EPA-450/3-74-050
SEPTEMBER 1974
    DEVELOPMENT OF A TRIAL
   AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE
                               PLAN
         USING THE BALTIMORE
                      AIR QUALITY
                CONTROL REGION
      U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         Office of Air and Waste Management
      Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
      Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

-------
                             EPA-450/3-74-050
 DEVELOPMENT OF A TRIAL

AIR QUALITY MAINTENANCE

                PLAN

   USING THE BALTIMORE

           AIR QUALITY

       CONTROL REGION

                    by
           ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC.
             7903 West Park Drive
             McLean, Virginia 22101

                Assisted by
               HOWARD, NEEDLES,
              TAMMEN & BERGENDOFF
              Alexandria, Virginia
            Contract No. 68-02-1380
               Task No. 2
         EPA Project Officer:  John Silvasi
               Prepared for

         ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         Office of Air and Waste Management
      Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
         Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
               September 1974

-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers.  Copies arc
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the
Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from
the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Spring-
field, Virginia 22151.
This report was  furnished  to  the Environmental Protection Agency by
Engineering-Science,  Inc., McLean, Va.,  in  fulfillment of Contract No.
68-02-1380.  The contents  of  this report are reproduced herein as re-
ceived from Engineering-Science, Inc.  The  opinions,  findings, and con-
clusions expressed are  those  of the  author  and not necessarily those of
the Environmental Protection  Agency.   Mention of  company or product names
is not to be considered  as an endorsement by the  Environmental Protection
Agency.
                       Publication  No.  EPA-450/3-74-050

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

     The authors of this report include the following Engineering-Science,
Inc. staff members:  J. K. Allison, Meteorologist, T. A. LiPuma, Engineer,
W. G. Dalton, Planner, and M. E. Lukey, Systems Engineer.  M. D. High was
the Engineering-Science, Inc. Officer-in-Charge of the project.  Co-authors
from the firm of Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff included F. R. Madgwick,
Urban Planner, R. A. Baldwin, Economist, J. H. Baldwin, Urban Planner,
and R. P. Steinman, Transportation Planner.
     Substantial guidance and assistance was also provided by the follow-
ing USEPA staff members:  Joseph Sableski and John Silvasi, both of the
Control Programs Development Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Durham, North Carolina, and Jim Brown, of the EPA Region III
Office, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
     The initial suggestion to evaluate the residuals-environmental
quality management (REQM) framework as an approach to air quality mainten-
ance came from Norm Edmisten, former Chief, Standards Implementation Branch,
Control Programs Development Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards.  The REQM framework, initially developed at Resources for the
Future, Washington, D.C., was adapted as an approach to air quality main-
tenance by Charles N. Ehler, Program Manager, Regional Environmental
Management Program, Washington Environmental Research Center, Office of
Research and Development, U.S.E.P.A.  He, together with Isabel Reiff,
Thomas J. Mierzwa, and Thomas E. Waddell assisted Engineering-Science in
identifying control measures, developing and utilizing the matrix and
criteria for evaluation, and strategy selection.  Ms. Reiff made signifi-
cant contributions to land use sections of the report.
                                      iii

-------
     The Air Quality Task Force, Regional Planning Council participated  in
the development of the Trial Maintenance Plan.   Their participation  in  this
Plan was with the understanding that it would not bind the Baltimore Reeion
to a specific data base, method of analysis, or final strategy.
                                      IV

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements

List of Figures

List of Tables

Chapters

I        Introduction                                                  1

II       Discussion of Methodology and Approach                        13
            Introduction                                               13
            Coordination of Agencies                                   13
            Review of Data Base                                        19
            Analyses of Projection                                     31

III      Projected Air Quality Analyses:  Particulates                 39
            Air Quality                                                39
            Baseline Emission Inventory                                39
            Projected Emission Inventory                               44
            Relating Emissions to Air Quality Using AQDM               54
            Projected Annual Air Quality                               56
            Short Term Air Quality                                     66

IV       Projected Air Quality Analyses:  Sulfur Dioxide               71
            Background                                                 71
            Air Quality                                                71
            Baseline Emission Inventory                                74
            Relating Emissions to Air Quality Using AQDM               74
            Projected Emission Inventory                               78
            Projected Air Quality                                      80

V        Projected Air Quality Analyses:  Oxidants                     83
            Background                                                 83
            Air Quality                                                85
            Baseline Emission Inventory                                85
            Projected Emission Inventory - 1977                        86
            Projected Emission Inventory - 1985                        89
            Implications of the Analysis                               93

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
VI       Projected Air Quality Analyses:  Nitrogen Dioxide
            Background
            Air Quality
            Emission Inventory
            Projected Air Quality

VII      Methodology for Strategy Development                          105
            Introudction                                               105
            Residuals - Environmental Quality Management               105
            Application of REQM Framework                              112

VIII      Selection  of Maintenance Measures                             117
             Introduction                                               117
             Potential Control Measures  For  Maintaining Ambient         118
               Air Quality  Standards for Suspended Particulates
             Potential Control Measures  For  Maintaining Ambient         125
               Air Quality  Standards for Hydrocarbons
             Remarks                                                   147

IX       Design and Selection of  Strategies                           149
             Introduction                                               149
             Hydrocarbons                                               149
             Selection of Trial Hydrocarbon  Strategy                   153
             Impacts of  the Trial  Plan                                 155
             Particulate                                               156
             Selection of Trial Particulate  Strategy                   161
                                     VI

-------
                                    FIGURES

 No.                                                                     Page

 1    Baltimore air quality control region                                2

 2    Projected effectiveness of SIP and AQMP                             5

 3    Existing institutional relationships - Baltimore air quality        17
      planning
                                                              o
 4    Observed annual average particulate concentrations (yg/nr3) 1973     41

 5    Baltimore SMSA regional planning districts and Maryland emission    51
      grids

 6    Comparison of observed and predicted particulate concentrations     58
      in the Baltimore AQMA-1973

 7    Average annual concentrations of particulates from all sources in   59
      1985  (yg/m3)

 8    Average annual concentrations of particulates from 1985 domestic    60
      sources (yg/m3)

 9    Average annual concentrations of particulates from 1985 commercial  61
      sources (yg/m3)

10    Average annual concentrations of particulates from 1985 power       62
      plant sources (yg/m3)

11    Average annual concentrations of particulates from 1985 industrial  63
      sources (yg/m3)

12    Average annual concentrations of particulates from cars in 1985     64
      (yg/m3)

13    Average annual concentrations of particulates from trucks in        65
      1985  (yg/m3)

14    Distribution of particulate concentration in the central business   68
      district by source category

15    1973  sulfur dioxide air quality from all sources in the Baltimore   76
      AQMA  (yg/m3)
                                      vii

-------
                              FIGURES (continued)

No.                                                                    Page

16   1973 sulfur dioxide air quality from point sources in the          77
     Baltimore AQMA
17   Baltimore AQMA hydrocarbon emissions for future years by source    95
     category

18   Allowed VMT to meet standards                                      97

19   Automotive emission reductions required to meet standards          98

20   Distribution of hydrocarbon emissions by source category           99
      (tons/6-9 am)

21   Residuals environmental management  linkages                        109

22   Sample Matrix                                                      113
                                    VI I L

-------
                                   TABLES
No.                                                                   Page
 1      COMPARISON OF NATIONAL EMISSION DATA SYSTEM INFORMATION TO    20
        MARYLAND EMISSION INVENTORY INFORMATION FOR SIX PLANTS
 2      COMPARISON OF FEDERAL NEDS INFORMATION TO MARYLAND EMISSION   21
        INVENTORY FOR POINT SOURCES AT ONE FACILITY (a)
 3      COMPARISON OF FEDERAL NEDS INFORMATION TO MARYLAND EMISSION   22
        INVENTORY FOR POINT SOURCES AT ONE FACILITY(a)
 4      COMPARISON OF EPA AND MARYLAND AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS  24
 5      PROJECTIONS OF HOUSEHOLD SIZE                                 32
 6      BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS (yg/m3)             40
 7      MARYLAND EMISSION INVENTORY - COUNTY =3                      43
 8      MARYLAND EMISSION INVENTORY - COUNTY =24                     45
 9      BALTIMORE CITY GRID SOURCES - MARYLAND AREA SOURCES           46
10      PROJECTED AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR 1977 BASED ON PLANNING    48
        DATA
11      BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR 1973 (tons/year)     50
12      BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS         53
        (tons/year)
13      BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICULATE EMISSIONS FOR 1973 UTILIZED IN     55
        THE AQDM TO OBTAIN CALIBRATION OF THE MODEL
14      COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND PREDICTED PARTICULATE CONCENTRA-   57
        TIONS IN THE BALTIMORE AQMA
15      PROJECTED 1977 AND 1985 SUSPENDED PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS  67
        AT TWO LOCATIONS IN THE BALTIMORE AQMA BY SOURCE CATEGORY
        CONTRIBUTION (yg/m3)
16      BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS FLAME PHOTO-     72
        METRIC METHOD (ug/m3)
17      BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS 24-HOUR BUBBLER  73
        METHOD (ug/m3)
18      BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FOR 1973  (tons/year)  75
19      BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS      79
        (tons/year)
                                      IX

-------
                             TABLES  (continued)

No.

