Health believes in strong
persuasion rather than legislation and prosecution to abate air pollution
sources, but will utilize the courts if necessary.
3.3.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
General laws provide for a permit system to authorize construction
or operation of major sources of pollution. The permit system, however, is
not used as a tool in compiling a source emission inventory. Quite recently
the Department of Health and the Metropolitan Boston Air Pollution Control
3-11
-------
District (MBAPCD) conducted an extensive source emission inventory. This
inventory was accomplished both by canvassing the Boston area and using
rapid survey analytical techniques for predicting emissions. Results are
not yet compiled, but when available they will help define the nature of
Boston's air pollution problem on a square mile basis. There are no plans
for continual updating of the emission inventory, but major contributors of
pollution are kept under surveillance by air pollution officials.
The Department of Health and MBAPCD do not have emission standards or
air quality standards, but address air pollution problems when the problem
becomes grossly self-evident or objectionable to the public. As such,
various actions have been accomplished over the years. For example, all
open burning in dumps, auto body salvage, wire salvage, demolition, and in
cleaning of brush or trees have been eliminated during the 1961-1967 time
frame.
The Department of Health and MBAPCD strongly believe that detailed
data must substantiate any control or abatement action. Therefore, in
conjunction with the recently completed emission inventory, an air quality
study was performed. Air samples at fifty stations throughout the Boston
area were collected and measurements of dustfall and sulfates were made.
At twenty of the stations particulate data were gathered by high volume
filters and tape stain methods. Results have been tabulated and publication
of the report is imminent. While this air quality study does not include
all pollutants, it does provide more information than heretofore was avail-
able on Boston. Included in the report will be data on the emission inven-
tory, as well as discussion of possible or required control actions needed.
Normally, the monitoring stations are operated only on a part-time
basis (i.e., not continuous). For emergency purposes the stations are
manned and provide more frequent and immediate information. Local meteoro-
logical information is obtained from the airport, and observed stagnations
have been short in duration due to the rather good ventilation character-
istics in the Boston basin.
The air pollution officials in the Boston area have not formally
addressed details of an emergency action implementation plan, such as
public information dissemination, enforcement, establishing criteria for
alert levels, and source control actions.
3-12
-------
3.3.3 REPRINT OF MASSACHUSETTS AIR POLLUTION EMERGENCY ACT
CHAPTER 900
THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
In the Year One Thousand Nine Hundred and Sixty-seven
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE DECLARATION OF AIR POLLUTION EMERGENCIES BY THE
COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC HEALTH WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNOR.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General
Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
Chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after
section 2A the following section:
Section 2B. If the commissioner determines that the condition or
impending condition of the atmosphere in the commonwealth or in any part
thereof constitutes a present or reasonably imminent danger to health, he
may, with the approval of the governor, declare an air pollution emergency
and cause the fact to be made known to the public.
The department, after public hearing held in accordance with section
two of chapter thirty A, may, after consultation with the advisory council
on air pollution emergencies, and with the approval of the governor, es-
tablish, and from time to time revise, an air pollution emergency plan to
protect the public health during period of such declared emergencies. Said
plan may include the imposition, during such periods, of controls and re-
strictions upon the use of certain fuels and fuel-burning installations,
the practices of incineration and open burning, and the movement of specific
types of motor vehicles, and said plan may include such other provisions
as the department deems necessary to protect the public health during such
emergency period.
During an air pollution emergency the commissioner may, with the ap-
proval of the governor, take whatever action is necessary to maintain and
protect the public health, including but not limited to the implementing of
the air pollution emergency plan, and prohibiting, restricting and condi-
tioning emissions of dangerous or potentially dangerous air contiminants
from whatever source derived, and requiring the evacuation of the public
from, or restricting public entry into, designated areas. The commissioner
shall clearly specify the geographical area to which such action shall
apply.
If conditions which warrant the declaration of an air pollution emer-
gency change or are so modified that they no longer constitute an actual
or reasonably imminent danger to the public health, the commissioner shall,
with the approval of the governor, delcare the air pollution emergency
terminated, and shall cause this fact to be made know to the public.
3-13
-------
There is hereby established the advisory council on air pollution
emergencies, consisting of the comissioner of public health, the registrar
of motor vehicles, the commissioner of commerce and development, and the
commissioner of labor and industries or their designees, and eleven members
appointed by the governor, of whom one shall represent municipal govern-
ments, one shall represent the power generating industry, one shall repre-
sent the fuel oil industry, one the coal industry, one the gas industry
and one shall represent the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, and
one shall be a licensed physician knowledgeable in the subject of the ef-
fect on health of air pollution, and one shall be a registered professional
engineer experienced in matters cf air pollution control.
Any orders promulgated by the commissioner pursuant to this section,
hereinafter called emergency orders, shall be enforced by personnel of the
department of public health and by the state and local police. A court,
judge or justic authorized to issue warrants in criminal cases may, upon
complaint on oath by a person authorized to enforce emergency orders under
this section that he believes that such an order is being violated in a
particular property, premise or place, if satisfied that there is reason-
able cause for such belief, issue a warrant identifying such property,
premises or place and commanding such person to search such premises for
further evidence of such violation. Information relating to trade secrets,
secret processes or methods of manufacture or production shall be confiden-
tial and shall not be disclosed or received during the course of any such
investigation; nor shall such information be used or disclosed in any pub-
lic hearing under this section. Such enforcement personnel are further
empowered to order any person having control of an air contamination source
to stop and abate violation of any emergency order. Whoever knowingly fails
within a reasonable time to comply with any such order to stop or abate
giving due consideration to the practicability and to the physical and
economic feasibility of compliance with such order shall be punished by a
fine of not less than twenty dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars.
For the purpose of this paragraph, each day or part thereof of violation of
any such order to stop or abate, whether such violation be continuous or
intermittent, shall be construed as a separate and succeeding offense. The
superior court, on petition of any person authorized by this section to en-
force emergency orders, shall have jurisdiction in equity to enforce com-
pliance with such emergency orders.
Any aggrieved person may appeal to the commissioner or his designee
for relief from the continuance of an order. If the commissioner or his
designee finds that the continuance of any order in whole or in part is
unreasonable or unnecessary in light of the then prevailing conditions of
air pollution, he may terminate or modify any such order.
If such an appeal is disapproved by the commissioner or his designee,
the aggrieved person shall, upon his request, be granted a public hearing
on the question of relief from unreasonable restrictions and the contin-
uance of such order by the commissioner. Such public hearing shall not be
subject to the provisions of chapter 30A but shall be held as soon as may
be by said commissioner, who shall give notice of the same. If the com-
missioner, upon conclusion of said hearing, determines that any such order
should be terminated, or modified in any way whatever, he shall enter such
further order as he deems appropriate.
3-14
-------
All power granted to the commissioner by this section shall be in
addition to and not in limitation of any powers granted him by any other
provision of law.
"Air contaminant," as used in this section, includes but is not
limited to, dust, fly ash, fume, gas, mist, odor, smoke, vapor, pollen,
microorganisms, radioactive material, ionizing radiation, any combination
thereof, or any decay or reaction product thereof.
3.3.A REPRINT OF BOSTON AIR QUALITY STUDY
CHAPTER V
OBSERVATIONS AND FINDINGS
The survey conduct and information data collected produced informa-
tion of considerable value to the Department in its responsibility for the
oversight, supervision, and operation of the Metropolitan Air Pollution
Control District.
The most pertinent of these are here presented in concise form.
1. The array of sampling stations selected and established will
be useful in the Department's long range air-monitoring and
use management program. Review of the data collected indi-
cates that the stations are indicative of general air
quality and not unduly influenced by proximate sources.
2. Seasonal levels of ambient air concentrations of certain
contaminants were determined on appropriate geographical
bases throughout the survey area.
3. Data on levels of concentration of certain air contaminants
were obtained and stored on magnetic tape, and are available
for further statistical analyses utilizing computer oriented
techniques as may be indicated.
4. Certain air quality data was assembled and presented to
facilitate the comparison of the average levels of the air
contaminants throughout selected areas of the district.
Meaningful air quality evaluation of certain of the data is
difficult (or impossible) at this time because of the state
of the art and concomitant lack of ambient air quality
criteria. Never-the-less, the data are now available for
immediate input to program needs when acceptable air quality
criteria and standards do become available.
5. Except for the special meteorological temperature profile
data collected by special airplane flights, the data ob-
tained on Boston "weather" was of a limited nature and from
3-15
-------
stations located at East Boston, Milton, and Bedford. The
generally good ventilation in the Boston area was documented,
but so also was the potential for infrequently occurring
episodes of stagnant air conditions which are conducive to
contaminant build-up (e.g.; the Thanksgiving Episode of
1966). The data collected during the episode was and are
invaluable for present and future good air use management
programs. The generally good ventilation by "westerly"
winds in the area is of a complicated nature when associated,
in portions of the district, with on-shore breezes. The
Department intends to expand its efforts in the area of
weather observation data collection and analyses. Much data
already collected are now available for input application
to meteorological models of the Metropolitan Air Pollution
Control District. These services are available to the
Department as and when needed.
6. Computer programs developed to retrieve, analyze, and cor-
relate the data collected or to be collected in the future
include:
a. An "error" check program for all contaminants capable
of performing the following:
1. checking station coding.versus sampling capability,
2. checking range of raw laboratory data,
3. converting laboratory data to appropriate concen-
trations,
4. calculating arithmetic averages, and
5. counting of valid and invalid data points.
b. A program to transfer raw data on information cards to
storage on magnetic tape.
c. A program to calculate contaminant levels from the
storage tape.
d. A program to calculate frequency distributions for each
contaminant for time intervals desired. Sub-programs
to also determine the number of samples, the minimum
values, the maximum values, the geometric means, the
geometric standard deviations, and the arithmetic means
for each contaminant.
e. A "ventilation model" program to correlate certain air
contaminant concentrations with wind speed, mixing
depth, and location or locations of air quality con-
cern.
3-16
-------
f. Programs to effectively handle the source emission
inventory data collected during and following the
survey, in order to correlate them with the ambient air
concentrations observed during the survey, necessitated
the writing of seventeen programs; included were:
1. Programs to transfer data on cards to magnetic tape
for census tracts per source emission grid, vehicle-
mile traveled per source emission grid, and certain
other point source data per source emission grid.
2. Programs to meld the census tract, automobile-mile
traveled, and point sources data to the source
emission grid system.
4. Programs to compute the particulate emission per
source emission grid resulting from domestic heating,
certain other point sources, and automobiles and
the relative percentage contribution.
5. Programs to perform statistical manipulations of
• data relative to population, domestic fuel consump-
tion, and certain other point sources of fuel con-
sumption throughout the survey area.
7. The air contaminant data, source emission data and certain
other relevant data collected during the survey has had an
immediate usefulness to the Federal Government in its
activities relative to establishment of air quality control
regions under the provisions of P.L. 90-148.
8. The study, as finalized, was not sufficiently sophisticated
to permit quantitative evaluation of the benefits that
inure to the district from and as a result of:
- centralized industrialized process and space-heating
steam production facilities with high stacks and/or
highly efficient fuel utilization;
- mass transportaion (i_._e. Massachusetts Bay Transit Au-
thority, Boston & Maine Railroad, New York Central Rail-
road, New Haven Railroad, and Commercial bus lines);
- low sulfur content fossil and gas fuel utilization in
low (near ground level) stack height facilities;
- stopping of open burning of building demolition debris,
autos, wire (reclamation), and dumps in the district;
- minimal but effective inspection and enforcement of the
MAPCD rules and regulations (budget deficiencies and
under-staffing has precluded the establishment of an
adequate district program); and
3-17
-------
- dispersed and easterly located fossil fuel power plants
with comparatively high stacks.
9. The conduct of the survey was accompanied by problems and
delays originating not only from budgeting, staffing, and
red tape problems, but also from the inadequate "state of
the art" of air sampling, sample analyses, equipment relia-
bility and dependability, and technical resources available.
10. The potential for occurrence of pollution levels of certain
air contaminants in the Metropolitan Air Pollution Control
District can or may be reduced by:
a. Greater use of mass transportation and more efficient
highway transportation systems;
b. Reduction of emissions of sulfur oxides from significant
sources as may be indicated to meet specific needs of
the district;
c. Authorization of the construction of additional facili-
ties for importation of more natural gas for comsumption
in the district;
d. Development within the electrical distribution system,
and to the extent of economic feasibility, of pumped
storage and nuclear fuel electricity producing facili-
ties ;
e. Discovery, exploitation, and use of potential off-shore
low sulphur oil and natural gas resources;
f. Establishment within the electric utility grid system
of dispersed, shared, electric power production capa-
bility reserved for cooperative use, as may be required,
during high air pollution potential episodes and periods
of peak demands, and that such be in addition to the
firm power capability now maintained for production
reserve; and
g. Continuation and expansion of the effective air pollu-
tion control program in the Metropolitan Boston area as
part of the overall Commonwealth's air use management
program.