20      COMPILATION OF HYDROCARBON CONTROL STRATEGY EFFECTS ON        84
        THE METROPOLITAN BALTIMORE INTRASTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL
        REGION ON MAY 21, 1977(a)

21      BALTIMORE AQMA HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR 1972 AND 1973        85
        (tons/6:00-9:00 am)

22      BALTIMORE AQMA HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR FJTURE YEARS         87
        (tons/6:00-9:00 am)

23      BASELINE TRANSPORTATION DATA USED TO PREDICT 1977 HYDRO-      88
        CARBON EMISSIONS

24      MOBILE SOURCE EMISSION FACTORS  (a) (g/tnile) (without speed      91
        correction or retrofit)

25      PROJECTED HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR GASOLINE AUTOMOTIVE       91
        VEHICLES WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE TCP CONTROL MEASURES
        (tons/peak period)

26      PROJECTED 1980 AND 1985 EMISSION INVENTORY                    92
        (tons/peak period)

27      PROJECTED VMT  (1000's) AND EMISSION FACTOR  (g/mile) FOR       93
        1980 AND 1985 PEAK PERIODS

28      SUMMARY OF DERIVED DATA RELATING TO HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS     94
        FROM MOBILE SOURCES

29      BALTIMORE AQMA NITROGEN DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS  (yg/m3)        102

30      BALTIMORE AQMA NITROGEN OXIDE EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS      103

31      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        132
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES - DOMESTIC AND
        COMMERCIAL HEATING AND COOLING

32      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        133
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES - INDUSTRIAL
        PROCESSING AND HEATING

33      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        134
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES - POWER
        PLANTS

34      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        136
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES -
        TRANSPORTATION
35      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        137
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES - FUGITIVE
        DUST
36      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        138
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR  SUSPENDED PARTICULATES - LAND USE
        MEASURES, STATIONARY

                                  x

-------
                            TABLES (continued)
No.                                                                  Page
37      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        140
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS - NON-AUTOMOTIVE
        SOURCES, STATIONARY
38      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        141
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS - NON-AUTOMOTIVE
        SOURCES, MOBILE
39      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        142
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS - LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
40      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        144
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS - HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
41      POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR        145
        QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS - LAND USE MEASURES
42      ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS PLAN NO. 1                             164
43      ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS PLAN NO. 2                             165
44      ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS PLAN NO. 3                             167
45      THE TRIAL HYDROCARBONS PLAN                                   168
46      ALTERNATE PARTICULATE PLAN NO. 1                              169
47      ALTERNATE PARTICULATE PLAN NO. 2                              170
48      ALTERNATE PARTICULATE PLAN NO. 3                              171
49      THE TRIAL PARTICULATE PLAN                                    172
                                   XI

-------
                                  CHAPTER I
                                INTRODUCTION

     As outlined in the Federal Register (40 CFR 51.12(e)), all states were
required to identify those areas of their state  that have  the potential
for exceeding National Ambient Air Quality Standards  (NAAQS) as a  result
of projected growth in emissions over the 10-year period 1975 to 1985.
The Baltimore Air Quality Control Region (Figure 1) was so identified.
     For this Region it was necessary to prepare and submit the following
(40 CFR 51.12(g)):
     "(1) An analysis of the impact on air quality of projected growth
          and development over the 10-year period from  the date of submittal.
     "(2) A plan to prevent any national standards from being exceeded
          over the 10-year period from the date  of submittal.  Such plan shall
          include, as necessary, control strategy revisions and/or other
          measures to insure that projected  growth and  development will
          be compatible with maintenance of  the  national standards throughout
          such 10-year period."
     As a part of the overall air quality planning process for the Baltimore
Air Quality Control Region, the Office of Air Programs  of  the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency contracted with Engineering-Science, Inc. (ES)
to evaluate and critique EPA's draft Air Quality Maintenance Plan  guidelines.
In addition, ES was requested to develop for the Baltimore Air Quality Con-
trol Region a prototype air quality maintenance  plan.   The objectives in
developing this trial plan were to test the  guidelines, to determine areas
of weakness, and to develop recommendations  for  improvements so that the
State and local agencies would be able to develop maintenance plans in a
direct and orderly fashion.  In addition, it was felt that improved clarity

-------
                        PENNSYLVANIA
                                                    HARFORD
                                                     COUNTY
BALTIMORE
  COUNTY
CARROLL
 COUNTY
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                             BALTIMORE
                   HOWARD
                   COUNTY
                           PRINCE
                           GEORGE
                           COUNTY
                                     ANNE
                                    ARUNDEL
                                    COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
        Figure  1.   Baltimore  air quality control  region

-------
in the guideline documents would result in a more uniform format and would
enhance completeness of the plans at the time they were submitted to EPA.
     The Baltimore Air Quality Control Region boundaries conform to the
Baltimore Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area and encompass  2,364 square
miles (Figure 1).   Included in the Region are the City  of Baltimore and
the counties of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and  Howard.   The
Region forms the western edge of the northern section of Chesapeake Bay.
The western portion of the Region lies in the Piedmont  Plateau,  while  the
eastern portion lies within the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain.   The eastern
portion is generally flat, with elevations of less than 500 feet.   Toward
the west, the elevation rises gradually to the gently rolling areas of
Carroll and Howard Counties where elevations reach 1,000 feet.   The topography
generally permits  free air movement with little channeling effects.
     Population of the Region increased 19 percent between 1960 and 1970
to a total of nearly 2.1 million.  The 1970 census data indicate that  pro-
jected growth patterns and population estimates were reasonably accurate
except for the City of Baltimore, which was estimated to have lost approxi-
mately four percent in population.  The population of Baltimore County
increased over 26  percent in the same 10-year period and ranked as the most
populous county in the State.
     Meteorological conditions conducive to the accumulation of air pollutants
can and do occur in the Baltimore Metropolitan Area. Topography does  not
materially restrict free flow of air throughout the Area, but two meterolog-
ical factors, light winds and a stable temperature lapse rate,  occasionally
increase the concentrations of air pollution.  Clear skies and  light winds
with stagnant atmospheric conditions lead to the accumulation of pollutants
Such conditions usually prevail near the centers of high barometric pressure
(anticyclones).
     Weather bureau data indicate that inversion conditions occur on short-
term bases about 34 percent of the time in the Region.   Over a  thirty-year
interval, the Region averaged 1.5 times per year when stagnation occured
that averaged 4.8 days duration.  During the same thirty-year period,  the
region experienced three cases of stagnation that lasted for seven or  more days.

-------
     This  trial  air  quality  maintenance plan was developed on a twenty-week
 time schedule  to aid EPA in  meeting  certain deadlines.  Because time was
 of  the essence,  it was  not always possible to utilize the guideline documents
 as  working tools for the development of the trial Air Quality Maintenance
 Plan.  Also,  the time limitation did not permit extensive coordination with
 State, regional, or  local agencies.   Where guidelines or basic issues were
 lacking  or unresolved,  the obstacles were noted in the critique, certain
 assumptions were made (based on the  best information available), and prepara-
 tion of  the trial maintenance plan proceeded.  In general, this approach met the
 objective  of  identifying problem areas which will be common to all planners
 and control officials attempting to  prepare maintenance plans for other areas
 of  the country.   For the reasons noted, it is emphasized that this trial
 maintenance plan is  preliminary and  will require additional baseline informa-
 tion and detailed consideration of the control measures prior to actual plan
 preparation by the State.
     Four  pollutants were considered for analysis in this report [i.e., sus-
 pended particulates, sulfur  dioxide,  oxidant  (hydrocarbons) and nitrogen dioxide
 Carbon monoxide  was  not included in  the trial plan.  A preliminary analysis
 based on existing air quality and emission inventory data indicated that the
 future carbon  monoxide  levels would  not exceed the standards over the 10 year
 period and therefore should  not be considered in the maintenance program.
     The time  frame  in which  these air quality maintenance plans were con-
 sidered  to  be  applicable was  1975 to  1985.  The geographic region for which
 the air  quality  maintenance plan was  developed included:  Baltimore City;
 Baltimore County, Anne Arundel County, Carroll County, Howard County, and
 Harford  County.
     To  initiate  analyses of  the need for air quality maintenance plans, ES
 considered  the existing air quality,  existing emission inventory, and
existing regulations  and compliance schedules for reducing various  pollutant
sources.   Maintenance plans were conceptually designed to offset increases
in projected emissions as a result of growth through enactment of increasingly
stringent control measures (Figure 2).  It was therefore assumed that exist-
ing regulations would be complied with by 1975 or 1977.  However, it was
recognized  that,  in  certain cases,  i.e. oxidants, the National Secondary

-------
                 100
                         1      I       I      T
                                                     1      I      I       I      I       I      f
                 60
                 60
                                   NATIONAL SECONDARY AMBIENT
                                   AIR QUALITY STANDARD
Ln
40
20
                                                                                    LEGEND

                                                                    	 CONTROLLED AIR QUALITY DUE TO SIP
                                                                    — _ CONTROLLED AIR QUALITY DUE TO AQMP

                                                                          DEGRADATION DUE TO GROWTH
                          I      I       I      I      I      I
                                                            I      I       I
                   1970
                                1975
I960
1985
                                                                  YEARS
                                 Figure  2.    Projected  effectiveness  of  SIP  and  AQMP

-------
Ambient Air Quality Standards would not be met by the 1975 or 1977 date.
In such cases, maintenance strategies theoretically could be selected which
would more than compensate for the anticipated growth in emissions.  The
selected control measures would  thereby offer the possibility of eventually
replacing currently unacceptable control measures such as gasoline rationing.
During preparation of  this document, Congress extended the date for additional
motor vehicle emission controls  to 1977 and  limited application of certain
measures which had been earlier  advocated  as hydrocarbon control (VlfT) measures
for this analysis, ES  assumed that by the  year 1985 motor vehicles would be
tightly controlled.
     The air quality maintenance control measures developed and presented in
the report should be considered  to be preliminary.  The primary value of the
document is intended to be a demonstration and test application of the EPA
guideline documents rather than  a thorough and complete development of a final
air quality maintenance plan for the Baltimore Air Quality Control Region.
The approach and the experiences cited  in  this report should be of maximum
benefit to the professional  planners and air pollution staff members who
must develop the air quality maintenance plan for the Baltimore Region.
      Control measures  considered in  this  report  were  reviewed  and  evaluated  by
 the Baltimore  Regional Planning  Council's  Air Quality Task Force.  However,  the
 input  of  the Task  Force to  this  plan  cannot  be  considered as Regional Council
Policy or even as  Air  Quality  Task  Force  Policy  but must be viewed more as the
 opinion of  the various participating members.   The  input of  the participants
was  to provide Engineering-Science with a feeling for the reaction of public
 and private  groups to  the suggested  control  measures.   RPC's participation in
 this plan was  with the understanding  that  such  participation would not  bind  the
 Baltimore Region  to  a  specific  data  base,  method of  analysis,  or  final  strategy
The background and experience  of the  Task Force  offered a broad-based and wide-
ranging viewpoint  from State and local  officials toward the  air quality plan-
ning  as a part of  other and  broader  long range  plans  for  the  Region  (a  list  of
Task  Force members and those participating in  the review and  evaluation of con-
 trol measures  is provided in Reference  1 at  the  end  of  this  chapter.
 Similar groups should  be of  value in  development of  other AQKP's.

-------
     In this investigation, the trial air quality maintenance plan was de-
veloped so that the National Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards would
be achieved and maintained.  The analyses did not attempt to develop plans
for achieving or maintaining more stringent ambient air quality standards
of the State of Maryland.  The four contaminants [suspended particulates,
sulfur dioxide, oxidant (hydrocarbons) and nitrogen dioxide]  were analyzed
separately and results of the analyses appear as four separate chapters in
the report.  Distinct maintenance measures were suggested for two contaminants,
particulates and hydrocarbons, which required reduction over the 1975-1985
period.  Areas of overlap or repetition of the control measures were later
combined in the maintenance strategies in the last chapter of this report.
     The application of air quality models to the analyses required for
AQMP's received considerable discussion early in this investigation.  The EPA
air quality display model was selected to predict air quality for suspended
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide.  Roll back/roll forward models were
utilized for hydrocarbons and nitrogen dioxide.  Use of the air quality dis-
play model was considered necessary in order to achieve the degree of resolu-
tion required to analyze for areas of particularly high concentrations of
suspended particulates or sulfur dioxide.  Conversely, the roll back/roll
forward model was considered adequate in the case of oxidant because the
hydrocarbon/oxidant relationship is somewhat uncertain, oxidant is more of
an area-wide problem, and photochemical reactions are required.
     It became apparent during the conduct of these analyses that projections
of 1985 air quality could be highly variable and extremely dependent upon
assumptions concerning growth projections.  Therefore, the reviewer should
temper his judgment of the projections presented in this report with more
specific knowledge of the local situation.  Otherwise, the sensitivity of the
required air quality maintenance measures to the original growth projections
could be overlooked.  In this trial plan, ES selected control measures which
would be as flexible as possible, thus allowing for maintenance of air quality
under growth patterns different than anticipated.
     In conducting this study, periodic meetings were held with the Regional
Planning Council's Air Quality Task Force.  In addition several one-on-one
meetings were held by ES staff members with state and local officials in  the
Baltimore Region to obtain data and perspectives on various technical subjects.

-------
     In addition to the Introduction, this report includes Chapter II on the
actual methodology and approach utilized in the analyses and development of
the trial plans.  That Chapter is followed by four chapters  (III, IV, V, and
VI) devoted specifically to the analyses of the need for maintenance plans for
each of the four pollutants [i.e., particulate, sulfur dioxide, oxidant
(hydrocarbons), and nitrogen dioxide].  Chapter VII described the systematic
approach used to identify and consider various maintenance control measures.
Chapter VIII identified the control measures and Chapter IX  the control
strategies which were finally selected.  The Appendices contain background
data on emissions, traffic, growth projections, etc.

-------
                   Reference 1-Baltimore Regional Planning Council
                           Air Quality Task Force Members

Baltimore City
     Warren Anderson      Chairman,  Air Quality Subcommittee TTAC
                          Department of City Planning
     Robert Farber, M.D.  Representative of the City Health Council
                          Commissioner of Baltimore City Health Department
     Paul Samuel          Mayor's Aide, City of Baltimore
Anne Arundel County
     Joseph Abey          Chief Air  Quality Control, Anne Arundel County,
                          Department of Health
     Marion J.  McCoy      Planning and Zoning Officer, Department of Planning
                          and Zoning
     James Cannelli       Planner, Department of Planning and Zoning
     (Alternate)
Baltimore County
     Stephen Collins      Acting Development Coordinator, Baltimore County
     William Phillips     Air Pollution Control Director, Baltimore County
                          Department of Health
Carroll County
     James Naylor         Sanitarian, Carroll County Health Department
     G. Herbert Rice, Jr.  President Board of County Commissioners Carroll
                          County
Harford County
     Kenneth Green        Director,  Department of Planning and Zoning
     Kenneth Unruh        Planner, Department of Planning and Zoning
     (Alternate)
Howard County
     Helen Ruther         Chairperson, Air Quality Task Force
     William Zepp         Sanitarian, Howard County Health Department
Maryland State
     George Ferreri  -     Director Bureau of Air Quality Control
                          Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
     William Bonta        Planning Division, Bureau of Air Quality Control
     (Alternate)

-------
Maryland State  (continued)
     Charles Pixton
     Clyde Pyers

     Isaac Shafran
     (Alternate)
Principal Planner, Department of State Planning
Director, Division of System Planning and Develop-
ment, Maryland Department of Transportation
Transportation Planner, Division of Systems Planning
and Development
Private Groups and Concerns
     Marsha CapIan

     James Grady

     Amos Plante
      (Alternate)
     Rowland Hill

     Frank Jones
     Donald Siple, M.D.

     John Stout
Co-Chairperson, Air Quality Task Force,
Better Air Coalition
Public Affairs Exxon Company, Baltimore County
Chamber of Commerce
Coordinator Marketing Services, Exxon Company,
Baltimore County Chamber of Commerce
Maintenance Superintendent, Kennecott Refining Corp.
Chamber of Commerce Metropolitan Baltimore
Executive Director, American Lung Association
Chairman, Environmental Problems Committee, Balti-
more City Medical  Society
Chairman, Air Quality Committee, Chamber of Commerce
of Metropolitan Baltimore
Regional Planning  Council  Review and  Evaluation  Participants
     Jack Anderson
     Henry  Fostel
     Larry  Henessey
Environment and  Community Development
Environmental Planner
Environmental Engineer
     Jacob  Jacobkaminsky  Chief  Land  Use  Planning
      Stephen  Kelsey
      Alan Leary
      William  Ockert
      Stuart Stainman
      Robert N. Young
Other Participants
      John Banbury

      Ted Bishop
      Alvin Bowles

      Samuel Christine
      Frances  Flanigan
Planner
Chief  Environmental  Engineering  Section
Technical  Director 3C  Transportation
Planner
Executive  Director

Transportation  Planner,  Maryland Department  of
Transportation
Transportation  Planner,  Department  of  City Planning
Public Health Engineer,  Maryland Bureau  of Air
Quality  Control
Chamber  of Commerce  of Metropolitan Baltimore
Better Air Coalition
                                       10

-------
Gary Fuhrman
Tom Golden
Thomas Hamer
Virginia Nox
Daniel Raley

Larry Saben
John Seyffert
Linda Smeyne
Michael West
Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Baltimore
Director Technology Transfer Baltimore City
Interstate Division for Baltimore City
Better Air Coalition
Public Health Engineer, Baltimore County
Department of Health
Maryland Department of Transportation
Chief Environmental Planning Baltimore City
Better Air Quality Coalition
Planner, Maryland Department of Transportation
                                 11

-------
                                   CHAPTER II
                      DISCUSSION OF METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH

INTRODUCTION
     In preparing this plan,  ES generally followed the outline in the draft
guideline document,  "Mechanics of 10-year Plan Preparation and Implementa-
tion," developed as  Task I under an EPA contract to Research Triangle Insti-
tute.   However,  experience and difficulties  encountered in making these
analyses are described in this chapter to supplement the guideline document.
Alternative approaches are also suggested for the planners or air quality
staff who may have sufficient time and resources available to develop a more
detailed and thorough AQMP.
     The development of this  trial plan involved three distinct task areas
prior to considering maintenance measures.  The remaining portion of this
chapter addresses these three basic subject  areas:  coordination of agencies;
review of data base; and analyses of projections.  The methodology utilized to
identify and rank control measures and to select a control strategy is des-
cribed in Chapter VII.  A diagram showing the flow of tasks in the AQ?I strategy
development process  is shown  on Diagram 1.

COORDINATION OF AGENCIES
     The approach followed in coordinating with state and local agencies
and their involvement in the study was dictated by two factors.  First, the
short time span precluded establishing new and special groups or new
relationships.  Se'cond, the fact that the work was completed by a  con-
sultant to the EPA,  rather than by a public agency or by  a  consultant
working for a Maryland Agency precluded  operation under a local umbrella.
                                     13

-------
     There were several aspects to the coordination of project activities.
One approach consisted of data collection, technical discussion,  and  periodic
review of the study methodology and results with specific staff of selected
agencies.  These agencies included all of those listed under the  headings
federal, state, and regional in the suhsequent description of the existing
institutional structure.  These contacts were an essential part of the planning
process.  The means of coordination was through the Air Quality Task  Force
of the Baltimore Regional Planning Council which provided for:
     (1)  Conveniently informing the "air quality community" of the scope,
          progress, and findings of the study;
     (2)  Testing methodology and policy questions with a cross-section of
          the air quality community;
     (3)  Establishing contact with the counties through their representa-
          tion on the task force; and
     (A)  Obtaining feedback from the counties on the feasibility of  various
          maintenance control measures and strategies discussed in the plan.
     The level and breadth of contacts made through the Air Quality Task
Force did not fully accomplish the desirable level of coordination with
the counties because:
     (1)  Not all counties were represented at all meetings; and
      (2)  Representatives had  no  authority to  "speak for the  county," nor did
           they feel comfortable  "speaking for  the public."
The representative members did, however,  relay study  alternatives and
recommendations  to interested parties in  the counties and did bring back
some response.   Within  the scope  of time  and effort  available  to the study
team, it was  felt that  this was about the best  that  could be  achieved.
Certainly it was not possible  to  relate properly with individual local
governments and  their agencies.
     For any  geographic area the  existing institutional  structure can be
divided  into private organizations and public  agencies  (federal, state,
regional, and local).   During  the investigative phase of this project,
specific contacts were made with many of  the public  agencies  having direct
or peripheral interest  in the  Baltimore Air Quality Maintenance Plan.  These
included:
                                      14