People's biggest problem is probably people. And if not too many
people, then, at least, people increasing in numbers faster than society
adequately adjusts its ways to the finite environment in which it functions.
Concomitant with the increasing number of people are the environment-
affecting cancerous problems associated with disposal of man's wastes (per-
sonal, commercial, and industrial) which are themselves becoming more
3-18
-------
complex in character and magnitude as a result of our affluence-demanding
society. The Commonwealth must become cognizant of the increased stresses
being placed upon its air-environment resource as a result of policies of
noil- or mis-management of our population and/or the effects of affluence.
It should behoove our law makers to concern themselves with these social
matters of great significance.
However clean or unclean one may judge the air in "Boston" to be,
there is evident need for greater vigilance over and more sophisticated
custodial care of the air-environment in the years ahead. But expansions
of the Commonwealth's air use management programs should be orderly and in
an appropriate manner without panic.
3.3.5 REPRINT OF MASSACHUSETTS AIR POLLUTION LAW EXCERPTS
SUMMARY OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS FOR
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL IN MASSACHUSETTS
Control on the Local Level
Section 31C, Chapter 111, General Laws
Local boards of health (cities, towns) have authority to adopt air
pollution control rules and regulations limiting the emission of air con-
taminants, so long as the condition of air pollution constitutes a nui-
sance, a danger to the public health, or impairs the public comfort and
convenience. The regulations must be approved by the Department of Public
Health.
Nuisance Sections of General Laws
Local agencies can effect a considerable degree of control particu-
larly over isolated sources of odors, using these statutes. Difficulties
are that it may ultimately be necessary to prove a hazard to health or a
cause of sickness, or that adequate identification of the offending source.
may be difficult.
Control by Massachusetts Department of Public Health
Inter-Municipal (Section 31C, Chapter 111, General Laws)
"The Department of Public Health may, upon request of the board of
health of a town adversely affected by atmospheric pollution arising
in another town, after a hearing to all parties interested, assume joint
jurisdiction to regulate or control such cause of atmospheric pollution
and may exercise all powers of the local board of health ....under provi-
sions of the General Laws or any special laws." i
The underlined phrase illustrates a limitation of this statute. The
powers of local boards under the General Laws are somewhat limited and
difficult of enforcement in the field of air pollution control, unless
specific regulations have been adopted.
3-19
-------
The Department has held one hearing under this statute (Reading-
Woburn) but did not find it necessary to assume jurisdiction.
See also discussion under "State-wide Control".
State-Wide (Section 142A, Chapter III, General Laws)
Department has authority to adopt air pollution control rules and
regulations, subject to approval of Governor and Council. Original form
of this Section (Section 3 of Chapter 676, Acts of 1954) permitted adop-
tion of "min"liM«n rules and regulations to prevent pollution or contamina-
tion of the atmosphere within the Commonwealth". (Emphasis added). The
present form (as amended by Chapter 422, Acts of 1959) authorized the
Department to "adopt or amend regulations to prevent pollution or
contamination of the atmosphere..." The words "minimum" and "within the
Commonwealth" no longer appear. However, the primary intent of the
amendment was to simplify and reduce the expense of rendering any regu-
lations effective. The Department still regards regulations adopted here-
under as being "minimum state-wide". It is intended that their application
be reserved to pollution arising from one or more of the following sources:
1. State institutions,
2. Sources located in one municipality but adversely affect-
ing residents of another (see also Section 31C, Chapter
111, above),
3. Mobile sources,
4. Sources which could and should be controlled by local
agencies but are not.
Presently effective regulations, filed with the Secretary of State
on July 25, 1960, contain a series of definitions, a section generally
prohibiting the creation of atmospheric pollution conditions (see defn. of
"atmospheric pollution"), and a section stating that the Department may
specify a limitation on emissions from any source, or may prohibit certain
operations. The application is discretionary with the Department, and the
regulations bear more resemblance to legislation than to conventional
regulations.
Control of motor vehicle emissions could be effected under this
statute, to cover all motor vehicles registered in the Commonwealth.
Metropolitan Air Pollution Control District (Sect. 142B, Chapter 111, G.L.)
The MAPCD consists of thirty contiguous municipalities in the Boston
area, from Peabody on the north to Weymouth in the south, and west to
Waltham, Newton, and Needham. Additional contiguous communities may(join.
The present land area is 320 square miles, the population is 1,928,793.
This district was established effective January 1, 1961, by Chapter
660 of the Acts of 1960, as an up-dating of the metropolitan Boston "Smoke
District", so-called, which had been established in 1910. At this point a
i 3-20
-------
brief history of this "smoke district" and the then Division of Smoke
Inspection is appropriate.
In 1910, at the urging largely of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, the
legislature established in the Board of Gas and Electric Light Commissioners
the position of Supervising Smoke Inspector and assistants, and empowered
the Board to control the emission of visible smoke from stacks within Boston
and six surrounding cities. The legislature established the permissible
degrees of emission for all types and classes of stacks, set forth the
method of observation, and prescribed penalties.
The Department of Public Utilities replaced the Board mentioned above
in the 1919 reorganization of State structure, and the office of Smoke
Inspector was incorporated into that Department. Twenty-two additional
communities were added to the district in 1928 making a total of twenty-
nine, in 1934, the Division of Smoke Inspection, with a director, was
established, replacing the old set up of a Smoke Inspector and assistants.
By 1948, Peabody and Millis had been added to the district (31) com-
munities. (Millis was non-contiguous and was dropped in the 1960 reorgani-
zation) .
Long a stepchild of the DPU, in 1954, the Division of Smoke Inspec-
tion was transferred to the Department of Public Health, a more appropriate
location, and became a part of the Division of Sanitary Engineering.
The control of visible smoke within the district, throughout its
history, continued to be paid by the communities involved, through an
assessment procedure based on relative valuations, and the degree and
method of control remained relatively constant.
Under the reorganization, the Department of Public Health is directed
to control atmospheric pollution within the Metropolitan Air Pollution
Control District, and to adopt rules and regulations to accomplish this end
The old statutory limitations on visible smoke emissions have been elimi-
nated and replaced by a simplified and somewhat more stringent regulation.
Departmental expenditures for the District are made on the basis of
an appropriation by the legislature from the General Fund; the actual
amounts amended are then refunded by the District communities, one-half in
proportion to relative populations and one-half in proportion to relative
valuations.
In addition to adopting and amending rules and regulations to pre-
vent pollution within the District the Department has the right of entry
onto private property and the right to stop motor vehicles for purposes of
investigations and enforcement. It may issue Orders to stop or abate vio-
lations of its regulations. Violations, then, or Orders are punishable ,
by fines ranging up to $500 per.day. Knowing violation of a regulation
(no order issued) is punishable by a fine of from $10 to $50.
The Department is authorized to "maintain and operate such air samp-
ling stations and devices; make or perform such routine and special exami-
nations, inspections, observations, determinations, laboratory analyses,
3-21
-------
and surveys; maintain such records; and perform such other acts as it deems
necessary to conduct an adequate air pollution control program within the
metropolitan air pollution control district".
In the exercise of its responsibilities under the new law the Depart-
ment has continued to observe visible stack emissions. A survey has also
been made of the nature and extent of open burning within the District,
and, subsequently a set of rules and regulations were drafted, conferences
and a hearing held, and the regulations adopted and filed on August 1, 1961.
These "Rules and Regulations to Prevent Pollution or Undue Contamina-
tion of the Atmosphere within the Metropolitan Air Pollution Control Dis-
trict" must be regarded as a first step beyond the control of visible smoke
from stacks in the control of atmospheric pollution. The Regulations con-
tain seven sections. Section 1 consists of definitions; Section 2 is a
general prohibition of pollution-causing emissions; Section 3 regulates
open burning by requiring that fire department permits, which must be ob-
tained for all open fires, be approved, in most instances, by the Depart-
ment as a condition of their validity (the intent is to provide a neces-
sary changeover or adjustment period after which approval will generally
be denied); Section 4 prohibits the use of medium to high-volatile bitumi-
nous coals in hand-fired furnaces; Section 5 requires the Department's
approval of large power plants and most incinerators, for air pollution
control purposes; Section 6 prohibits the emission from stacks of smoke as
dark as or darker than No. 2 of the Ringelmann (40% black) for more than
six minutes per hour; and Section 7 contains a severability clause.
The Department felt that the need for these regulations was self-
evident and required no entensive documentation beyond that already avail-
able (NASN particulate data, some S02 and total oxident levels in Boston,
dustfall data). It would probably be unwise to adopt more stringent regu-
lations without some means of relating the regulatory effect to present
and also to expect or desired future air quality. A considerable increase
in survey effort, both atmospheric monitoring and source evaluation, seems
desirable, if a further regulatory program is to be developed in an equit-
able manner and based on demonstrated need.
Lower Pioneer Valley Air Pollution Control District (Sec. 142C, Ch. Ill,
G.L.)
The LPVAPCD consists of ten contiguous municipalities in the Spring-
field area. Additional contiguous communities may join. The present land
area is 241 square miles, the population is 414,380.
The District was formed in 1966 and adopted rules and regulations to
control air pollution similar to those of the Metropolitan Air Pollution
Control District. Departmental expenditures for the District are made on
the basis of an appropriation by the legislature for the General Fund. The
actual amounts expended are then refunded by the District communities, one-
half in proportion to relative populations and one-half in proportion to
relative valuations.
3-22
-------
Exemption from Taxation (Chapter 539, G.L. as Ammended by Chapter 700,
Acts of 1966)
This statute provides that air and stream pollution abatement equip-
ment is exempt from local property tax.
Air Pollution Emergencies (Chapter 900 Acts of 1967)
This act provides for the declaration of air pollution emergencies
by the Commissioner of Public Health with approval of the Governor. Dur-
ing an air pollution emergency the commissioner may, with the approval of
the governor, take whatever action is necessary to maintain and protect the
public health, including but not limited to the implementing of the air
pollution emergency plan, and prohibiting, restricting and conditioning
emissions of dangerous or potentially dangerous air contaminants from what-
ever source derived, and requiring the evaluation of the public from, or
restricting public entry into, designated areas. The commissioner shall
clearly specify the geographical area to which such action shall apply.
3.4 CINCINNATI
3.4.1 SUMMARY
The problem of air pollution in Cincinnati is a complex blend of
topography, meteorology and industrial activity. The city with a population
of 505,000 and covering a 78 square mile area, lies on an upland plain that
has been trenched by the past and present courses of the Ohio River and its
tributaries into valleys 200 to 400 feet deep and 1/2 to three miles wide
among abruptly rising hills.
The prevailing southwest wind would be sufficient to carry pollutants
away if the area was entirely level; because of the confining influence of
the valley walls, the wind speed during the summer and fall is below average
70 percent of the time and below three miles per hour about 30 percent of
the time. Most of the major sources of pollutant emission are in the
valleys; the released pollutants tend to remain in the area for long periods
due to the low wind speeds, and because of the high frequency of nocturnal
inversions.
Attempts to control air pollution in Cincinnati go back to 1886, when
the first recorded smoke abatement action was taken. For the next 60 years
excessive smoke from the burning of solid fuel was considered the principal
air pollution problem in the city; in recent times more attention has been
directed to SO , NO , and the constituents of automotive engine exhaust.
X X.
Under the City's Ordinance 90, passed in 1947, and its later additions,
3-23
-------
replacement of older units with modern coal-burning plants, conversion to
gas heating, and the shift from steam to diesel by the railroads, had re-
duced visible smoke emissions by 1960 to 90 percent of the 1947 level; air-
borne ash and dust were reduced from 30,000 to 16,000 tons per year. By
1967 the dustfall had dropped to an average of 12,000 tons per year. Other
comparisons to indicate the changing complexion of Cincinnati's urban
atmosphere are presented in Tables 3-2 and 3-3; note that while other
pollutant levels have dropped, oxidants have increased, most probably due
to the rise in auto traffic.
3.4.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The City of Cincinnati has no alert plan for episodes. The thinking
is that the "chronic" situation is the most important air pollution problem.
Air pollution problems are at present handled by the Division of Air Pollu-
tion Control and Heating Inspection which comes under the City's Department
of Safety; an organization chart is presented in Figure 3-3. During the
year 1967, the division operated on a budget of $208,040 and employed a total
of 23 people; revenues from permits, fuel dealer licenses, annual inspection
fees, and the Intercommunity Air Pollution Control Program totalled $68,842.
The Diviion's authority is Ordinance 119-1965, a revision of Chapter 15 of
the Building Code. The Division is assisted by two appointed Boards:
(a) The Air Pollution Control Board, consisting of seven
members, appointed by the City Manager, and whose duties
are to "advise and rule on such policy matters relating to
air pollution control" as are brought to them by the head
of the Division> ind to hear appeals from decisions made
by the Division.
(b) The Board of Mechanical Standards and Appeals, consisting
of five members appointed by the City manager, whose func-
tion is similar to that of the Air Pollution Control Board,
but specifically applies to the use and acceptability of
materials, devices or systems as required by the Division
under the Building Code.