-------
          ESTABLISH BASIS FOR
          COORDINATION COOPERATION
          THRU BALTIMORE REGIONAL
          PLANNING COUNCIL AIR
          QUALITY TASK FORCE
                                                           ANALYSIS
                                                      (SEE CHAPTERS III  - VI)
           REVIEW AND DEFINE
           BASELINE DEMOGRAPHIC.
           LAND USE/
           TRANSPORTATION'
           EMISSIONS DATA
   DEVELOP FUTURE
   (1975-1985)
   GROWTH FACTORS
   AND DEVELOPMENT
   PATTERNS
.PROJECT I960 AND 1985
EMISSIONS FOR CRITERIA
POLLUTANTS:   TSP
             S02
 MODEL 1980
 AND 1985
 AMBIENT
 AIR QUALITY
      DETERMINE
      POLLUTANTS
      WHICH
      EXCEED
      NAAQS
IDENTIFY
SOURCES
OF POLLUTANTS
                                                                                   STRATEGY PREPARATION  AND EVALUATION
                                                                                           (SEE CHAPTERS  VII -  IX)
              SPECIFY
              ALTERNATIVE
              CONTROL MEASURES
              BY POLLUTANTS
              AND SOURCE
              CATEGORIES
IDENTIFY
ALTERNATIVE
MEANS OF
IMPLEMENTATION
(POLICY  INSTRUMENTS)
EVALUATE CONTROL MEA-
SURES/POLICY  INSTRU-
MENTS FOR  ENVIRONMEN-
TAL,  ECONOMIC,  LEGAL,
PUBLIC RESPONSIVENESS
ETC.,  IMPLICATIONS
INPUTS  FROM BRPC AQTF
FORMULATE
ALTERNATIVE
AQM
STRATEGIES
EVALUATE AQM
STRATEGIES FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL
ECONOMIC, LEGAL,
PUBLIC  RESPONSIVENESS.
ETC.,  IMPLICATIONS
                                                                                          I
  RANK
  ALTERNATIVE
  STRATEGIES
SELECT  FINAL
TRIAL AQM
STRATEGY
                                                                                                                        INPUTS FROM BRPC AQTF
                                                                                                                                                                            Diagram  1
                                                                                                                                                                   Baltimore  AQM  strategy
                                                                                                                                                                     development  process

-------
     (1)  State
          (a)  Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Bureau of Air
               Quality Control;
          (b)  Maryland Department of Transportation,  Division of Systems Plan-
               ning and Development;
          (c)  Maryland Department of State Planning,  Office of Regional and
               Local Planning—Baltimore Area;  Office  of Comprehensive State
               Planning—Natural Resources.
          (d)  Office of Maryland State Attorney General.
     (2)  Regional
          (a)  Regional Planning Council
               - A.95 Review
               - HUD 701 Planning Programs
               - 3C Planning Programs
               - Land Use,  Environmental and Community Development Section
                 and Recreation Department
               - Transportation Section
               - Air Quality Task Force
     (3)  Local
          (a)  City of Baltimore
               Mayor's Office*
               Department of City Planning
               City Health Department*
               Interstate Division for Baltimore City  (Joint City/State)
          (b)  Anne Arundel County
               Department of Planning
               Citizen Representative*
          (c)  Baltimore County
               County Development Coordinator*
             •  Department of Planning
*Indicated that contacts were made primarily or solely through the Air Quality
 Task Force of Baltimore Regional Planning Council.
                                     15

-------
          (d)   Carroll County
               Citizen Representative*
               County Health Department*
               Department of Planning
          (e)   Harford County
               County Planning and Zoning Coranission*
          (f)   Howard County
               Department of Planning
               Citizen Representative*
          (g)   City of Annapolis
               Director, Planning and Development*

     The pertinent established relationships between these agencies, and
study groups such as the Baltimore Region Environmental Impact Study (BREIS),
are indicated in Figure 3.
     There were many concerned private interest groups identified in the
metropolitan area.  Among those identified and participating in the activities
of the Regional Planning Council's (RFC) Air Quality Task Force were:
     (1)  Baltimore City Medical  Society,
     (2)  Better Air Coalition,
     (3)  American Lung Association  of Maryland,
     (A)  Baltimore Chamber  of Commerce, and

     (5)  Baltimore Gas and  Electric Company.
     In at least one sense,  the procedures used in preparation of this trial
plan cannot be considered a  fair  test of the institutional procedures which
should be followed in developing  the final maintenance plan.  This effort
was EPA-initiated and contractor-performed with a requirement that the con-
tractor establish the best coordination possible in  the process of plan prepa-
ration. In the preparation of the final AQMP, the responsibility will generally
*Indicates that contacts were made primarily or solely through the Air  Quality
 Task Force of Baltimore Regional Planning Council.
                                      16

-------
                                                                                                                DEPARTMENT OF
                                                                                                               TRANSPORTATION
                                                             DEPARTMENT OF
                                                        HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE
DEPARTMENT OF
STATE PLANNING
                                                                                                                               DIVISION OF SYSTEMS
                                                                                                                             AND PLANNING  DEVELOPMENT
                                                             BUREAU OF AIR
                                                            QUALITY CONTROL
                    STATE PLANNING
LOCAL PLANNING
   STATE AND
    REGIONAL
    LAND USE
      PLAN

                                                                                                                                              UNIFIED
                                                                                                                                             TRANSPOR-
                                                                                                                                              TATION
                                                                                                                                              PLANNING
                                                                                                                                              PROGRAM
                                                                                                                   TRANSPORTATION
                                                                                                                 TECHNICAL COMMISSION
                                                  BALTIMORE REGIONAL
                                                   PLANNING COUNCIL
             COUNTIES:
        ANN ARUNDEL,  BALTIMORE
       CARROLL, HOWARD,  HARFORD
                                            TRANSPORTATION
                                                                                                        CITY OF BALTIMORE
                                                           AIR DUALITY TASK  FORCE
       COUNTY COMMISSIONER
                                                                 PREVIOUS
                                                                 STUDIES
                                                                   AND
                                                                  BREIS
                                                                                           INTERSTATE DIVISION FOR
                                                                                               BALTIMORE CITY
I


HEALTH
DEPARTMENT


L_
PLANNING
DEPARTMENT
                     _f
NOTES:  1.
       2.
         Only  the more  significant relationships are shown.
         Only  relationships relevant to  the air quality planning
         process are shown.
                                                       The  importance of  RPC and  the central function
                                                       of the Air  Quality Task Force is demonstrated.
                                                                                                                   LEGEND:
      LINES OF  AUTHORITY
      AGENCY
 O  STUDY AND PLANNING PROGRAM
	  MEMBERSHIP
	  LIAISON
      Figure   3.      Existing  institutional   relationships  -  Baltimore  air  quality  planning

-------
lie with a state agency.  Such an agency is part of the public institutional
structure and has established working relationships with other agencies.   It
also has the status to establish additional relationships as may be necessary
for successful completion of the plan.
     Given the nine-month planning period which will be available to the
states and metropolitan areas for completing their respective AQ11A plans,
the following changes might be made in the approach to ensure more detailed
coordination with and involvement of agencies, elected officials, and the
public:
     (1)  Stronger relationships should be established with the functional
          agencies involved.  In the work resulting in this report, the more
          important agencies were contacted.  Therefore, for future related
          activities, the list of agencies to be involved would probably
          not expand greatly; however, the frequency of communication and
          the degree to which agencies would be asked to provide data,  advice,
          and assistance should be increased.
     (2)  The groups established to oversee or coordinate air studies or
          study programs (Unified Transportation Planning Program, State
          Land Use Plan, Regional Land Use Plan, BREIS) should be briefed
          on the study scope, methodology, and findings and asked to respond
          during the course of plan preparation.  One purpose of this approach
          would be to further integrate air quality planning with comprehensiv:
          land use/transportation/economic/resource planning.
     (3)  The technique of working with a regionally oriented steering
          committee, study group, or task force is highly advantageous.
          The existence and cooperation of the Air Quality Task Force was
          invaluable during this study effort; however, in the actual AOMP
          development the group should, ideally, be more deeply involved.
          Changes which might be considered by the Air Quality Task Force
          are as follows:
                                      18

-------
          (a)  Expand its membership,  especially from  the city and the coun-
               ties,  to assure that  all  segments of  the general public are
               adequately represented.
          (b)  Publicize its work  and  functions with the objective of ob-
               taining greater attendance  and heightened interest;
          (c)  Make it short-lived with  the  express  function of guiding the
               development of  the  maintenance plan;
          (d)  Give members tasks  and  participation  in the program; and
          (e)  Develop periodic working  papers for review in committee
               discussion in the counties  and to assist in obtaining com-
               munity responses.
     (4)  Publicize the study  and  provide  information  to all interested
          parties.  News media can be  utilized, but  a  local telephone
          number from which either information can be  obtained or to which
          questions can be referred  for  later reply  can be an effective
          device.
     (5)  Near the  conclusion  of the study,  after preparation of the draft
          report, a series of  local  "workshops" might  be held in the Cities
          and the counties at  which  preliminary findings could be presented.
          and community reactions  recorded.  Such workshops could be informal
          so as to  not be confused with  public hearings held after prepara-
          tion of a proposed rulemaking.

REVIEW OF DATA BASE
     An early important and necessary  step in preparing the pilot Air
Quality Maintenance Plan was to review several basic data files, including:
     (1)  Maryland  State Implementation  Plan (SIP),
     (2)  State, Regional, and Local Land  Use/Transportation Plans, and
     (3)  Baltimore Regional Demographic Information.
Of prime importance in the SIP were  the  emission inventories, air quality
data, and control strategies for the various contaminants.  It was  readily
apparent that the emission inventory and air quality data sections  found

                                    19

-------
                     Table 1.   COMPARISON  OF  NATIONAL  EMISSION  DATA SYSTEM INFORMATION
                       TO  MARYLAND  EMISSION INVENTORY  INFORMATION  FOR SIX PLANTS

Facility
American Smelting
and Refining
Baltimore City
22 point sources
Glidden Durkee
Baltimore City
25 point sources
Cambridge Rubber Co.
Carroll County
4 point sources
Springfield State
Hospital
Ca-rroll County
5 point sources
Mobil Oil
Baltimore City
1 point source
Shell Oil
Baltimore City
1 point source
Data
system
NEDS(a)
f'Kl
MEI(b)

NEDS

MEI
NEDS

MEI
NEDS

MEI

NEDS

MEI
NEDS

MEI
Emiss ions. — tons /year
PART.
2,056

174

306

529
6

1
3,294

101

0

0
0

0
sox
1,818

572

2,934

3,007
48

47
1,944

557

0

0
0

0
NOX
964

538

2,864

1,185
28

27
494

350

0

0
0

0
HC
30

23

108

111
110

98
334

15

1,300

879
1,598

1,824
CO
316

350

2,000

20,002
0

0
0

0

0

0
0

0
(a)  From National Emission  Data System-Maryland  1971 Emission  Inventory
(b)  From Maryland Air Quality  Control  Bureau-Maryland  1973 Emission Inventory

-------
in the SIP required updating to reflect  current  conditions  and  to provide a
more sound base from which future  projections would be made.  Engineering-
Science, Inc.  obtained a copy of the Baltimore Region emission  inventory
from the National Emission Data System (NEDS).   A  second set of emission
data was obtained from the Maryland Bureau  of Air  Quality Control.  A
comparison was made between the two data files for completeness, accuracy,
and age.  The  Maryland Emission Inventory (MEI)  was selected in preference
to the NEDS data for several reasons. A comparison of several  small, medium,
and large sources listed in both systems revealed  wide variations (Table 1).
In addition, as shown in Tables 2  and 3, the MEI offered a  more complete
listing of point sources than did  the NEDS  print-out.  Finally, the two
data files were compared for general completeness.  Carroll County facilities
emitting in excess of 100 tons/year of pollutants  were accessed from both
systems.  Ten  such facilities were found in the  MEI as compared with five
in NEDS.  Subsequent discussions with the staff  of the Maryland Bureau of
Air Quality Control revealed that  the NEDS  data  files were  being updated.
It was, therefore, decided that the MEI  data would be used  for  this study
              Table  2.  COMPARISON OF FEDERAL NEDS INFORMATION TO
         MARYLAND  EMISSION  INVENTORY FOR POINT SOURCES AT ONE FACILITY
(a)

Data
system
NEDS


MEI



Emission
point
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
Emissions
PART.
1
1
0
.36
0
0
0
SOx
4
4
6
1
0
0
0
— tons /year
NOX
2
2
0
1.5
0
0
0
HC
0
0
298
0
0
0
298
CO
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
   (a)   Plant—Standard  Brands
        County—Baltimore  City
                                      21

-------
          Table  3.   COMPARISON  OF FEDERAL NEDS  INFORMATION  TO
   MARYLAND  EMISSION INVENTORY FOR POINT SOURCES  AT  ONE  FACILITY
(a)

Data
system
NEDS


MEI





Emission
point
1
-7
3
1
2
3
A
5
6
Emissions —
PART.
338
338
467
6
48
42
66
42
38
S0x
2,220
2,220
4,080
35
930
805
1,280
805
120
NOX
871
871
1,320
78
780
671
1,009
671
390
tons/year
HC
16
16
24
1
15
13
19
13
12
CO
7
7
32
0
0
0
0
0
0
(a)   Plant—Baltimore Gas and Electric—Westport
     County—Baltimore City
                                   22

-------
effort.  It is suggested that,  when the final AOMP is developed,  the updated
NEDS file be reviewed and,  if found in satisfactory order,  used as  the
official data base for current  and projected emissions because the  NEDS
system contains several emission parameters  useful in diffusion modeling
which are not found in the  present MEI file.
     For air quality data,  data found in the SIP,  together  with more recent
particulate and oxidant data from the Maryland  Bureau of Air Quality Con-
trol, were utilized.  These data were used for  calibration  of the Air Quality
Display Model in the case of particulates and for  direct input into the
roll back/roll forward model to calculate oxidant  levels.
     Early in the study ES  considered the necessity to develop an AOMP to
meet the Maryland State Air Quality Standards as presented  in the SIP.
Table 4 compares these Federal  and State standards and clearly indicates the
State standards to be more  stringent in many cases. Federal standards were
selected for the purpose of designing this pilot maintenance plan.
     There is a fundamental relationship between air quality and  the magni-
tude and distribution of a  region's population  and economic activities.  For
this reason it was necessary to review the Baltimore Region's land  use and
transportation plans.  These plans contained the basic data necessary for
future growth projections of residential or  employment centers, highway and
mass transit availability or usage, etc.  Several  sources for this  type of
data existed in the Baltimore region and each is discussed  briefly  in the
following paragraphs.
Data Sources
Regional Planning Council - As  a major part  of  the Regional Planning Council's
(RFC) development of a comprehensive plan for the  Baltimore Region  and of
various other planning in the area, a comprehensive set of  data and projec-
tions covering social and economic factors in the  region had been developed.
Based on the division of the six county regions into 94 Regional  Planning
Districts, the RPC had analyzed and reported on these characteristics of
the region using 1960 and 1970  Census information  as a source.  These data
had been compiled and reported in several documents published by  the Council.
Population and employment projections by District  for  1980  and 1995 had also
                                     23

-------
               Table 4.  COMPARISON OF  EPA AND MARYLAND  AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

National
Primary Secondary
Sulfur oxides
3
Annual arithmetic mean, yg/m 80
/U \ 0
24-hour maximum , yg/m 365
/v \ o
3-hour maximum , yg/m - 1,300
(c) 3
1-hour maximum , yg/m -
Particulate matter
Suspended
••5 /• \ / \
Annual mean, yg/m 75 60
24-hour maximum , yg/m 260 150
Settleable
Annual arithmetic average,
(mg / cm^ /mon th )
Monthly maximum - -
(mg/cnr /month)
Nitrogen dioxide
3
Annual arithmetic mean, yg/m 100 100
Photochemical oxidants
/L \ O
1-hour maximum , yg/m 160 160
State
Serious More adverse

79 39
262 131
— —
525 262


„(« 65(d>
160 140

0.5 0.35
1.0 0.70

100 100

160 160
(a)  - annual geometric mean
(b)  - not to be exceeded more than once per year
(c)  - not to be exceeded more than 8 times per
      month in the Baltimore AQCR Area III
(d)  - annual arithmetic mean

-------
been made using a Lowry-Gravity type land use model.   In its application
here, after manually allocating major employers to the various planning
districts, based on existing conditions and expectations for the future,
population and service employment of various types were allocated to the
various districts based on the desirability of each in terms of accessibility
to major employment and other less tangible factors.
Maryland Department of Transportation - In response to litigation seeking to
stop the construction of the 3A system of interstate  highways,  the Interstate
Division for Baltimore City (IDBC),  a division of the Maryland Department of
Transportation (MDOT), undertook an  environmental impact analysis of this system.
As part of the process by which the  Baltimore Region  Environmental Impact Study
(BREIS) was to be accomplished,  a significant effort  in the  area of traffic mod-
eling was undertaken.  Models for trip generation,  mode choice,  and traffic
assignment were constructed and run  based on the results of  the RFC land use
model forecasts for eight alternative future transportation  system conditions.
Included were the 3A system, as well as several states of completion of that
system for 1980 and 1995.  Data on total Vehicle Miles Travelled for each
Regional Planning District, stratified by type of highway and by level of
congestion, were partial outputs of the BREIS models.
Bureau of Air Quality Control - In order to determine the effect of various
transportation policies and individual projects on air quality in the Baltimore
Region, the Bureau of Air Quality Control developed a methodology to predict
Vehicle Miles Travelled.  As a result of source methodological problems with
application of speed correction factors to link specific average speeds, it
was decided that the use of the conventional Baltimore Regional Planning
traffic modeling package would be too complex and time consuming.  Thus,
that portion of the Koppelman Highway Needs model which related Vehicle Miles
Travelled to the amount of highway in each district and to travel demand was
applied.  The region was divided into six districts and the model calibrated
on existing travel data from the Baltimore Metropolitan Area Transportation
Study  (BMATS).  Corrections to this calibration were made based on 1970 Census
data and this result was used as the base year.  Projections were made for
various transportation system and policy alternatives using RPC data for
population and employment  projections on which to base trip generation  (travel
                                     25

-------
demand) and Maryland Department of Transportation plans for the amount  of
highways in the future.
Regional, Local Land Use and Transportation Plans
     Although the emphasis in this study x
-------
     It is interesting that the growth in the Metropolitan Washington area
will contribute substantially to the growth forecast in the Baltimore region.
Nearby Metropolitan Washington's population is expected to expand even
further and, given the proximity of the Baltimore region, the decentraliza-
tion of Federal employment, the location of Columbia and other attractive
factors, Washington is expected to contribute almost one-third of the
region's growth by 1990.
     Projections for employment complement the population increase fore-
cast for 1990.  An increase of 300,000 through the planning period would
achieve a regional employment total above 1,200,000.  Typical of nationwide
trends, the region's economic activities will gradually shift from goods
producing towards services.  Metrocenter (downtown Baltimore) will continue
to be of primary economic importance to the region and the focus of new
investment and employment.  Elsewhere in the region, existing employment
centers and new centers will offer major concentrations of employment.  In
summary the general plan asserts the continuation of metrocenter as the
central core of economic life, as well as the increasing strengths of decen-
tralized employment centers.
     The transportation planning element clearly influences the actual
distribution of new population and jobs in the region.  The plan calls for
"an integrated, balanced transportation system."  As interpreted in the GDP,
this means completion of new facilities and improvements to existing
facilities for both highways and public transportation.  Furthermore, the
transportation plan is viewed as a means for assisting "the direction,
timing, and extent of urban growth in conformance with both development
policies and utility planning."
     The regional development plan affords a guide to local jurisdictions
which ultimately direct the characteristics of development in their col-
lective decisions and use of land development controls.  Essentially, the
plan calls for concentrated development in metrocenter enhanced by the
rail rapid transit and the 3A highway system, and corridor development
chiefly related to the Washington-Baltimore attraction (between the
Baltimore-Washington Parkway and U.S. 29), development along the Anne
Arundel Freeway (Md. 2) to Annapolis, the industrial corridor toward Havre de
Grace, corridor development along 1-83 north of Towson, and to the Northwest
                                     27

-------
Freeway.  Open space focused on stream valleys and large reserves of semi-
rural and rural land use further define the corridor characteristics.
Anne Arundel County - The Anne Arundel County General Development Plan was
prepared in the mid-1960's and adopted in 1967.  The plan recognized the
certainty of rapid growth contributed by employment opportunities in both
Washington and Baltimore.
Baltimore City - Within the General Development Plan, a minority report
from Baltimore City officials emphasized the specific development strengths
which the city possesses.  Reflecting many of the same concerns, the
individual elements of the Comprehensive Plan  (1970) addressed ways in
which the city could revitalize residential development possibilities within
the region's center, attract new population and jobs and strive toward
solution of inner  city problems.
Baltimore County - The 1980 Guideplan, the official master plan for Baltimore
County, was adopted in 1972.  Similar to other jurisdictions experiencing
rapid growth,  the  Guideplan expressed concern  for the "haphazard, ever-
increasing  conversion  of  the  rural environment to urban use."
Carroll County - The Master Plan  for Carroll County, amended through
September 1973, suggests  continued agricultural use  throughout the  county
with principal development located in Westminster.