The ordinance is specific as to definitions, general provisions,
permit fees, and penalties. Some of the more pertinent provisions are:
(a) Emission of smoke darker than //4 scale on a standard smoke
tester is unlawful, except for such time-limited operations
as cleaning a fire and building a new fire.
3-24
-------
TABLE 3-2
COMPARISON OF 1957 AND 1967 PARTICULATE
POLLUTANT LEVELS IN CINCINNATI
Pollutant
Dustfall
Soiling Index
Suspended Particulates
Total
Benzene Soluble
1957 Average
13,000 tons/yr.
1.75 RUDS
145 yg/m
14 vg/m3
1967 Average
12,000 tons/yr.
0.8 RUDS
125 yg/m3
6
Percent Change
(1957/1967)
-8%
-54%
-14%
-57%
TABLE 3-3
COMPARISON OF 1964 AND 1967
GASEOUS POLLUTANT LEVELS IN CINCINNATI
Pollutant
Carbon Monoxide
Nitric Oxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
Sulfur Dioxide
Total Hydrocarbons
Total Oxidants
1964 Average 1967 Average
6.1 ppm
0.038 ppm
0.032 ppm
0.038 ppm
3.0 ppm
0.028 ppm
5.6 ppm
0.030 ppm
0.028 ppm
0.021 ppm
2.5 ppm
0.033 ppm
Percent Change
(1964/1967)
-21%
-12.5%
-45%
-17%
+18%
3-25
-------
u>
to
ADMINISTRATION
1 Sup. Clerk
1 Clk. Typist
1/2 Custodian
DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY
DIRECTOR OF SAFETY
BD. OFMECH. STDS.
AND APPEALS
DIVISION OF AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL AND HEATING INSPECTION
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AND HEATING ENGINEER
Secretary - Clerk-Steno
AIR POLLUTION BOARD
ENFORCEMENT
ENGINEERING
Heating Combustion
and A.C. Engineer
1 Eng. Tech.
MECHANICAL EQUIP.
Supr. of APC & HI
(Mechanical)
ORGANIZATION CHART
4* Air Pollution
Control and Heating
Inspectors
(Mech. Insp.)
Commercial-Industrial
Division of Air Pollution
Control & Heating Inspection
Department of Safety
City of Cincinnati
January I, 1968
3 Residential
Mechanical Inspectors
A.P. CONTROL
Supr. of APC & HI
(A.P.C.)
4* Air Pollution
Control and Heating
Inspectors
(A.P.C.)
r One inspector is assigned as Special Duty
Inspector in each unit.
A. P. MEASUREMENT
A. P. Chemist
1 A.P. Technician
1 Eng. Technician
INTERCOMMUNITY AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
Air Pollution
Control Officer
PHS RESEARCH GRANT
1 A. P. Technician
Figure 3-3^ Organization Chart, Division of Air Pollution Control and Heating Inspection
-------
(b) Emission of solid matter in combustion or other gases is,
limited to 0.85 Ibs./lOOO Ibs. of gases adjusted to 50%
excess air.
(c) Limits for incinerator emission of solid matter are 0.4
Ibs./lOOO Ibs. of gases adjusted to 12% CO .
(d) Low volatile coal (less than 25% volatile on a dry basis)
is required for hand-fired furnances and boilers. Solid
fuel delivery tickets must be marked with volatile content
and trade name; solid fuel dealers are licensed. Provision
is made for emergency conditions.
(e) An inspection is required annually for all solid or liquid
fuel-burning equipment except 1-, 2-, or 3-family resi-
dences, railroad locomotives, and vehicles.
(f) Special equipment is required for certain sources, such as
fly ash prevention devices, automatic smoke consuming
systems, smoke warning system, chimney settling chambers,
etc.
(g) All equipment regulated by the code is subject to engineer-
ing review prior to granting a permit to operate, and to
inspection upon installation or replacement.
(h) The penalty for failure to comply with the code can be
sealing of the equipment, and/or fine and court costs.
Under the code, information could be obtained from the permit system
for an emission source inventory; apparently this has not been done. What
inventory data are available were acquired by telephone contacts and no
information was obtained on curtailment problems or emissions should cur-
tailment be necessary.
Monitoring of pollutants was confined until 1962 almost exclusively
to dustfall and suspended particulates (continuous records for airborne
solids go back to 1931). Since 1952, the soiling index has been recorded
at three locations, using the AISI Automatic Smapler. A National Air
Sampling Network Station recording particulates has been in operation since
1953. Levels of gaseous pollutants have been monitored since 1962 by the
Public Health Service Monitoring Station (Continuous Air Monitoring Pro-
gram) . Pollutants sampled include hydrocarbons, NO , oxidants, CO, S00.
X t,
Occasional sampling for S0? was performed by the city between 1955 and
1962.
3-27
-------
At present the following monitoring system is carried on within the
City, either by the Air Pollution Control Division or by the Public Health
Service:
No. of Monitoring
Pollutant Stations
Settleable Particulates 10
Soiling Index 3
Suspended Particulates 2
CO 1
NO 1
N02 1
S02 1
Hydrocarbons 1
Oxidants ' 1
While the City itself has a reasonably rigid code aimed at abatement,
there is presently only a voluntary mechanism for dealing cooperatively with
the surrounding political jurisdictions and their porblems. The Intercom-
munity Air Pollution Control Program (IAPCP), a vehicle for cooperation
between the municipalities within and adjoining the City, and the City
itself, was instituted in 1957.
Seven municipalities (Lockland, Glendale, Elmwood Place, Reading,
St. Bernard, Wyoming and Arlington Heights) have a contract with Cincinnati
for provision of the following basic services:
(a) Observation of an action upon visible air pollution
emissions and violations of the Uniform Air Pollution
Control Ordinance;
(b) Action upon citizen and agency complaints;
(c) Industrial plant inspection;
(d) Recommendations for correction of unsatisfactory air
pollution conditions.
The municipality of Norwood, which is totally enclosed within the ,
City, does not belong to the IAPCP, but has an informal agreement with
Cincinnati on "border complaints."
3-28
-------
3.4.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
As has been mentioned earlier, Cincinnati apparently feels her air
pollution problem can best be attacked on a "chronic" rather than "episode"
basis. No emergency plans exist and planning for future controls appear to
be slanted for the chronic conditions.
In addition, the City realizes its problems are not confined to city
limits, but that intercommunity and interstate considerations need to be
taken Into account. The IAPCP has been set up to handle some of the inter-
community relationships; on March 31, 1965 the Southwest Ohio-Northern
Kentucky Air Pollution Survey (SWO^NK) was established to approach the
region's pollution problems on an interstate basis. The cooperating
agencies were:
(a) City of Covington, Kentucky
(b) City of Norwood, Ohio
(c) City of Cincinnati, Ohio
(d) Hamilton County, Ohio
(e) Kenton County, Kentucky
(f) City of Newport, Kentucky
(g) Boone County, Kentucky
(h) Campbell County, Kentucky
(i) City of St. Bernard, Ohio
(j.) Township of Arlington Heights, Ohio
(k) Ohio State Department of Health
(1) Kentucky State Department of Health
(m) U. S. Public Health Service
Upon completion of the survey, a proposal has been made .for a unified
air resource management program to encompass these goals for the SWO-NK
region:
(a) Establish air quality criteria.
(b) Develop and maintain an emission mountory.
(c) Provide limitations for sources.
(d) Establish a monitoring and testing program.
(e) Provide engineering advisory services.
(f) Provide goals and limitations to be applied in land-use
programs.
3-29
-------
(g) Establish a scientifically-based regulatory program.
A proposed amendment strengthening Cincinnati's existing ordinance is
presently (9/16/68) before the City Council.
3.4.4 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS, CURRENT
Cincinnati has no emergency action plans, and planning for future
controls appear to be slanted toward chronic conditions.
3.4.5 REFERENCES
"Air Pollution Control in Cincinnati," C. W. Gruber, Air Pollution
Control and Heating Inspection, Department of Safety, City of
Cincinnati, 1964.
"Bridge to Clean Air," C. W. Gaulding and R. R. Kolbinsky, SWO-NK Air
Pollution Survey, 1967.
"Air Resource Management Program for Southwestern Ohio-Northern
Kentucky," SWO-NK Air Pollution Survey, 1967.
"1967 Annual Report," Division of Air Pollution Control and Heating
Inspection, City of Cincinnati, 1968.
"Air Quality Data," Division of Air Pollution Control and Heating
Inspection, City of Cincinnati, 1967 edition.
"Ordinance Regulations Pertaining to Air Pollution Control, Heating,
Mechanical Ventilation, and Refrigeration," City of Cincinnati,
April 24, 1965.
3.5 CLEVELAND
3.5.1 SUMMARY
Cleveland's air pollution problem stems from three major sources;
motor vehicle exhausts account for about 60 percent of the total pollution
load; industrial emissions account for 25 to 30 percent; and waste disposal
and incineration 10-12 percent.
Cleveland's air pollution code passed in 1962 established some source
emission standards, for all contributors of pollution, except one- and two-
residence dwellings. Ultimate conformance to the code was to be completed
/
before 1968 and the effectiveness of their program is illustrated by the
reduction of dust fall from 48.8 tons per square mile per month in 1947 to
16.0 in 1967. Currently, no official ground level air quality standards
are in effect for Cleveland, and no emergency action plans have been for-
mulated.
3-30
-------
Cleveland's Division of Air Pollution Control has about 35 employees,
a budget of approximately $300,000, and the responsibility of protecting
the health and welfare of about 700,000 residents.
3.5.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The Cleveland Division of Air Pollution Control (CDAPC) operates using
a permit system and emission standards. Standards are specified in the Air
Pollution Code of Cleveland, dated June 20, 1962. Five general categories
for control standards are:
(a) Public Nuisance,
(b) Maximum Emissions for smoke, particulate, fly ash, ferrous
and nonferrous industries,
(c) Regulation of Use or Design of Equipment,
(d) Regulation of Fuels or Fuel Composition,
(e) Zoning Standards.
The permits to operate are renewed yearly, but data are not obtained
to provide the basis for an emission inventory. Recently, the CDAPC has
attempted to get government funds so that a better emission inventory could
be developed. What information now exists for an emission inventory has
been developed on a "spot basis" as problems arise. The industrial valley
which is more or less in the heart of Cleveland is the apparent focal point
of source emissions.
Enforcement as specified by the Air Pollution Code gives the control
officer power to enter industrial and commercial establishments and to
require emission tests by a third party. Costs of the tests are borne by
the industry, and, if violations are detected, the industry must correct
the situation or suffer penalties.
With regard to air monitoring, Cleveland has a Federal grant program
entitled, "A Study of the Ambient Air Quality in the City of Cleveland."
This program calls for establishing thirty air quality testing sections
throughout the city for measuring dust fall, suspended particulate matter,
and gaseous pollutants. Twenty-one high-volume air sampling stations and
11 gas testing stations (measuring S0_ and N0_) are in operation; twenty-
four hour samples are collected twice a week. Additional assistance is
3-31
-------
being given to the Bureau of Smoke Abatement by establishing and maintaining
34 dust fall sampling stations.
The CDAPC uses an ESSA meteorologist in evaluating local conditions;
and recently two meteorological stations have been installed in Cleveland
for one year to provide data. These stations record wind speed and direc-
tion and strip charts are collected every two weeks.
Emergency actions or plans have not been formulated, and if an episode
were to occur, an informal cooperative effort between major pollutant
sources and the CDAPC would be effected. On the basis of past relationships,
the Department feels that such cooperation will be easily obtained.
3.5.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
The CDAPC has no official emergency action plans and no date was
given as to when such plans'may be formulated.
3.5.4 REFERENCES
1967 Annual Report, Cleveland Division of Air Pollution Control,
Department of Public Health and Welfare.
Lucuoco, A. W. "Cleveland's Progressive Air Management Program," Air
Engineering, September 1968.
Lucuoco, A. W. "The Cleveland Performance Program and Progress".
Presented at East Central Section of APCA, September 20, 1967.
3.6 LOS ANGELES
3.6.1 SUMMARY
The air pollution problem in Los Angeles results mainly from motor
vehicle exhaust. Automobiles account for the majority of the problem, and
are among difficult sources of pollution of control during "episode"
emergencies.
The Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District has a continuing
program for surveys of the sources of air pollution and monitoring of
atmospheric contaminants. Data abstracted from the most recent publication
(Ref. 1, Paragraph 3.6.4) summarizing pollution surveys in Los Angeles
County are presented in Table 3-4. Approximately 13,820 tons of air con-
taminants are emitted daily, uncontrolled, during periods of minimum high
3-32
-------
Co
I
Co
Co
TABLE 3-4
PERCENTAGE OF CONTAMINANTS FROM MAJOR SOURCES WITHIN LOS ANGELES COUNTY
November 16 - April 14
MAJOR SOURCE
Gasoline-Powered Motor Vehicles
Organic Solvent Usage
Petroleum
Combustion of Fuels
Aircraft
Chemical
Other
HYDROCARBONS AND
THER ORGANIC GASES
69.1
17.8
8.9
0.3
1.5
2.3
0.1
AEROSOLS
31.5
6.6
2.5
16.7
16.7
7.5
12.5
NOX
62.7
OJO
4.3
29.8
2.0
0.0
1.2
S02
11.4
0.0
9.7
53.6
0.0
24.3
1.0
CO
97.3
0.0
0.8
0.0
1.9
0.0
0.0
TOTAL
87.4
3.4
2.7
3.4
1.9
1.0
0.2
-------
sulfur content fuels usage. Of this, approximately 1,320 tons are produced
by stationary sources, and 12,230 tons (88%) are produced by motor vehicles.
The Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District has rules and
regulations published that define certain responsibilities and authority
(Ref. 2, Paragraphs 3.6.4). Regulation VII is entitled "Emergencies" and
is designed to prevent the excessive buildup of air contaminants and to
avoid any possibility of a catastrophe caused by toxic concentrations of
air contaminants.
The alert stages for toxic air contaminants are presented in Table
.3-5, and the number of first alerts called in Los Angeles County since 1955
are depicted in Figure 3-4. All alerts called to date have been due to
ozone, and fortunately no second or third stage alerts have been called.
Data on alerts called and number of days state standards were exceeded are
given in Table 3-6 and Figure 3-4.
Los Angeles County land area is 4,083 square miles, and the Los
Angeles Basin land area is 1,250 square miles, and the population is
7,200,000. The Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District has approximately
195 enforcement and engineering personnel to serve the county.
In addition to Regulation VII Emergencies, the Control District has
established internal procedures for implementing the emergency actions.
3.6.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The purposes, organizations, methods, and procedures that the Los
Angeles County Pollution Control District effected in developing an emer-
gency action program are reviewed in reference 3 (paragraph 3.6.4).
Historically, the development program started with advisory committees
establishing recommended actions and contaminant concentration standards.
From the advisory committees' recommendations, Regulation VII was written
and enacted into law. The next phase of developing the program was char-
acterized by administrative and technical efforts to implement the require-
ments of the newly enacted legislation. Even now, the continued development
of the emergency program is that of addressing operational problems and the
refinement and improvement of the program to better meet the basic objectives
in an effective and efficient manner.
3-34
-------
TABLE 3-5
ALERT STAGES FOR TOXIC CONTAMINANTS, PPM
CONTAMINANT
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Oxides
Sulfur Oxides
Ozone
FIRST ALERT
SECOND ALERT
THIRD ALERT
100
3
3
0.5
200
5
5
1.0
300
10
10
1
.5
TABLE 3-6
NUMBER OF DAYS STATE STANDARDS WERE EXCEEDED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY
YEAR
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
CO
20
20
19
35
19
58
22
12
N02
112
102
85
79
78
100
87
113
OZONE
236
212
225
191
179
190
214
210
S02
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PARTICULATE
180
169
211
167
131
153
173
190
3-35
-------
OJ
I
OJ
ON
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
II
1 1
1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967
Figure 3-4. Number of First Alerts Called in Los Angeles County
-------
The effectiveness of the emergency program depends on dissemination
of information to the public, since automobiles are the chief source.
The emission inventory for Los Angeles is effectively accomplished
by inspectors in the field providing continual updating of data for each of
the major pollution sources. Data collected includes type and amount of
pollutant, a notation of whether the process is continuous or batch, and
work schedule (partial day, one or more shifts per day, and number of days
per week). Information on shutdown emissions is obtained mainly by compu-
tation; analytical techniques applied to gasoline sales data provides in-
sight to pollution emissions from motor vehicles. Although computer
technology is used for storing data, it is not currently used for real-time
data retrieval and processing.
The legislation that provides for identification and control of pollu-
tion sources is documented in Regulations I through VI, (Ref. 2, paragraph
3.6.4), the Air Resources Board Air Quality Standards, and the 1968 Clean
Air Act of California. Regulation I defines general provisions of the Air
Pollution Control District. Regulation II, "Permits", requires an approval
(authority) to construct, and a permit to operate before any person can
erect, alter, or replace any device which emits air contaminants. Exemp-
tions to this regulation are many, but specifically defined so that only
the smaller sources of pollution are relieved of the permit requirements.
Applications for authority to construct or permit to operate are cancelled
after two years. Standards for granting permits are defined in Regulation
II. The Air Pollution Control Officer may require the applicant to provide
and maintain facilities for sampling and testing purposes in order to get
information on the nature and extent of contaminants discharged into the
atmosphere. Much of the field inspection work and updating of emission
inventories is accomplished from this information.
Regulation III identifies fees required from the different sources of
air pollution. Regulation IV, "Prohibitions", defines certain requirements
or standards that are not to be violated by any person operating any source
of pollution. The subject matter in Regulation IV includes: opacity,
nuisances, particulate matter, sulfur compounds, combustion contaminants,
scavenger plants, dust and fumes, storage of petroleum products, open fires,
incinerator burning, oil-effluent water separators, circumvention, gasoline
3-37
-------
loading, sulfur content of fuels, gasoline specifications, reduction of
animal matter, organic solvents, and architectural coatings.
Regulation V details procedures before the Hearing Board. Regulation
VI is related to the permits, prohibitions, etc., of orchard or citrus grove
heaters.
The Air Resources Board Standards and the Clear Air Act of California
specify emission standards for motor vehicles. These standards are time
phased to meet a 1980 objective of reducing emissions to levels character-
istic of pre-war air. To date, 75-80% of all vehicles in the country are
equipped with crankcase control devices, and 20-25% with exhaust controls.
Beginning in 1970, control systems on cars should reduce exhaust hydro-
carbons to 2 gm/mile, and carbon monoxide to 20 gm/mile, and cut evaporative
hydrocarbon losses by 90%. In 1972 control systems should further limit
exhaust hydrocarbons to 1.35 gm/mile and exhaust nitrogen oxides to 1.35
gm/mile.
The task of selecting the specific monitoring sites and determining
monitoring methods was based on data from 76 meteorological stations and 3
sampling stations. Wind flow patterns and data throughout the basin were
analyzed to determine those locations at which contaminant concentration
measurements would be most representative of the entire area. The current
Regulation VII stipulates that at least six permanently located and con-
tinuously maintained sampling stations be operated. Pollutants monitored
include carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and sulfur dioxide.
Additional sampling stations may be used as necessary and may be permanent,
temporary, fixed, or mobile. Since the sampling stations are semiautomatic,
- automatic recording but no telemetry - it is necessary that manual obser-
vation and data transmission be accomplished.
Meteorological monitoring and forecasting is accomplished by person-
nel within the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District. Although APP
forecasts are received, the Los Angeles meteorologists must provide local
pollution potential forecasts. This local forecasting takes into consider-
ation inversions experience all along the West Coast, the topography, and
wind speed and direction.
3-38
-------
It is important to note that Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District
emergency actions can be taken only after a defined alert level exists, not
on the basis of forecast emissions or meteorology.
3.6.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
Los Angeles is the only city that currently has an emergency plan that
is enacted into legislation. Attachment A is a copy of the plan entitled
Regulation VII - Emergencies.
The essence of Regulation VII provides for:
(a) Prevention of possible air pollution emergencies and pro-
vision for actions to protect health in the event of an
emergency;
(b) Identification of alert levels;
(c) Voluntary cooperation of the public in reducing air pollu-
tion;
(d) Enforced control of emissions in the Los Angeles Basin
during any alert stage;
(e) Including industry or other emitters of pollution in the
planning of how emissions can be controlled;
(f) The minimum number of sampling stations to be continuously
maintained;
(g) Declaration of alerts and dissemination of information;
(h) Actions to be taken at each alert level;
(i) Updating of health criteria, alert levels, monitoring
requirements, etc. through a scientific committee;
(j) Committee decision as to what actions should be taken in
a second or third stage alert.
Alert levels currently specified by the Scientific Committee are
defined by concentrations of contaminants. Since the entire Los Angeles
program is based on protecting health, it is believed that alert levels
will eventually be defined in terms of contaminant dosage. The effect of
this redefinition of alert levels on the number of emergencies called is
not known.
The control of emissions is effected by the Air Pollution Control
District having knowledge of major contributors of pollution and enacting
3-39
-------
plans submitted by those contributors defining shutdown times, and emission
rates.
The first alert level is defined as a "safe condition but approaching
a point where preventive action is required." As such, the Air Pollution
Control Officer can inaugerate specific actions, including cessation of any
open burning, alerting industries to take preliminary steps in anticipation
of more severe control actions, and requesting civic cooperation in reducing
motor vehicle usage.
The second alert level is where a health menace exists in a preliminary
state. As such, the Control Officer must notify the Emergency Action Com-
mittee and request advice on actions to be taken, and use all mass media of
communication to alert the public. Actions that could be taken are not
specifically defined, but range from limiting operation of motor vehicles
to ordering the shutdown of pollution sources. Before shutdowns can be
effected, however, the Control Officer must also obtain concurrence of the
Air Pollution Control Board.
The third alert level represents a dangerous health hazard. The
Control Officer, after exhausting all possible control actions applicable
to the first or second alert levels, may request that the Air Pollution
Control Board ask the Governor to declare a state of emergency and take
appropriate action as defined in the California Disaster Act.
Information dissemination and mass communication are recognized as
very important in Regulation VII and details are provided on who to contact
and what communication equipment is required. In addition to Regulation
VII, the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District has internal procedures
for relaying information on alerts. There procedures are designed to make
internal operations more efficient and to assure that prescribed format and
plans for releasing information and implementing control actions are fol-
lowed.
3.6.4 REFERENCES
Air Pollution in Los Angeles, Air Pollution Control District County
of Los Angeles, January 1968.
Rules and Regulations, Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control
District.
3-40
-------
Chass, R. L., Pratch, M., Atkisson, A. R. "Air Pollution Disaster-
Prevention Program of Los Angeles County." Presented at the 50th
Annual Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association. St. Louis,
Missouri, June 6, 1957.
REPRINT OF:
RULES AND REGULATIONS
LOS ANGELES COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
CHAPTER VIII. EMERGENCIES
This emergency regulation is designed to prevent the excessive buildup
of air contaminants and to avoid any possibility of a catastrophe caused by
toxic concentrations of air contaminants. Past history indicates that the
possibility of such a catastrophe is extremely remote.
The Air Pollution Control Board deems it desirable to have ready an
adequate plan to prevent such an occurrence, and in case of the happening
of this unforeseen event, to provide for adequate actions to protect the
health of the citizens in the Air Pollution Control District.
Rule 150. General.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of these rules and regulations,
the provisions of this regulation shall apply within the Los Angeles Basin
to the control of emissions of air contaminants during any "alert" stage
as provided herein.
Rule 151. Sampling Stations.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall maintain at least six (6)
permanently located atmospheric sampling stations adequately equipped.
These sampling stations shall be continuously maintained at locations des-
ignated by the Air Pollution Control Officer after consultation with the
Scientific Committee. The Air Pollution Control Officer may maintain such
additional sampling stations as may be necessary. These additional stations
may be permanent, temporary, fixed, or mobile, and may be activated upon
orders of the Air Pollution Control Officer.
Rule 152. Air Sampling.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall establish procedures whereby
adequate samplings and analyses of air contaminants will be taken at each
of the stations established under Rule 151.
3-41
-------
Rule 153. Reports.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall make daily summaries of the
readings required by Rule 152. The summaries shall be in such form as to
be understandable by the public. These summaries shall be public records
and immediately after preparation shall be filed at the main office of the
Air Pollution Control District and be available to the public, press, radio,
television, and other mass media of communication.
Rule 154. Continuing Program of Voluntary Cooperation.
Upon the adoption of this regulation the Air Pollution Control Officer
shall inform the public of ways in which air pollution can be reduced and
shall request voluntary cooperation from all persons in all activities which
contribute to air pollution. Civic groups shall be encouraged to undertake
campaigns of education and voluntary air pollution reduction in their re-
spective communities. Public officials shall be urged to take promptly
such steps as may be helpful to reduce air contamination to a minimum within
the areas of their authority. Employers shall be requested to establish
car pools. Users of automotive vehicles shall be requested to establish
car pools. Users of automotive vehicles shall be urged to keep motors in
good condition and to plan routes and schedules which will contribute min-
imum contamination to critical areas of pollution. All industrial, com-
mercial and business establishments which emit hydrocarbons or the air con-
taminants named in Rule 156 should critically study their operations from
the standpoint of air contamination and should take appropriate action
voluntarily to reduce air pollution.