 Harford County -  The proposed revisions to the 1966 Harland Bartholomew
 plan address  the  following concerns:
      (1)  Limitation and phasing  of residential development,
      (2)  Preservation of prime agricultural land and woodland, and
      (3)  Separation of communities and provision of central focus points.
 Concern for air quality improvement is shown in the proposed policy to meet
 air pollution standards.  Proposed policies which indirectly relate to air
 quality include the restriction of sprawl development, the location of
 higher densities  near commercial  and employment centers with good acces-
 sibility, clustering industrial and commercial activities, and promoting
 multi-purpose centers.  Again, provision of public services, chiefly water
 and sewer facilities, is suggested as a means for development phasing or
 staging and curtailing development in agricultural lands.

                                     28

-------
Howard County - The General Plan for Howard County was adopted in late
1971.  The plan forecasted further major employment attracted to the
Baltimore-Washington corridor for a variety of reasons.
Data Source Selection
     Choice of a data source for use in this study was based on the
applicability of each source to air quality modeling and on the assumptions
underlying each source.  To determine air quality, changes in regional
population, employment, and amount of travel (VMT) were required.  Popula-
tion and employment data forecasts for 1980 and 1995 stratified by small
areas (RPD) were available only from the Regional Planning Council.  Amount
of travel (VMT) data were available from MDOT and BAQC.  Several reasons
existed for the choice of the MDOT data.  First, these data were stratified
by RPD while the BAQC data were stratified only into six super-districts.
Second, the MDOT analyses were performed by using more complete travel
simulation models.  Finally, the MDOT data were available for the exact
assumptions needed for this study base data (i.e., the General Development
Plan highway and transit systems and no controls or policy changes in
effect).  While these two data sources were readily available, certain
modifications such as assuming a certain number of persons per household
were necessary in order to prepare the data for use in the modeling of air
quality.

 Baltimore  Regional Population Growth
      The  six jurisdiction  region  is expected to attain a  total population
 of  2,800,000 by 1990  of which an  increasing proportion will  be distributed
 in  suburban locations principally  along major highway  and rail rapid  transit
 corridors.  The following  discussion  further details  the  proposed  alloca-
 tion of population as  represented  in  the GDP and  the  data requirements
 which are  important  to AQMA analysis  and AQMP measures.
      The  GDP estimates that a total of  100,000  acres  will be needed  to
 accommodate the development requirements of  700,000 new  residents  and 300,000
 new jobs  in the region.  Of this  amount, 64,000 acres  of  land are  calculated
 for residential use;  49,000 acres  would be  single-family  development  and
 15,000  acres would be  multi-family development.   It  is estimated  that over
 85  percent of  the new  land for  residential  purposes will  be  developed in

                                     29

-------
Anne Arundel, Baltimore, and Howard Counties.  The new town of Columbia
alone will accommodate 10 percent  of  the  regional increase or approximately
70,000 persons during the planning period.
     Information necessary  for  air quality  analysis  includes population
totals and densities by  small area.   These  data  can  be provided  for  the
Baltimore region by Regional Planning Districts  (RPD's).  Transportation
planning efforts have generated subarea  totals,  residential acreages,  and
number of dwelling units.   From these forecast data,  residential densities
can be determined.
     Suburban  growth such as this  has often meant  spread  development.
However, as  proposed by  the regional  plan,  the actual location  of new
population  is  to be  controlled  by  the provision  of  a wide range  of public
facilities,  most notable of which  are sewers,  highways,  and mass transit
lines.   In  addition, continuation  of  growth in the  new town of  Columbia is
encouraged  as  well  as  is the location of residents  close  to major employment
centers.  The  following  areas  are  expected  to experience  significant urban
expansion:
      (1)  The  Baltimore-Washington corridor, as  defined by  the  four  principal
          highways  linking  the  tx^o metropolitan  centers.   Baltimore-Washington
           International  (BWI) Airport and Columbia  are located within  this
          corridor.
      (2)  Route 2 development  focused at Glen Burnie and Annapolis.
      (3)  1-95 industrial  corridor development toward Aberdeen and Havre  de
           Grace.
      (4)  Expansion of Towson  government employment center.
      (5)  Growth focused at Ownings Mills along U.S. 40 and the Northwest
           Freeway.
      (6)  Social Security  employment center at the intersection of the
           Beltway and I-70N.
 The areas of expansion are contained within transportation corridors shaped
 by open space.  Densities  at major employment areas or multipurpose centers
 are keyed to mass transit  availability in every instance cited above.
                                      30

-------
     Consequently,  in terms of air quality data associated with population
and urban expansion,  all pertinent information is available as to densities
of residential development and proximity to highway arterials or rapid
transit.
     Of the 300,000 new jobs estimated by 1995, about one-third will locate
within four RPD's most closely associated with metrocenter.  The GDP states
that Metrocenter "will be a prime focus of new investment and employment."
However, manufacturing and wholesale trade is expected to decline in
importance and this will be noticeable in metrocenter and adjacent areas
ringing the harbor.  The principal sites for other employment growth within
the city will be institutions such as universities and medical centers.
     Major existing employment areas will receive one-half of the new employ-
ment.  Columbia, Maryland will have a dramatic increase in employment of
approximately 36,000 jobs as General Electric becomes a major employer.
Other major employment centers include Social Security, Towson, Fort Meade,
and Port industrial plants.  Elsewhere, suburban employment growth is pro-
jected in the south and southwest industrial area, BWI Airport and Glen
Burnie.
     Planning data available on employment include forecast employment totals
and type by RPD.  This information adequately addresses the two issues con-
cerned with air quality, namely distribution of employment relative to
work-trip VMT and distribution of industrial point sources.

ANALYSES OF PROJECTIONS
     The true need for an  air quality maintenance plan is  a direct function
of expected growth of population  and employment in a given region.  The
Regional Planning  Council  and OBERS projections were used  to  forecast  the
growth  rate for  the Baltimore Metropolitan Area.
     According  to  the Regional Planning Council,  the increase in population
from 1970  to 1990 Was estimated  to be  35 percent  (from 2.07 million to 2.80
million),  an annual rate  of  just  over  1.5 percent.  Most  of this growth was
expected to occur  in  the  outer suburban counties  with Howard  County in-
creasing by 226  percent  to 226,000, Harford  County by  67  percent to 192,000,
                                     31

-------
Carroll County by 63 percent to 113,000, and Anne Arundel County by 78 per-
cent to 529,000.  The already highly populated areas of Baltimore City and
County were expected to experience smaller changes with the County increasing
39 percent to 862,000 and the City declining 3 percent to 878,000.  There-
fore, by 1990 the City would be expected to have only 32 percent of the
region's total population as contrasted with 44 percent in 1970.
     Similarly, substantial growth in employment was forecast by RPC and
OBERS.  The former agency predicted an increase from 869,000 to 1,180,000
in the period 1970 to 1990, a change of 36 percent.  OBERS projected an
increase to 1,090,000 by 1990, a value only 7.6 percent different from the
RPC forecast.  Each forecast predicted a shift in the proportion of total
employment accounted for by various major industry types.  In general, more
service, government, financial, wholesale, and retail trade employment would
occur while the proportion in transportation and utilities, manufacturing
and mining, and agriculture would decline.
     Data for 1970, 1980, and 1995 were taken from tabulations of actual
data and simulation results provided by the Baltimore Regional Planning
Council.  Data for 1973, 1977, and 1985 were interpolated assuming linear
growth.  Because data were not available for number of dwelling units,
certain assumptions were made on household size.  These assumptions reflected
a downward trend in the factor, resulting in more dwelling units per popula-
tion in the later stages of the period under study (Table 5).

                   Table 5.  PROJECTIONS OF HOUSEHOLD SIZE

RPD
Code No's
100
200
300
600
Jurisdiction
Baltimore City
Anne Arundel
Baltimore Co.
Howard Co.
1970
3.06
3.45
3.28
3.59
1973
2.81
3.17
3.02
3.31
1977
2.69
3.04
2.89
3.16
1980
2.60
2.93
2.79
3. .05
1985
2.54
2.86
2.72
2.98
1995
2.51
2.83
2.69
2.94
 The 1970 figures used represent actual data as reported in the 1970 Census
 of Population.  The Baltimore Regional Planning Council reported that
 household size had declined 10 percent in the period 1968-1974 and that
 much of this decline had occurred since 1°70.  Hence, the 1973 figures
                                      32

-------
represented an 8 percent drop since 1970.  By 1980, this trend was assumed
to have continued but at a decreasing rate.  Thus, the 1977 figures were
predicted 12 percent below those of 1970 and the 1980 figures were pre-
dicted 15 percent below those of 1970.  The trend was assumed to continue
but at an almost negligible rate from 1980 onward.  Therefore, 1985 figures
were 17 percent below 1970 and 1995 figures were 18 percent below 1970.
Regionwide, the average household size by 1995 was thus approximately 2.7
persons per household.
     As discussed in an earlier section, the data available from the MOOT
BREIS report was utilized in this analysis.  The data available from MDOT
was VMT by RPD stratified by functional classification and by level of
service.  Because calculations of average speed were not available, certain
assumptions were made and calculations prepared to arrive at these values.
For each level of service and each functional class, the following speeds
were assumed  (mph):
Level of
Service
A
B
C
D
E
F
Freeway
60
55
50
40
30
20
Major
Arterials
40
30
20
15
10
3
Minor
Arterials
30
25
20
15
10
5
Local
Strip
20
20
15
15
10
5
Ramps
40
30
20
15
10
5
 These values were based on the definitions of level of service in the
 Highway Capacity Manual, 1965.  The average speed was then calculated,
 weighted by the amount of VMT occurring in each function—level of service
 class.  This value then represented the average speed on the links contained
 within the network.
      To calculate the VMT by vehicle class, the VMT's were factored by 1.012
 to reflect intrazonal trips not occurring on the network and by O.SSS to
 reflect the fact that, while 18 percent of average daily traffic occurs in
 the arternoon peak for which these data were calculated, only 16 percent of
 daily traffic occurs in the morning peak.  Thus, despite the fact that the
 afternoon peak period (3:30 to 5:30 p.m.) is only two hours long while the