Rule 154.1 Plans.
a. If the Air Pollution Control Officer finds that any industrial,
business or commercial establishment or activity emits hydrocarbons or any
of the contaminants named in Rule 156, he may give written notice to the
owner or operator of such industrial, business or commercial establishment
or activity to submit to the Air Pollution Control Officer plans for imme-
diate shutdown or curtailment, in the event of an air pollution emergency,
all of the sources of hydrocarbons or any of the contaminants named in Rule
156, including vehicles owned or operated by such person, his agents or
employees in the scope of the business or operation of such establishment
or activity. Such plans shall include, in addition to the other matters
set forth in this rule, a list of all such sources of hydrocarbons and any
of the contaminants named in Rule 156, and a statement of the minimum time
and the recommended time to effect a complete shutdown of each source in
the event of an air pollution emergency. Such notice may be served in the
manner prescribed by law for the service of summons, or by registered or
certified mail. Each such person shall, within sixty (60) days after the
receipt of such notice, or within such additional time as the Air Pollution
Control Officer may specify in writing, submit to the Air Pollution Control
Officer the plans and information described in the notice.
b. The Air Pollution Control Officer shall prepare appropriate plans
to be made effective and action to be taken in respect to a First or Second
Alert as follows:
3-42
-------
In respect to a First Alert, the Air Pollution Control Officer shall
develop plans calling for the operation of all privately owned vehicles on
a pool basis as may be arranged by persons and employers of persons oper-
ating vehicles from home to work and in the business of such employer.
In respect to a Second Alert, the Control Officer shall prepare a
program of action and steps to be taken under the provisions of Rule 158,
paragraph c. The general nature of the plans to be made effective upon a
Second Alert shall be reported to and subject to review and approval by the
Air Pollution Control Board.
It shall be the objective of such program to result in bringing about
a diminution of air contaminants which occasioned the Second Alert and to
prevent any increase thereof in order to protect the health of all persons
within the area affected by the alert. It shall also be the objective of
such plans that they may be effective to curtail the operations of indus-
trial, business, commerical and other activities within the basin, but
without undue interference with the operations of public utilities or other
productive, industrial, business and other activities, the conduct of which
is essential to the health and welfare of the community. It is further
intended that any said plan, of action shall not jeopardize the welfare of
the public or result in irreparable injury to any means of production or
distribution or the rendering of public utility services.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall further, by cooperative
agreements or in addition to cooperative agreements, prepare plans for
action in respect to industry, business, transportation, hospitals, schools
and other appropriate public and private institutions, and the public
generally, to accomplish the purposes of the Second Alert action as set
forth in Rule 158d. The general nature of the plans to be made effective
upon a Second alert shall be reported to and subject to review and approval
by the Air Pollution Control Board.
All plans and programs of action to make effective the procedures
prescribed in Rule 158, paragraphs c., and d., shall be consistent with
and designed to accomplish the purposes, and shall be subject to the con-
ditions and limitations, set forth in said paragraphs c., and d.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall give, or cause to be given,
wide publicity in regard to plans for action to be applicable under Rule
158, paragraphs c., and d., in order that all persons within the district
shall be able to understand and be prepared to render compliance therewith
in the event of the sounding of a Second Alert.
Rule 155. Declaration of Alerts.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall declare the appropriate "alert"
whenever the concentration of any air pollution contaminant has been
verified to have reached the standards set forth in Rule 156.
Rule 155.1. Notification of Alerts.
Following the declaration of the appropriate "alert", the Air Pollu-
tion Control Officer shall communicate notification of the declaration of
the alert to:
3-43
-------
1. All Sheriff's substations.
2. All city police departments.
3. California Highway Patrol.
b. Local public officials and public safety personnel, who have
responsibilities or interests in air pollution alerts.
c. Air polluting industrial plants and processes which require
"alert" data in order to effect pre-arranged plans designed to reduce the
output of air contaminants.
d. The general public.
e. All Air Pollution Control District personnel.
Rule 155.2. Radio Communication System.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall install and maintain, in con-
tinuous operation, a radio transmitter with selective calling facilities
for the purpose of broadcasting the declaration of alerts and information
and instructions which may be appropriate to carry out the provisions of
this regulation.
Radio receiving equipment with decoding device capable of receiving
broadcasts from the Air Pollution Control Officer of the declaration of
alerts and information and instructions thereto shall be installed and
properly maintained and operated during all hours of plant operation by
any person who operates or uses any:
a. Petroleum refinery.
b. Bulk gasoline loading facility for tank vehicles, tank cards, or
marine vessels, from which facility 20,000 gallons or more of gasoline are
loaded per day. For purposes of this paragraph, "gasoline" means any
petroleum distillate having a Reid vapor pressure of four pounds or greater,
and "facility" means all gasoline loading equipment which is both: (1) pos-
sessed by one person, and (2) located so that all the gasoline loading
outlets for such aggregation or combination of loading, equipment can be
encompassed within any circle of 300 feet in diameter.
c. Asphalt saturator.
d. Asphalt paving manufacturing plant.
e. Asphalt manufacturing plant.
f.. Chemical plant which:
1. Reacts or produces any organic liquids or gases.
2. Produces sulfuric acid, nitric acid, phosphoric acid, or
sulfur
3-44
-------
g. Paint, enamel, lacquer, or varnish manufacturing plant in which
10,000 gallons or more per month of organic solvents, diluents or thinners,
or any combination thereof are combined or manufactured into paint, enamel,
lacquer, or varnish.
h. Rubber tire manufacturing or rubber reclaiming plant.
i. Automobile assembly or automobile body plant.
j. Metal melting, refining or smelting plant in which a total of
2,500 pounds or more of metal are in a molten state at any one time or are
poured in any one hour.
k. Rock wool manufacturing plant.
1. Glass or frit manufacturing plant in which a total of 4,000
pounds or more of glass or frit or both are in a molten state at any one
time or are poured in any one hour.
Rule 156. Alert Stages For Toxic Air Pollutants.
(in parts per million of air)
First Alert Second Alert Third Alert
Carbon Monoxide* 100 200 300
Nitrogen Oxides* 3 5 10
Sulfur Oxides* 3 5 10
Ozone* 1.0 1.0 1.5
First Alert: Close approach to maximum allowable concentration for the
population at large. Still safe but approaching a point where
preventive action is required.
Second Alert: Air contamination level at which a health menace exists in
a preliminary state.
Third Alert: Air contamination level at which a dangerous health menace
exists.
*How measured: The concentrations of air contaminants shall be measured
in accordance with the procedures and recommendations established by the
Scientific Committee.
Rule 157. First Alert Action.
This is a warning alert and shall be declared whenever the concentra-
tion of any contaminant has been verified to have reached the standards for
the "first alert" set forth in Rule 156. The following action shall be
taken upon the calling of the First Alert:
3-45
-------
a. A person shall not burn any combustible refuse at any location
within the basin in an open fire.
b. Any person operating or maintaining any industrial, commercial or
business establishment other than power plants or heating plants essential
to health or safety, which establishments emit hydrocarbons or any of the
contaminants named in Rule 156, and any person operating any private non-
commercial vehicle, shall, during the First Alert period, take the neces-
sary preliminary steps to the action required should a Second Alert be
declared.
c. The Air Pollution Control Officer shall, by the use of all appro-
priate mass media of communication, request the public to stop all un-
essential use of vehicles in the basin and to operate all privately owned
vehicles on a pool basis, and shall request all employers to activate
employee car pools.
d. When, after the declaration of the First Alert it appears to the
Air Pollution Control Officer that the concentration of any contaminants in
all or any portion of the basin is increasing in such a manner that a Second
Alert is likely to be called, he shall take the following actions:
1. Notify the Emergency Action Committee and request advice
on actions to be taken.
2. Give all possible notice to the public by all mass media
of communication that a Second Alert may be called.
Rule 158. Second Alert Action.
This is a preliminary health hazard alert and shall be declared when
an air contaminant has been verified to have reached the standards set
forth for the "Second Alert" in Rule 156.
The following action shall be taken upon the calling of the Second
Alert:
a. The action set forth in Rule 157, and
b. The Emergency Action Committee and the Air Pollution Control
Board, if not already activated, shall be called into session and shall
remain in session or reconvene from time to time as directed by the Air
Pollution Control Officer to study all pertinent information relating to
the emergency and to recommend to the Air Pollution Control Officer actions
to be taken from time to time as conditions change.
c. The Air Pollution Control Officer shall make effective, upon
notice as provided in Rule 155.1, the program of action to be taken as
previously developed pursuant to Rule 154.1, paragraph b., and to carry
out the policy stated therein.
Pursuant to this alert, the Air Pollution Control Officer may impose
limitations as to the general operation of vehicles as provided in Rule
154.1, permitting limited operation essential to accommodate industry,
3-46
-------
business, public utility and other services as may be necessary in the
i public welfare.
I
d. In the event the control measures made effective under paragraph
c. above prove to be inadequate to control the increase in the concentration
of air contaminants, the Air Pollution Control Officer, with the advice of
the Emergency Action Committee and with the concurrence of the Air Pollution
Control Board shall take such steps as he may deem necessary to assure
adequate control of existing air contaminants and to protect the health and
safety of the public, but, if possible, without employing such drastic
remedial measures as to completely disrupt the economic life of the com-
munity or to result in irreparable injury to any form of production, manu-
facture or business.
The Air Pollution Control Officer may, with the concurrence of the
Air Pollution Control Board, order the closing of any industrial, commercial
or business establishment and stop all vehicular traffic, except authorized
emergency vehicles as defined in the California Vehicle Code, vehicles used
in public transportation and vehicles the operation of which is necessary
for the protection of the health and welfare of the public, if, in the
opinion of the Air Pollution Control Officer, the continued operation of
such establishment or vehicle contributes to the further concentration of
any air contaminant, the concentration of which caused the declaration of
the "alert".
The Air Pollution Control Officer, during a Second Alert, shall keep
the public suitably informed of all significant changes in the concentra-
tion of toxic air contaminants.
e. In the event that the Air Pollution Control Officer determines
that the public health and safety is in danger, the Emergency Action Com-
mittee and the Air Pollution Control Board may take any action authorized
by this rule with less than a quorum present. A majority vote of the
members present is required for any such action.
Rule 159. Third Alert.
This is a dangerous health hazard alert and shall be declared when an
air contaminant has been verified to have reached the standards set forth
for the "Third Alert" in Rule 156.
The following action shall be taken upon the calling of the Third
Alert:
a. The actions set forth in Rules 157 and 158, and
b. If it appears that the steps taken by the Air Pollution Control
Officer will be inadequate to cope with the emergency, the Air Pollution
Control Board shall request the Governor to declare that a state of emergency
exists and to take appropriate actions as set forth in the California Dis-
aster Act.
3-47
-------
Rule 160. End of Alert.
The Air Pollution Control Officer shall declare the termination of the
appropriate alert whenever the concentration of an air contaminant which
caused the declaration of such alert has heen verified to have fallen below
the standards set forth in Rule 156 for the calling of such alert and the
available scientific and meteorological data indicates that the concentration
of such air contaminant will not immediately increase again so as to reach
the standards set forth for such alert in Rule 156. The Air Pollution
Control Officer shall immediately communicate the declaration of the ter-
mination of the alert in the manner provided in Rule 155.1 for the declara-
tion of alerts. The Sheriff shall broadcast the termination of the alert
in the same manner as provided in Rule 155.1 for the declaration of alerts.
Rule 161. Enforcement.
When an "alert" has been called the Air Pollution Control Officer,
the Sheriff, their deputies, and all other peace officers within the Basin
shall enforce the appropriate provisions of this regulation and all orders
of the Air Pollution Control Board or the Air Pollution Control Officer
made pursuant to this regulation against any person who, having knowledge
of the declaration of an alert, refuses to comply with the rules set forth
in this regulation or any order of the Air Pollution Control Board or the
Air Pollution Control Officer made pursuant to this regulation.
Rule 163. Scientific Committee.
A Scientific Committee shall be appointed by the Air Pollution Con-
trol Board. Members shall be licensed physicians, medical scientists,
biologists, chemists, engineers, or meteorologists, each of whom has had
experience in air pollution control work, or other experts with scientific
training.
The Air Pollution Control Officer and the County Counsel shall be ex-
officio members of the Scientific Committee.
The term of appointment of all members except the ex-officio members
shall be two (2) years. The Scientific Committee shall act through a
majority. There shall be at least fifteen (15) members on the Committee.
The Scientific Committee shall have the following duties:
a. Study and Recommend. The Scientific Committee shall study and
make recommendations to the Air Pollution Control Board of the most suitable
methods for measurement of air contaminants and on any changes recommended
for the concentrations set forth in Rule 156. The Air Pollution Control
Board may adopt such recommended changes for the concentrations of toxic
air contaminants for each alert stage by amendment to Rule 156.
b. Consult. The Scientific Committee shall serve in a consultant
advisory capacity to the Air Pollution Control Officer concerning any air
pollution health problem which may arise. The Scientific Committee shall
also advise the Air Pollution Control Board on any recommended changes in
3-48
-------
this emergency regulation which will provide greater protection of the
health and welfare of all persons within the Air Pollution Control District.
Rule 164. Emergency Action Committee.
An Emergency Action Committee shall be appointed by the Air Pollution
Control Board. The Committee shaj.1 be composed of ten (10) appointed
members and of these members two shall be experts with scientific training
or knowledge in air pollution matters, two shall be licensed physicians,
two shall be representatives of industry, two shall be representatives of
law enforcement, and two shall be members of the public at large.
The County Health Officer, the Sheriff, and the County Counsel shall
be ex-officio members of the Committee. In the absence of an ex-officio
member, his deputy may act for him.