-------
morning peak is three hours  (6:00  to 9:00 a.m.) in length, less traffic
occurs in the morning peak period.
     Based on a communication with MDOT, factors of 15 percent of peak
hour travel for Medium Duty Vehicles (MDV) and 1.5 percent for Heavy Duty
Vehicles (HDV) were applied.  MDV's were defined as light trucks (those
with two axles) while HDV's were defined as heavy trucks  (with more than
two axles).  Although this does not totally agree with EPA's definition, the
calculated resulting emissions were correctly categorized.
     Because simulations were available for 1970, 1980, and 1995, the 1973,
1977, and 1985 data were interpolated linearly.  Where travel in a certain
district increased substantially from 1970 to 1980, accompanied by a
similar increase in speed, an examination was made of new freeway links in .
the area because great increases in volume and speed could only occur in
new roadways.  If no new links had been added by 1973, the average speed
in 1970 was assumed to remain the  same until 1973.  In these cases, 1977
values were interpolated between 1973 and 1980 average speeds.
     Because  of the large  changes  in the system which will occur between
1980 and 1995, the values  obtained for 1985 linear interpolation could  be
improved with  more sophisticated  techniques.  Because the transportation
system assumed for 1980  included only two of the full six-legged system
assumed for 1995, the level  of  transit ridership in 1985  would be sensitive
to factors such as the phasing  of  network construction not reflected  in a
linear  interpolation.  Also  not  reflected is the decreasing  rate of in-
creased auto  ownership  forecast  for  the period  1980-1985. Further, trip
length  increases  in  the  period would likely not  occur linearly.  Thus,
while the  linear  interpolation  performed  in order  to  achieve values for
1985 was  the  best technique  possible given  the  resources  available, results
taking  into account  all  of the  factors governing travel  in 1985 would
require the utilization  of modeling  techniques  such as the transportation
model used in the BREIS  analysis  for 1970,  1980, and  1995.
      In general,  there x^ere  few  areas in  Baltimore where  the data available
in the  region did not meet the needs of  this study.   Data on VMT by
Regional Planning District x^ere  readily available  from the MDOT BREIS
project.  Because data were  not  available for the  study years 1977, 1980,
                                     34

-------
and 1985 and for the a.m.  peak hours, certain interpolation and manipulation
techniques were applied to the data base.  However, given sufficient time
and resources, a run of the BREIS models could have been performed to
provide these data in the required formats and time scale.  Further, more
accurate calculations of average speed could have been made using the
speeds resulting from the actual assignment of traffic to the various sec-
tions of the road network, rather than by using the manual procedure dis-
cussed.
     To account for those RPD's outside the present cordon line (see Figure
B-l, Appendix B) it would be necessary to extend the cordon line to the limits
of the AQMA.  This could be done in two ways.  A more precise method would
be to expand the traffic model to include the appropriate links in all those
RPD's currently outside the cordon.  However, this would be expensive and
would likely require more time than is available under the proposed AQMP
guideline.
     A second, more approximate approach, would be to use existing employ-
ment, population, highway network, and traffic data in the RPD's not pres-
ently included.  These data would be used to generate a set of approximate
relationships to bring out the following information:
      (1)  Trips from outside the AQMA cordon,
      (2)  Trips from the added RPD's which cross the present cordon line,
      (3)  Trips between the added RPD's, and
      (4)  Trips within each of the added RPD's.
 Considering that the population and employment data available in these
RPD's are consistent with overall regional data, there exists a basis for
estimating the trip data listed above.  A test of these relationships would
have  to be made and could, perhaps, be based on existing traffic counts
at the AQMA boundary or within the added RPD's.
     Demographic data were readily available from the RPC for most of the
planning districts.  However, the RPC did not maintain data files for many
of the districts outside the Baltimore Metropolitan Area.  Other growth
factors were assumed in these instances with the intent of expediting the
study but with the full understanding that the assumptions could be in error,
especially in those areas slated for development.
                                     35

-------
     Where RFC data were lacking, county growth factors may provide informa-
tion for more refined assumptions.  In addition, the possibility of obtaining
employment projections from commercial and industrial organizations should
be explored.  A second approach would be to investigate the availability
of state projections which could be adjusted to a county level, based on
historical trends.  The use of trend analysis involves introducing potential
errors.  If a county has historically grown slowly but is on the edge of
a rapidly expanding urban area, its future growth may be much greater than
historical trends would indicate.  Conversely, if a county has experienced
recent rapid growth, then growth may tend to taper off in the future,
particularly if land-use plans or sewer moratoria constrain growth.  Local
information is required to refine the results of simple trend analyses to
account for these factors.
     Even with perfect projections of those selected emission indicators,
the problem of relating indicators to emissions is still difficult.  Identi-
fiable sources are, for the most part, stringently controlled.  As these
sources are controlled, the residual emissions, whether true background
or anthropogenic in character, become more and more important.  For instance,
in the case of suspended particulates in the BMAQMA, the background con-
                           3
centration is near 40 yg/m .   At least some of this background is surely
due to man's general activity and would be expected to grow as man's activi-
ties grow.  The tendency would be not so much for background levels to
increase in city centers but for high levels of background concentration
to encompass larger areas.
     In the case of particulates and S02, a tool exists in the form of
dispersion modeling to at  least estimate the unaccounted for emissions
even if their spatial distribution is unknown.  Such is not the case for
oxidants and NO  where methods to estimate precursor residual emissions
are not available.  If these are, in fact, a large part of total emissions
the roll back effect on air quality will be severly diluted.
     It is hoped that all  of the above points emphasize the necessity for
the most accurate and complete baseline year emission inventory along with
concurrent air quality measurements.  Complete instructions will be available
for projecting emissions in the EPA guideline manuals.  In the study reported
                                     36

-------
herein, those instructions were not followed specifically because of their
:ion-availability and time constraints.  It is interesting to note, however,
that independently the same growth indicators were selected as were recom-
mended in the manual.
                                    37

-------
                                 CHAPTER III
                PROJECTED AIR QUALITY ANALYSES:   PARTICIPATES

AIR QUALITY
     The Maryland Bureau of Air Quality adopted  particulate standards to
promote the general health and welfare for all its  citizens.   The Maryland
ambient air quality standards in some cases are  more stringent than the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards as shown  below:
Maryland
Averaging Time
Annual mean, yg/m
3
24-hour maximum, yg/m
Serious
75(a)
160
More adverse
65
150
     (a)  arithmetic mean     (b)   geometric mean
     Air quality levels for particulates  generally exceeded both the Maryland
and NAAQS with the highest concentrations being recorded in the industrial
zones and in the downtown Baltimore urban area (Table 6).   Rural background
                              3                                    3
levels averaged around 40 yg/m  compared  to the standard of 60 yg/m .   Hot-
spots of particulates are currently observed in the vicinity of the steel
mill but as compliance schedules are met  the overall maximum ground level
concentration is expected to shift toward the center of the urbanized area.
The 1973 air quality monitoring stations  are shown in Figure 4 along with
isopleths of measured concentrations.  The Fire Station No. 10 station results
appear to be inconsistent with readings of all other city stations and should
be seriously questioned.  The station reportedly is close to several unoaved
driveways, truck terminals, and streets without curbs and gutters and these
may be the source of the abnormally high  readings.

BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY
     A magnetic tape of the Maryland emission inventory was obtained from
the Bureau of Air Quality Control.  The computer tape listing provided easv
access to the multitudinous emission data and allowed the selection of
those data which were important in making projections with the air quality
display model (AQDM).  The magnetic tape  was developed  from the Maryland
                                    39

-------
Table 6.  BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
                     (yg/m3)

Station location
Anne Arundel County
Glen Burnie
Harmons
Harwood
Linthicum
Odenton
Riviera Beach
St. Johns
Baltimore4 County
Catonsville
Cockeyesville
Essex
Garrison
Lans downe
Solless Point
Middle River
Tows on
Baltimore City
Fire Department Hdq.
Fire Department # 10
Johns Hopkins
Morgan
NW Police Station
NE Police Station
SE Police Station
SW Police Station
Poly
State Office Building
Carroll County
Westminster
Harford County
Bel Air
Whiteford
Howard County
Simpsonville
Site code

210080003
210080006
210080008
210080001
210080002
211360002
210060002

210140004
210500001
210680001
210140003
211040001
210620001
210120021
211640001

210120001
210120005
210120014
210120015
210120007
210120006
210120008
210120009
210120016
210120003

211720002

210180001
210920002

210960003
Quarterly Average
1234

64
51
26
71
35
50
46

36
29
57
64
64
67
52
43

92
145
67
51
103
81
105
104
64
65

33

47
30

37

75
80
40
88
56
52
60

52
48
83
83
76
81
57
50

112
157
62
51
69
60
105
82
64
104

45

55
43

54

97
76
47
71
70
70
74

50
102
98
90
77
85
86
59

79
147
84
62
66
58
92
70
67
76

109

67
58

68

71
51
42
60
47
53
64

57
72
82
67
67
84
70
65

104
142
77
57
58
49
93
77
62
—

40

55
42

53
AAM

77
65
38
73
53
56
60

49
63
80
76
71
79
66
54

99
148
73
55
74
62
99
83
64
82

57

56
53

53
24-hour
Max. 2nd

197
154
115
178
149
117
145

144
345
182
255
149
180
151
185

351
413
130
102
285
276
306
395
208
415

109

135
126

135

172
151
101
176
120
106
128

116
313
174
179
137
167
151
154

328
404
122
90
179
237
271
305
162
182

89

116
103

121
                          40

-------
                              BALTIMORE
                                COUNTY
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                              70
                             BALTIULDREXCITY
                  HOWARD
                   OUNTY
                           PRINCE
                           GEORGE
                           COUNTY
                                     ANNE
                                   ARUNDEL
                                    COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
              10
+  TYPICAL
   SAMPLING
   STATION
       MILES
       Figure 4.   Observed annual  average particulate
                   concentration  (ug/m3)  1973
                                  41