The term of appointment of appointed members shall be two years.
The duties of the Emergency Action Committee shall be to meet with
the Air Pollution Control Officer when called into session, to evaluate
data, and to advise the Air.Pollution Control Officer as to the appropriate
action to be taken when the concentration of any of the contaminants set
forth in Rule 156 has been verified to be approaching the standards set
forth in Rule 156 for a Second Alert.
The Committee shall meet when called into session and not less than
every three months.
3-49
-------
3.7 NEW JERSEY
3.7.1 SUMMARY
New Jersey's air pollution problem is caused by factories, motor
vehicles, incinerators, power plants, fuel burning for space heating—etc.,
however, of all sources the two most important categories are motor vehi-
cles and the burning of fuel for power and heat.
Ninety percent of all sulfur dioxide in the northern metropolitan
areas comes from fuel burning; the other ten percent primarily comes from
various chemical processes. Of the ninety percent which is caused by fuel
burning about one-third results from the generation of electricity by pub-
lic utilities, one-third from industrial heat and power generation, and
one-third from the heating of homes, stores, and offices.
Air pollution in New 'Jersey is primarily controlled through the
state Department of Health; Figure 3-5 illustrates the organization struc-
ture of the Air Pollution Control Program.
The New Jersey Air Pollution Control Act of 1954 (as amended) estab-
lishes the functions, powers and duties of the Department of Health in
controlling air pollution. Portions of this act are entitled:
(a) General provisions,
(b) Motor Vehicle Law,
(c) Emergency Control Act,
(d) Permit for construction, installation and alteration of
equipment,
(e) Air Pollution Scholarship and Interim Program,
(f) Tax exemptions,
(g) Mid Atlantic States Air Pollution Control Compact.
In addition, the Department of Health has prepared various supple-
mental codes that detail air pollution control. Included are:
Chapter 1 - Definitions
Chapter 2 - Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from
Refuse Disposal and Salvage Operations
3-50
-------
THE
GOVERNOR
STATE HEALTH
COMMISSIONER
CLEAN AIR
ADVISORY COUNCIL
DIVISION OF CLEAN
AIR AND WATER
AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL PROGRAM
SPECIAL SERVICES
to
I
Ul
Administration
Public Information
Training & Intern Prog.
Technical Services to Local Government
LEGAL COUNSEL
OFFICE OF ATTY. GEN.
LABORATORY
SERVICES
PLANNING AND EVALUATION
SECTION
FIELD CONTROL
OPERATIONS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
SECTION
Maintain emission inventory
Conduct air quality studies
Evaluate control effectiveness
Determine need for new or modified
codes, rules or regulations
Operate air monitoring systems (emergency and comprehensive)
Development of rules
Instrument development
Motor vehicle control development
Procedure development
1
TECHNICAL SERVICES AND SPECIAL
INVESTIGATION SECTION
1
Progress Surveys
Emission testing
Point source studies
| ENFORCEMENT SECTION
| THREE REGIONAL OFFICES
Inspection
Investigate complaints
Registration review
Prepare legal actions
Emergency actions
1
PERMIT AND CERTIFICATION
SECTION
1
Review of plans
Permits to construct
Permits to operate
Tax exemption certification
Figure 3-5. Organization Structure of the Air Pollution Control Program
-------
Chapter 3 - Municipal Ordnances or Regulations
Chapter 4 - Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution By Smoke
Chapter 5 - Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution From
Combustion of Solid Fuel
Chapter 6 - Prohibition of Air Pollution
Chapter 7 - Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution From
Solid Particles
Chapter 8 - Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution From
Sulfur Compounds in the Form of Gases, Vapors or
Liquid Particles
Chapter 9 - Permits
Chapter 10 - Sulfur in Fuels
Chapter 11 - Incinerators
Another chapter, number 12, is currently being reviewed by the
Governor. This Chapter 12 is on Emergency Control of Air Pollution.
Paragraph 3.7.3 of this report will discuss the type of thinking
that currently exists in the New Jersey Code Chapter 12; however, this in-
formation is subject to change before it is eventually approved and is
presented here only as advance preliminary information.
The population of New Jersey is about 7,100,000; the Air Pollution
Control Program employs about 100 people.
3.7.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
New Jersey operates with a permit system and emission standards. An
emission inventory was completed several years ago and pollution sources
were categorized for combustion of fuels from stationary sources, combus-
tion and evaporation of fuel from mobile sources, refuse burning and in-
dustrial processes. The inventory made use of rapid survey techniques and
the inventory is in need of updating on a state wide and local basis,
according to Mr. Munroe, the Director of the state agency.
The New Jersey Monitoring Network, as planned, consists of:
(a) One central station in Trenton which maintains records,
displays trend indications, compiles and stores data.
3-52
-------
(b) Four monitoring stations continuously measuring sulfur
dioxide, carbon monoxide and smoke shade. Fourteen addi-
tional monitoring stations are planned.
(c) Three air monitoring laboratories measuring 10 contami-
nants, wind speed and temperature. One additional
laboratory is planned.
All data are telemetered in analog form for data processing at the
central station. Part of the data processing is computation running
averages, of both 6- and 24-hour dosage values, during high-potential
periods.
The New Jersey Air Pollution Control Program believes that meteoro-
logical information should be provided to them through the Weather Bureau
or ESSA services. Therefore, no meteorologist is on the staff and limited
data are gathered.
3.7.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
The New Jersey legislation defining responsibilities and authority
for emergency air pollution control is given in Paragraph 3.7.4, entitled
Emergency Control Act (1967).
Currently the New Jersey Department of Health is preparing, review-
ing and soliciting approval of a code entitled "Chapter 12 Prevention and
Control of Air Pollution Emergencies". Generalities of the proposed code
are discussed below, however, the code is subject to change and the
following information must be considered tentative in nature.
The intent of Chapter 12 is to implement the New Jersey Emergency
Air Pollution Control Act and to provide for a series of steps that could
prevent or minimize an air pollution disaster. Since the control act spe-
cifies that the Commissioner of Health shall notify the Governor, in
writing, of the existence of an emergency and the basis of defining the
emergency, Chapter 12 will delineate the definitions and criteria for
alerts, the control actions required at each alert level, and requirements
upon the public in preparing for or enacting actions at each alert level.
Tentative alert levels and criteria are:
(a) Forecast - Wherein an APPF advisory for 36 hours exists.
The state Department of Health has an internal watch.
3-53
-------
(b) Alert - If air monitoring during an APPF advisory indi-
cates that in any consecutive 6 hours in the last 12 the
S02 dosage is equal to or exceeds 2.0 ppm hours and
soiling index equals or exceeds 25 RUD-hours/1000 linear
feet,
or
if any consecutive six hours in the immediate preceding
twelve hours, the CO dosage equals or exceeds 180 ppm
hours,
or
if the S02 dosage for the immediately preceding 24 hour
period equals or exceeds 6.0 ppm hours and increasing and
the soiling index equals or exceeds 100 RUD-hours/1000
linear feet,
and
adverse meteorological conditions are predicted for an
additional twelve hours.
(c) Warning - If during the prior alert stage for any consecu-
tive 6-hour period during the preceding 12 hours the 862
dosage equals or exceeds 3.0 ppm hours, and the soiling
index equals 25 RUD-hours/1000 linear feet,
or
if any consecutive 6 of the preceding 12 hours, the carbon
monoxide dosage equals or exceeds 300 ppm hours,
or
sulfur dioxide dosage for the preceding 24 hours equals
or exceeds 9.0 ppm hours and increasing and the soiling
index equals or exceeds 100 RUD-hours/1000 linear feet,
and
adverse meteorology predicted for another 12 hours.
(d) Emergency - If during the warning period any consecutive
24 hour period of sulfur dioxide dosage equals or exceeds
15 ppm hours and the soiling index equals or exceeds 200
RUD-hours/1000 linear feet,
and
adverse meteorology predicted for another 12 hours.
3-54
-------
Any alert level is terminated when it is determined that a threat
no longer exists from air contaminants, that the adverse meteorology no
longer persists.
In order to effect actions that prevent the further build up of con-
taminants during meteorological stagnations, any person responsible for a
major source of pollution must have standby plans that define specific
actions they will follow for the alert, warning and emergency levels.
These standby plans shall be designed to reduce or eliminate emissions of
contaminants into the atmosphere. Certain categories of polluters (e.g.,
coal or oil fired electric power generation, or steam generation facilities,
manufacturing industries such as petroleum, chemicals, primary metals,
paper, and glass) are initially required to have standby plans. The types
of actions to be identified in the standby plans may be thought of as sub-
stantial pollution reduction at the first alert stage; maximum reduction
at the second stage; and elimination of pollution at the emergency (third)
stage.
The standby plans shall be in writing and made available to any per-
son authorized to enfore the provisions of the Air Pollution Emergency
Control Act. Those authorized personnel include members of Departments of
Health, and state and local police.
The standby plans must also be available for review by the Department
of Health at any time. A small fine may be levied if such plans are not
on hand, although a few days' grace may be allowed. If unsatisfactory plans
are prepared, in the opinion of the Health Department, the plans must be
amended. The emergency control act provides for stiff penalties (up to
$100,000.00 and 10 years in jail, or both) if a person knowingly violates
his standby plans after the Governor declares an alert, warning or emer-
gency status.
Detailed directives are being formulated for the Governor's public
declaration of air pollution emergencies. Tentative overall actions for an
alert stage require those person having standby plans to effect appropriate
actions; all open burning halted; any incineration, boiler lancing, or soot
blowing use is limited between hours of 12:00 noon and 4:00 p.m. Tentative
actions for a warning stage has persons with standby plans taking appro-
priate steps, open burning, and incineration, etc., prohibited. Tentative
3-55
-------
emergency actions are all encompassing; standby plans for emergency use are
in effect, no burning, no incineration, and most mining construction, com-
mercial, governmental and retail establishments told to close down.
As in their current emergency system, New Jersey cooperates with the
Interstate Sanitation Commission for regional emergency actions. (Refer
to New York write-up for ISC coordination and dissemination of informa-
tion.)
3-56
-------
3.7.4 EMERGENCY CONTROL ACT
NEW JERSEY
AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL LAWS
PuMMm/ by Ik* New J*nay State DapartiMiit of
H»llti, Air Pollution Central Program, John Fitch
Plaza, Trenton. N. J. 086M.
EMERGENCY CONTROL ACT
P.I. 1967, ... 108 (Title 26, 2O26-36) Supplements A'r Pollution Control Act (P.L. 1954,c. 212).
NOTE: Other portions of the 1954 Act, as amended, and other air pollution laws are available.
They include:
General Provisions of 1954 Act as
amended
Motor Vehicle Law
Permit for Construction, Installation and
Alteration ,-'. Equipment
Air Pollution Scholarship and
Intern Program
Tax Exemption for Air and Water Pollu-
tion Control Equipment
Mid-Atlantic States Air Pollution Control
Compact
An Act providing for •m»rp»ncy air
pollution controls, and supplementing the "Air
Pollution Control Act (1954)."
BE IT ENACTEb by the Senate and Gen-
eral Assembly of the Slate of New Jersey:
26: 2C-26
This >ct shall be known and may be
cited as the "Air Pollution Emergency Control
.Act (1967)."
26: 2C-27
The Legislature finds and declares that
air pollution may at certain times and in cer-
tain places so seriously affect the health of the
public and so directly threaten the lives of large
portions of the population as to warrant the
provision of emergency powers as in this act
provided to prevent or minimize disasters of
unforseeable proportions.
26: 2C-28
As used in this act "area" means and
refers not only to that portion or portions of
the State as shall be described in the air pol-
lution emergency declaration of the Governor
but also to any other portion or portions of the
State where activities are carried on which con-
tribute or may contribute to the air pollution
emergency in the portion or portions of the
State described in the Governor's declaration.
26: 2C-29
If the State Commissioner of Health de-
termines at any time that air pollution, in any
county, locality, place or other area in the
State constitutes an unreasonable and emer-
gency risk to the health of those present within
said area of the State, such determination shall
be communicated in writing, with the factual
findings on which such determination is based,
to the Governor; the commissioner may dele-
gate in writing to any employee of the depart-
ment the power to make such determination and
deliver the same to the Governor in the absence
of the commissioner from the State. Upon be-
ing so advised the Governor may by proclama-
tion declare, as to all or any part of said area
mentioned in the aforesaid determination, that
an air pollution emergency exists, and upon
making such declaration the Governor shall
have the following powers which he may ex-
ercise in whole or in part by the issuance of an
order or orders:
(a) To prohibit, restrict or condition motor
vehicle travel of every kind, including trucks
and buses, in the area;
(b) To prohibit, restrict or condition the
operation of retail, commercial, manufactur-
ing, industrial, or similar activity in the area;
(c) To prohibit, restrict or condition oper-
ation of incinerators in the area;
(d) To prohibit, restrict or condition the
burning or other consumption of any type of
fuel in the area;
(e) To prohibit, restrict or condition the
burning of any materials whatsoever in the
area;
(f) To prohibit, restrict or condition any
and all other activity in the area which con-
tributes or mi'y contribute to the air pollution
emergency.
26: 2C-30
The declaration by proclamation of the
Governor r-f an air pollution emergency and
any order issued by the Governor pursuant to
such declaration shall be given maximum pub-
licity throughout the State.
26: 2C-31
Any gubernatorial order may be amended
or modified by further gubernatorial orders.
Said order or orders shall not require any
judicial or other order or confirmation of
any, type in order to become immediately effec-
tive as the legal obligation of all persons, firms,
corporations and other entities within the State.
Said order shall remain in effect for the dura-
tion of time set forth in same, and if no time
limit is specified in said order, same shall remain
in effect until the Governor declares by further
proclamation that the emergency has terminated.
26: 2C-32
The aforesaid orders of the Governor
shall be enforced by the Departments of Health,
Defense, and the State and local police and air
pollution enforcement personnel forces. Those
enforcing any Governor's order shall require no
further authority or warrant in executing same
than the issuance of the order itself. Those
authorized to enforce said orders may use such
reasonable force as is required in the enforce-
ment thereof, and may take such reasonable
steps as are required to assure compliance
therewith including, but without limiting the
generality of the forecoing, the following:
(a) Entering any property or establishment
whatsoever, commercial, industrial, or resi-
dential, believed to be violating said order
(excepting single or double family homes or
any dwelling unit within a multiple dwelling
unit larger than a double family home) and,
if a request does not produce compliance,
causing compliance with said order;
(b) Stopping, detouring, rerouting, and pro-
hibiting motor vehicle travel and traffic;
(c) Disconnecting incinerator or other types
of combustion facilities;
(d) Terminating all burning activities;
(e) Closing down or restricting the use of
any business, commercial, retail, manufactur-
ing, industrial or other establishment.
Where any person authorized to enforce
such an order believes or suspects that same
is being violated in a single or double family
residence or within the dwelling portion of a
larger multiple dwelling unit, said residence or
dwelling portion thereof may be entered only
upon obtaining a search warrant from any judge
having power to issue same.
26: 2C-33
Any person, firm, corporation or other
entity within this State which, violates any Gov-
ernor's order with knowledge of same, or know-
ingly fails to comply with the directions of those
authorized by the Governor to enforce said
order, or knowingly interferes with the enforce-
ment of such an order or such directions, shall
be guilty of a hiidi misdemeanor and shall be
punished by a line of not more than $100,000.00
or hy imprisonment for not more than 10
years, or both.
26: 2C-34
No cause of action against the State or
any person authorized by the Governor to en-
force any order issued pursuant to this act for
fiilse arrests, false imprisonment, or other tort
shall arise out of the good faith attempt of such
person to enforce such order.
26: 2C-35
Ar,y aggrieved person, firm or corpora-
tion or other entity upon application to the
commissioner shall he granted a public hearing
on the question of whether or not the con-
tinuance of any such order in whole or in part
is unreasonable in the light of the then prevail-
ing conditions of air po'lution, the contribution
lo the same of any ;iar,icular activity, an-i i'-e
purposes of this act. Said public hearing • .all
be conducted as quickly as possible by said com-
missioner who shall give public notice of same.
The commissioner shall have the power t» ',-->m-
pel altendance, testimony, and the production
of documents by the use of subpoena powers.
The number of witnesses and the extent of
testimony shall be within his control. If th^
commissioner, upon conclusion of such hear-
ing, determines that any such order should be
terminated, or modified in any way whatsoever,
he shall report such findings and recommenda-
tions to the Governor for such action as he
deems appropriate.
26: 2C-36
The commissioner shall promulgate a
set of proposed stand-by orders which might be
appropriate for use by the Governor upon
declaration of the emergency contemplated by .
this act. Such stand-by control proposals, when
approved by the Governor, shall be distributed
to the appropriate agencies and to all com-
mercial and industrial concerns throughout this
State concerned with enforcement or impact of
this act and notice of their contents shall be
given to the public. The commissioner shall
promulgate arrangements for the enforcement
of said stand-by orders and, upon approval by
the Governor, notice of said arrangements shall
also be distributed to said authorities, com-
mercial and industrial concerns, and to the
general public. Said proposed stand-by orders
and arrangements shall not, however, become
operative except when directed by the Gover-
nor in any order issued by him pursuant to a
declaration of emergency under this act.
3-57
-------
3,8 NEW YORK
3.8.1 SUMMARY
The nature of New York's problem is too many people in too small an
area. As a result, space heating and power requirements cause significant
emissions of particulate and sulfur dioxide. Vehicular traffic accounts
for 90 percent of carbon monoxide emissions.
Air pollution control in New York City dates back to 1895. In 1952,
the current New York Department of Air Resources (NYDAR) was formed and
given responsibility not only for smoke control and abatement, but also of
control of all sources of air pollution. Rules and regulations were re-
vised in 1964 to shift the emphasis from regulation of specific contami-
nants from specified sources to the regulation of air contamination in
general and from any source. The most recent and comprehensive legisla-
tion in New York for air pollution is known as local law 14, and is an
amendment to the city's Administrative Code. In addition to identifying
requirements for a permit system, emission standards, etc., local law 14
bans the burning of bituminous coal for heating purposes by 1968; requires
upgrading of incinerators in all buildings by 1968; prohibits after 1968
the installation of incinerators in multiple dwellings; and requires a
reduction of the sulfur content in all oil and coal burned in the city to
1 percent by 1971.
The NYDAR has embarked on a rather dynamic program that encompasses
such areas of concern as:
(a) Establishment of ambient air quality standards,
(b) A computerized aerometric system,
(c) A computerized information processing and retrieval system,
(d) Cost-benefit studies of air pollution and its control,
(e) Urban planning,
(f) Cooperative research on effects of air pollution,
(g) Regional cooperation,
(h) An intensive public information program,
(i) Details for an emergency action implementation manual.
3-58
-------
The Emergency Action Implementation Manual is being prepared in re-
sponse to the Mayor's executive order number 69, dated March 15, 1968.
The executive order declares that an Air Pollution Control Alert-Warning
System be established and that the NYDAR issue an implementation Manual
that prescribes the criteria for declaring each of the alert stages and
the specific measures to be taken by city departments and agencies, the
private sector, and other government agencies within New York City. The
executive order identifies four alert stages known as forecast, alert,
warning, and emergency, and further requires the NYDAR to consult with the
Weather Bureau and the New York/New Jersey Cooperative Committee on Air
Pollution when each alert stage is reached.
The NYDAR Implementation Manual has not yet been promulgated and no
information about the manual was released.
NYDAR has approximately 210 personnel serving the five burroughs of
New York City. Land area served is approximately 130 square miles and
includes about 8 million people. The NYDAR, working with the Interstate
Sanitation Commission, serves approximately 14 million people in the
greater New York City metropolitan area.
3.8.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The NYDAR uses a permit system for obtaining an emission inventory.
Data from the permit system are coordinated with other city agencies and
provides the NYDAR with an inventory on a square mile basis. The inven-
tory embraces many areas of concern to New York, namely, incineration,
heating, manufacturing, and diesel, locomotive, ship, warehouse, and auto-
mobile traffic. Work is in progress to process the inventory data via
computerized techniques. Also, the NYDAR is trying to update the emission
inventory to account for diurnal variations and effects of curtailment
actions. Major contributors of pollution give fuel and emission data to
NYDAR at frequent intervals; other pollutant sources are updated yearly.
Figure 3-6 shows the proportional relations of various emission sources.
The NYDAR aerometric network (Figure 3-7) has 34 stations equipped
to monitor sulfur dioxide, smoke shade, and particulates. Ten of these
stations will be continuous (5-minute averages) and automatic and will
telemeter data directly to NYDAPC headquarters. The automatic stations
3-59
-------
10.8%
Industrial
38,000
M/yr
' Incinerator
9,000 M/yr
PARTICULATES
SO,
CO
Figure 3-6. Estimated Emissions
3-60
-------
Y510
Y505
Y500
Y495
Y490
Y485
Y480
Y475
37-STATION AEROMETRIC
MONITORING NETWORK
T - TELEMETER STATIONS
M - MANUAL STATIONS
X490
X495
X500
X505
X510
X515
Figure 3-7. 37-Station Aerometric Monitoring Network
3-61
-------
will additionally monitor carbon monoxide, wind velocity, wind direction,
and air temperature. All data will be available in printout form and will
be compatible for computer processing and analysis. Considerations are
being given to using a helicopter during episodes to provide more complete
information on vertical temperatures, inversions, and mixing depths.
The objective of the NYDAR is to protect the health and welfare of
the people and to prevent, if possible, getting into an air pollution
emergency stage. As such, forecast modeling capability is desired to pro-
vide adequate pre-planned decisions on how to avoid an emergency and what
actions are most effective in reducing the severity of an emergency.
Coordination of emergency actions during episodes have been defined
through the Interstate Sanitation Commission, and most of the Commission's
activity has been in developing analytical monitoring techniques and
establishing an alert warning system. The requirements for alerts
generally depend on:
(a) Air pollution potential forecast (APPF) advisory,
(b) Duration of pollution,
(c) Prescribed concentrations of SO , COH, and CO.
A summary of current requirements is given in Table 3-7, and further
details can be found in Reference 2 in Paragraph 3.8.4.
From the operating standpoint of actually calling alerts, NYDAR,
upon calling a watch status, then:
(a) Sends a man to Interstate Sanitation Commission for 24
hour standby watch;
(b) Coordinates activities with New Jersey;
(c) Convenes Emergency Control Board;
(d) Continually updates and localizes meteorological
forecasting.
From experience, NYDAR places great importance on the dissemination
of information to the public, and detailed procedures, responsibilities,
and authority within the department are being pre-planned to assure proper
dissemination of correct information. Final judgment on release of infor-
mation is reserved strictly for the Department Director or his designee.
3-62
-------
Table 3-7. Current Standards for Air Pollution Alerts
CURRENT STANDARDS FOR AIR POLLUTION ALERTS (JUNE 30, 1967)
Air Concentrations Duralir.n N.Y.-HJ. Metro Area
SOi CO Smoke Sustained Meteorology High Air Number
Level Levels of Air Pollution Potential of
Alert COHS Concentrations Forecast for Next Pollu-
Status ppm ppm (hours) (hours) tants
Air Pollution Watch
FIRST 0.5+ 10+
0.7+
1.5+
SECOND 1.0+ 20+
5.0
7.5
9.0
7.5
4
2
2
1
1
2
and
and
and
and
and
and
24
IS
8
S
8
8
8
2
1
1
1
1
2
Action
Plan
A
1
1
1
1
1
2
COMMENTS: The standards tabulated above are predicated on the presumption that an air pollution alert should
be based on the following criteria:
1. The concentration of the number of pollutants as specified above with sustained levels meas-
ured at selected test sites for periods in excess of the duration indicated.
2. A meteorological forecast reporting that high air pollution potential conditions will persist for the
tabulated period of time. This would indicate that the levels of concentration will be present for that period
of time.
3. The levels of SOi, CO and smoke measured and confirmed for the tabulated periods of time
together with the forecast of the weather duration of continued high air pollution potential provide the basis
for the alert status.
WATCH & ALERT STATUS AND ACTION:
Plan "A" — Upon receipt of a high air pollution potential forecast for the next 24 hours, the
Interstate Sanitation Commission will call an air pollution watch and notify cooperating agencies.
Plans 1 & 2 — When air pollution measures exceed the standards for an alert and the meteorological
forecast indicates profound stable air conditions for the period of time tabulated in the above table, an alert will
be recommended by the Interstate Sanitation Commission to the Commissioners of Health of New York and New
Jersey or their designee. Detailed actions to implement alerts are specified by the states.
, 3-63
-------
Control actions for air pollution emergencies are generally speci-
fied by Executive Order No. 60, dated March 15, 1968, from the mayor's
office of New York City. Details on how to implement these control
actions are currently being defined, and an "Implementation Manual" should
be available before the end of the year. Enforcement powers are the re-
sponsibility of the NYDAR; however, delegation of enforcement authority
to the police is provided under criminal law.
3.8.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
Executive Order No. 69 from New York City's Mayor establishes an Air
Pollution Control Alert Warning System. The stages of this system include
(1) forecast, (2) alert, (3) warning, and (4) emergency. It is the duty
of the NYDAR director to notify the mayor when each and every stage is
reached. Upon the declaration by the mayor that any of the stages exist,
the following actions shall be taken:
(a) The Mayor's Emergency Control Board shall be convened and
shall carry out the functions provided for herein.
(b) All City departments and agencies shall take the preven-
tive and abatement measures provided for herein.
(c) The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Adminis-
tration shall request emitters in the private sector and
in other governmental agencies to take the preventive
and abatement measures provided for herein.
Forecast: (Stage 1)
(a) The Department of Sanitation shall reduce municipal
incineration.
(b) The Department of Air Pollution Control shall establish
a 24-hour monitoring procedure to determine the level of
contaminants.
(c) All utilities and other large emitters, including indus-
trials, shall be requested to switch their fuel pattern
to that of a lower sulfur content.
Actions identified are quoted from Executive Order No. 69, dated March 15,
1968.
3-64
-------
Alert; (Stage 2)
(a) The Department of Sanitation shall reduce municipal in-
cineration to an absolute minimum.
(b) All City departments and agencies, except those which
have been granted a special certificate of operation by
the Department of Air Pollution Control, shall eliminate
incineration in facilities under their jurisdiction.
(c) All City departments and agencies shall strictly enfore
all laws and regulations affecting the contamination of
the atmosphere.
(d) The Fire Department shall initiate and implement a re-
porting procedure to determine the daily inventory for
fuel oil arrivals in the City of New York.
(e) Utilities and other emitters, including industrials shall
be requested to shift their fuel patterns to natural gas
or fuels with a sulfur content of less than 1 percent and
to transfer loads to other areas where possible.
Warning (Stage 3)
All City departments and agencies shall more strictly enforce
all the measures implemented during the "Alert Stage" and the
emitters in the private sector and in other governmental
agencies shall be requested to do likewise.
Emergency; (Stage 4)
There shall be implemented such preventive and abatement
measures which shall be declared and ordered by the Mayor,
including but not limited to the following:
(a) limitation and control of vehicular traffic,
(b) limitation on maximum heating levels,
(c) limitation on use of electric power,
(d) limitation on the operation of large industrial and
other emitters.
Additional preventive and abatement measures may be implemented by
the mayor based on analysis and recommendations of the Emergency Control
Board and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Administration.
Upon declaration of an "alert stage", the Health Services Administra-
tion shall take measures to assess the impact of the air pollution emergency
3-65
-------
on public health and advise the mayor of its findings. In a declared
"emergency stage" the Board of Health may take such measures as it deems
appropriate and so notify the mayor.
Details of the Implementation Manual mentioned earlier are not yet
available, but the following are hypothesized:
(a) Strict protocol, personnel availabilities, and internal
government procedures will be defined.
(b) Formats for public information news releases will be
presented.
(c) Processing and analysis of emission source data, aero-
metric network data, and meteorological forecast data
will be utilized on a real-time basis for identifying
alert status control actions.
(d) Alternative control actions and effects will be identi-
fied and preplanned decision points stipulated.
(e) Pollutant data will be reported on a dosage basis.
(f) Enforcement procedures and priorities will be defined.
(g) Control actions and procedures identified in the manual
will continually be updated.
3.8.4 REFERENCES
Heller, A. N., Annual Report, 1967, New York Department of Air
Pollution Control, July 1, 1967.
Status Criteria for a High Pollution Alert and Warning System, The
City University of New York, December 1967.
Executive Order No. 69, "Establishment of Air Pollution Control-
Alert Warning System, March 15, 1968.
3-66
-------
3.9 PHILADELPHIA
3.9.1 SUMMARY
Philadelphia's air pollution problem is brought about by industry,
utilities and the motor vehicles, with the predominant pollutants being
particulates and sulfur dioxide.
The air pollution control boundaries of the Air Management Services
are that of the city and county of Philadelphia. The Air Management
Services is an organization within the Department of Health and is headed
by a Assistant Health Commissioner.
Philadelphia City and County regulations for air pollution control
are currently undergoing revisions. Currently, regulations enacted in 1954
(revised) are being used to control Philadelphia's pollution. Philadelphia
coordinates their air pollution activities with the overall Pennsylvania
program as well as with the Delaware Valley Interstate Committee on Air
Pollution.
Currently no emergency action plans exist for Philadelphia, but a
program is under consideration to develop the methodology and procedures
for emergency alerts. This program would also develop air pollution con-
trol guides and information on what can be done under emergency conditions.
Philadelphia has about 130 square miles and contains approximately
two-million people. The Air Management Services have about 40 people in
the department, with a budget of approximately $930,000.
3.9.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Installation permits are required and emission standards are pre-
sented in the Regulations of the Air Pollution Control Board. An emission
inventory was obtained in 1960, and has been updated over the last 6
months by the use of questionnaires and personal contacts. The inventory
is not computerized and apparently is not directly tied in with the permit
system.
A new Air Pollution Code for Philadelphia has been written and should
be ready for the city council within the next few months. Next year a
series of new regulations will be written under the new code.
-------
Philadelphia has two permanent air quality sampling stations plus a
mobile station; six more permanent stations are planned for the coming
year. For emergency purposes, the sampling stations monitor sulfur diox-
ide, carbon monoxide, and smoke shade (RUD) and total oxidants; the mobile
lab also has capability for measuring wind speed and direction. One of
the stations is a CAMP installation and additionally measures hydrocarbons,
NO and N0?. When APPF advisaries are received, Philadelphia monitors meas-
ure hourly concentrations of contaminants. These hourly measures are read
manually and telephoned in to control headquarters; both 6 hour and 24 hour
dose curves are manually drawn based on station data. Philadelphia de-
sires a data processing system so that telemetered data is compiled in
dosage form and can be obtained anytime of the day or night.
Currently, Philadelphia has no modelling or simulation capability
nor local meteorologist; a desire exists to develop such capabilities if
suitable personnel can be found.
3.9.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
No formal or written emergency plans have been developed, but
valuable experience was obtained for the Thanksgiving Episode. Currently,
Philadelphia uses the Tri-State Status Criteria as a definition of alert
status, until their own program is formulated. In the event an alert
level is reached, the Commissioner of Health is the person authorized to
declare an emergency status. Actions authorized or taken are primarily
restricted to calling the various sources of pollution and asking for
help in alleviating the pollution problem.
Philadelphia is entering into a program to define their emergency
criteria, the possible actions that can be taken and the effects of the
various actions. This is anticipated to be about a three year project.
3-68
-------
3.10 PITTSBURGH
3.10.1 SUMMARY
The Pittsburgh area air pollution problem is typically composite:
heavy industry and incinerators emit sulfur dipxide and participates;
automobiles account for carbon monoxide within the city itself; topography
is very uneven and induces localized pollution pockets; and local meteor-
ological effects are very difficult to predict because of the rough
topography.
Air pollution is controlled in the Pittsburgh area by the Allegheny
County Department of Health, Bureau of Air Pollution Control. As such,
city regulations, county regulations, state regulations, and regional con-
siderations are all coalesced in a working relationship. The Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania has identified ambient air quality criteria (Reference 1)
and also defined "alert" levels for emergency actions. Allegheny County
has further defined the air quality criteria or accepted the Commonwealth's
criteria for local operational purposes (Reference 3 in Paragraph 3.10.4),
however, detailed emergency action plans have npt yet been formulated.
Jurisdictional or regional problems of controlling air pollution exist when
meteorological conditions bring pollutants from the Weirton-Steubenville,
Ohio area and the heavy industrialized Beaver Valley area into Allegheny
County.
Because of the many air pollution problems facing the Allegheny
County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (ACBAPC), a dynamic air pollution
program has been launched. This program includes: considerable coopera-
tion between the ACBAPC arid major contributors of pollution; updating and
analyzing the data base on emission inventory and possible control actions;
installing a real-time monitoring network and data processing system; and
updating and refining legislation that allows roll-back of chronic levels
of pollution in the next few years.
Allegheny County has 730 square miles and a population of approxi-
mately 1,630,000. There are 129 different municipalities within the county;
Pittsburgh is the largest with 55 square miles and a population of about
605,000. The ACBAPC has approximately 45 people working in air pollution;
and the annual budget is approximately $640,000. Of the total budget,
approximately $354,000 is supplied through Federal grants.
3-69
-------
3.10.2 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Regulations defining the ACBAPC powers in controlling air pollution
in Pittsburgh are known as "Article XIII, Smoke and Air Pollution Control".
Therein, requirements are specified for a permit system, emission stand-
ards, an advisory committee, and enforcement authority over an array of
potential air pollution sources. Also, the Director is given authority
to call an "emergency" and exercise whatever action he deems necessary to
protect the health, safety, or welfare of the public.
The permit system and emission standards are used to control major
contributors of pollution. Through mutual cooperation with the major
sources, the ACBAPC has a good understanding of the weekly amounts of fuel
used and amount of pollution expelled by industry within Allegheny County.
Permits to operate are continuously valid, until the ACBAPC finds infrac:-
tions from emission sampling. As a matter of course, permits generally
get updated every second or third year, and plans are currently underway
to improve the data acquisition and handling of permits by using com-
puterized techniques.
To achieve cleaner air for Pittsburgh, the Allegheny County Air Pol-
lution Control Advisory Committee has prepared a report on air quality
(Reference 3) which will surely have some impact on existing emission
standards. Working for a cleaner Pittsburgh, the major industries are most
cooperative with the ACBAPC and have successfully cut back particulate
emissions and are working on sulfur dioxide cutbacks. As a result of this
cooperation, the personnel of the ACBAPC are aware of a large number of
alternate actions that local industries can take to permanently or tem-
porarily reduce emissions. This awareness and knowledge of source emission .
problems puts the air pollution control officials in a position to rationally
prescribe emergency action plans.
At the present time, the ACBAPC operates 44 monitoring stations
throughout the County. All stations measure dustfall; 31 stations measure
sulfates (lead candle method); two stations record wind speed and direction;
and one station records temperature and humidity. Additionally, measure-
ments are made for particulates, hydrogen sulfide, nitrogen dioxide,
ammonia, sulfur dioxide, oxidants, and carbon monoxide at one or more
sampling sites. Due to the realization that existing measurements dp not
3-70
-------
provide sufficient data to accurately evaluate effects of short-time peak
concentration air pollution, the ACBAPC is installing and checking out a
continuous automatic monitoring system. This automatic monitoring system
is in 18 of the 44 sample sites and currently measured parameters include
particulates, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, wind speed, wind direc-
tion, temperature, humidity, and solar radiation. Figure 3-8 portrays the
•\
location of the 18 stations within Allegheny County and Table 3-8 corre-
lates the name of the station and its eventual monitoring capability.
The ACBAPC has a meteorologist working on how to localize air pollu-
tion potential forecasts. Due to the numerous hills and valleys in the
Pittsburgh area, current APPF's and dispersion models are not always
appropriate. Therefore, many meteorological measurements are made at the
sampling station to create a data base for a better assessment of the
problem.
In addition to their automatic air monitoring system, the ACBAPC is
installing an IBM 1800 computer for data analysis, storage, and retrieval.
Five uses planned for this computer are:
(a) receive and process telemetry data from the air monitoring
system;
(b) store and analyze emission inventory data1,
(c) provide simulation and modeling capabilitiesJ
(d) budget and cost control', and
(e) processing of routine reports.
3.10.3 EMERGENCY ACTION PLANS
The ACBAPC is currently in the process of adopting a new regulation
that will identify air quality criteria levels for emergency alert pur-
poses, and this document is expected to be prepared by early 1969. The
emergency actions or implementation plan that should go along with this
new regulation, however, have not yet been formulated.
It is believed that when such emergency actions and plans are defined
by the ACBAPC, the many considerations of authority, enforcement, informa-
tion dissemination, monitoring, data processing, control action alterna-
tives, etc., will be duly considered.
3-71
-------
OJ
I
Figure 3-8. Location of Proposed Telemetering Stations for Allegheny County
-------
STATION
TABLE 3-8
STATION SENSORS DATA
REMOTE TELEMETERING AIR MONITORING NETWORK
SENSORS
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Location
Downtown
Hazelwood
Belle Bridge
Clairton
Logans Ferry
Springdale
Trailer
Neville Island
Homestead
Duquesne
East Pittsburgh
Crescent
Sewickley
North Park
South Park
Homestead II
Neville Island II
Hazelwood II
No.
8
10
9
8
8
8
12
8
8
8
8
8
6
6
6
8
8
8
Type*
T-P-N-0-M-C +2
B-E-D-S-T-H-P-R +2
B-E-D-S-T-P-N +2
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
B-D-S-T-P-N +2
B-D-S-T-P-N +2
B-E-D-S-T-P-N-O +4
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
E-D-S-T-P +3
E-B-P-M-N-O +2
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
B-E-P +3
B-E-P +3
B-E-P +3
E-D-S-T-P +3
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
B-E-D-S-T-P +2
Key
D - Wind direction
S - Wind speed
T - Temperature
H - Relative Humidity
R - Solar Radiation
E - H S
P - Fine Particulates
B - SO
N - NO
M - COX
0 - Oxidants
C - Hydrocarbons
+ - Extra sensor capability not
defined
3-73
-------
3.10.4 REFERENCES
Article XIII - Smoke and Air Pollution Control. Allegheny County
Department of Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Stockton, E. L., Shoak, W. C., Automatic Air Monitoring and Tele-t
metering to Control Points in Allegheny County, Journal APCA,
March 1968.
Report on Recommended Criteria for Suspended Particul^te Matter,
Sulfur Dioxide and Settled Particulates in Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania. By Air Quality Subcommittee of Allegheny County Air
Pollution Control Advisory Committee, July 31, 1968.
3-74
------- |