-------
air pollution permit system and included over 20,000 individual point and
area sources.  The lower cut-off limit of sources  included in the  inven-
tory file was one pound per day of any pollutant.   The tape was updated in
December 1973 and thus represented the most current information on emissions
in the State of Maryland.  While some of the area source entries still
carried the 1970 original entry date, the majority of sources had  been
reviewed periodically and updated to reflect current emissions, installa-
tion of abatement equipment, and new processes for point sources.
     During this investigation, no attempt was made to verify emissions
from any of the point sources.  However, area source emissions (mobile,
home heating, etc.) were confirmed to be essentially correct  as determined
from traffic density and home heating requirements expected for the Balti-
more area.  Area sources were separated into several categories.   These
included emissions generated from cars, trucks, home heating  units, small
commercial facilities, and "other" sources.  Projections of impacts on air
quality were made for each of these individual categories with the exception
of "other" sources.  (Neither growth nor reduction in the "other"  source
category was assumed for the projection period.)
     A computer program was prepared to summarize certain portions of emission
data from the computer tape which would be relevant to modeling.   The data
included the x and y coordinates of each point source and emission rates
for particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and
hydrocarbons and other pollutants.  For area sources, grid location was
extracted along with emission rates.  Table 7 illustrates the type of com-
puter printout report that was prepared as a first step in summarizing
emissions from the five county (plus Baltimore city) area.  Table  7 is one
of approximately 500 output pages which were printed to provide a  complete
listing of every point and area source within the SMSA.  "County = 3" in  the
heading of Table 7 refers to the code for Baltimore County.  The  table also
shows the name and/or location of the source ("Premise ID") and  an indica-
tion of the source type  (Premise code "1" is for process losses,  "2" is
for fuel combustion, and "3" is for incineration).  The horizontal and
vertical coordinates are also listed in the table (hor and ver).   The year
in which the source was registered (reg) and installed, the stack  height
code, the grid location and emission rates were also included on  the Mary-
land tape and summarized as shown in Table 7.
                                     42

-------
                                                                 Table  7.
                                                             .VAf-.YuANU r;;MSS10N
U>

pur-me ID
- • - F r t B

r L .. J ~ - j ' J •* 0 1. H u . £ :> U
^ L L/ i~ F S r'~huL i- (J - 2.--*
-.LL,j! '- J, Fu-Gt -I! . 22 7
fi '.: L u r :- a F C n L- L ^ b . 201
c L c V- I '• - w . o o 2 /
CL ": >'• 1 > IM! . til?
OLE .-: i 1' " . . 6i) j >
c L E . r - i I' K 0 . L d 1 0
L : i. • ' . .- r . . . t . l u >
>.!/ •' . •• U.I. .-!j. 1 J'J
ijljv-*--Ti_ri r'U. i^O
LIU'- .' •' * 1 i. < ni: . 117
^J'-J-*'. ft-. M. • I «. .)
h-.-'-r I. LSfl'i'.bLL SUIJ5 nhllL
"-(-:.<.-.>• T. >.'.v;V L L L ' S'.''. S' 'ftrti TT"
H-r. .-y T. _., .-••ic.Lu i>_ \i XilITr;
n..--r i. L -« '• ^ • • • L i. lo'.j AtliTu
1-.'. •-•• T. f. i'J'^iLi. bL' F. O-.'.toi'LL bi.N'". /sniTt
M..- • Y i . C-K'r-' I.L S'.uf, v.l'1 U
hi^-f t. LAf-'K- 1- Ll_ S'-.'i'.'i LI. Sv.M) hi'l Ic
n » r- • r 1 „ ». - "V ' ' L L L . • . S A f ' i T r.
K..'- I ., .•' <-LU'' K. J . -M Liii « K"L
" *~ . . •• / 1 - •'! -;'J' . ,". (.11. -; i f AL
N •'< i . - • - L '„ .' 1 l\ J ' ~> \ L '„ M ( * 1 f ' L
KM!.)..- ;Lu.'ii;.U'- ', JL Ci:.-.«iC<.L
K. M > : - - I L '• I '' 0 •' .'.No L H '. "• I C i. L
-*\n ••-•"L--!- d • .v.i" c^r' ir^L
r-.. i , il-oi- ;:.:,.-. -.l.r, '-i'i "• ll /-L
—**!:>: r i.Lo.'l .'J.'-1 ~f:0 Clir.-(ICAL""
K ;. I S ' • .' i k. ' I ' . I '• .'• N C L r- L v K .'• L
K-, i j .; LL - -il • J ' •• .1, ''.•»•" ''i C.'. L
Kil-. -v .'LL.''! iso-1 t.il. (.hi. ''ItiL

i\AI3... , l. •. ', 1 ,.j-, A ,,i_ L'-it .-Tt »L
K~l'j.- .-L^t'l'-'j'-' M>: ChcVK.iL
i^.-fji-- I.L. '^i'i II.'J. . ,J.L CnL''iCiL
M'. I j .• >.i 1,1- 1 .\o.» -Ki iiiLMlCAL
*( f i ~ — /i 'f'l'i f^ Ti'^f'ir'L
K ^ 1 ^ _ •• * L 0 •• i i\'J '•' »- ^ C C f~ :: ^ I C A L
s nrr™. c.ri~vr j T *. r r ..• SPIT*. L
Sf* » i . j '-•./(; j 1 '•• '. t n. jf IT ^L
^SPrl .T L"A~~ViT~ST,iTr *i.:.jPIT4L"
H.. M r • i IT i n -. ii.r '. • ;;





	




MAhSH
^ A ;:. S r«
Mi-, in
.'iun jfl
V, i -Cs -i
M A 5 S 1 1
'AS SH
MAK SM
MA:-' ii-l
1..- irl
C.J
I'O
CJ
r.'L
C U
C 7
ct
C"J
Cw
-,_
CO

(. L
( L
C J
i. L.

cc


"~

Pi- f MIS "~"
Cooc NL

^
i ..
- •-{

2
2
2
2 '
"2
2
1
1
1 "
1
1
I
i.
t
.'
1
1
1

I
. -j;
1
__ j.
1

1
1
1
1
. - _
1
— — 2 - -• - ~~~~
2
2
-
( dlHI Y =
" COSOI.-JAT YtAfs
, HCK Vf.K hECi IN
1 9

21
22
26
31
32
33
j't
•35
3-3
J-
j!>
ji
3;
$ j
35
3'j
31)
it
lt>
io
3C,
30
'36~
3'>
36 -
3t
3u
1o

JO
J'>
3o
Jo

36
•37-
i 7
"37 -
i ,
'.i
Off^l-- :;.;LTI i''.-- M-r. I.'.tL LLSTL« J JV
— cr;r".rr— ~~r MT ; v •,;,, ••;•-! ir-.t err-:
T-rr—
P
T~ -
Su 7 302
S'^7 io2
SO 7 5C2
SC7 502
Hi i
V07 'jo2
507 SC2
S07 SC2
S07 l/o/
9'jv ^b'l
si5'/ 5^6
'/3-j b5b
•j *. > *jrju
't'j'i 'I's'j
vsv 5">it
'/ !/ '1 'J .> M
S j t '^ lj 0
1 0 5 > J S
t.t)5 ^O-/
t L b 3 J ')
'J J i' ^ U '>
bfab 5os
o o 5 53)
oi/> L/w'J
835 50S"
oo 5 bOS
u<';3 3JS
t o 'j 5 o s

oo r r O'j
il '. ~j bo S
"3c5 509
C J J ') 'j 'l


"377 -...:r--
c/j !..U
-37-j--;2i -


- -on ^ * / i* —
'!/;.. J L* u
70 6S"
7G i)9
/C 6S
Vo os*
7C 6S
/U O'j
70 „<>
70 CS
70 o-i
/O OS
70 69
70 oS
70 cS
6'* Ob
6C (-•»
(. J CO
To oo
n IL
69 o>)
OS 'i 2
70 oO
/ 0 'j '}
73 30
6V 00
6v Cu
(> S j 0
60 00
^s Jo
f. T "CJ
^ '/ 0 j
6S" 00
ts Co
l,ri VO
os 00

c S UO
'j9 00
&9 00
o'< -)U
09 OJ
ts oo
7r 71
//: /l
72 71
j', in
t9 0 J
r.7 T)
J
STAK'
.

^
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
J
•5
1
'• 1
3
1
'3
3
't
•t
•»
s
'»
	 A ~"
^
A
4,

't
't
^t
•»
C,

-5 —
b
---- 5-
l
bh
-. -r.
3FIO 	 EMISSION PATE (LB/AVG. DAY)
LOCA SU2 PART NOX CO
.
•^
0 0

J •> 0.0
'jl O.C
3S 0.0
39 0.0
3 > 0.0
3 '* O.O
39
3s

JS
^ *
'(O
-»0
10
40

-------
     In this study only major point sources were considered.   (There were
approximately 9,000 point sources identified from the tape printout.)  Major
point sources were defined as those sources emitting more than 25  tons per
year of a specific pollutant.  All area sources within the SMSA were con-
sidered in this study, even if a specific grid did not have emissions
totalling 25 tons per year.  Table 8 summarizes the type of printout report
that was generated from the computer tape, listing only the 25 tons per
year point sources.  The headings and labels on Table 8 were identical with
those of Table 7.
     Table 9 summarizes the Baltimore City grid (area) sources. Note that
the smallest grid  (#20) shows emissions of .03 tons/day (11 tons per year)
while' the largest grid (#11) emits 0.97 tons per day.  The grid number
specified in Table 9 refers to the grid identification from Maryland Bureau
of Air Quality.  There are a total of 137 grids in the entire State of
Maryland and this sample page includes all the grids (or area sources)  for
Baltimore City.  Other similar tables were prepared for the five surrounding
counties.
     For process sources and fuel combustion sources the Maryland  emission
inventory system provided a stack code with a value between 1 and  7,
corresponding to various stack height ranges.  For example, a stack  code
of 3 referred to those stacks that were between 51 and 100 feet high.
For this range, the mid-point of 75 feet was assumed for inclusion in  the
model.  For incineration type sources, actual stack heights were  listed on
the file in the stack code printout.  Where the Maryland emission  inventory
file lacked certain data on stack parameters — stack diameters,  exit
velocity, and temperature were estimated from published EPA exhaust  gas
factors for inclusion in the dispersion model.  For future preparation  of
an AQMP, it would be desirable to verify these exhaust parameters  from the
State's permit file.  For major point sources the assumed effective  stack
height may be in error and it is emphasized that actual stack parameter data
are essential for  accurately predicting air quality.

PROJECTED EMISSION INVENTORY
     Area sources  identified on  the computer tape file were presented on a
grid basis, but unfortunately, the Maryland grids did not coincide with the

                                      44

-------
                                                                      Table  8.
                                                                 MARYLAND  EMISSION INVENTORY
                                                                       COUNTY = 24
               »i".«»scuRCE~S GREATER  THAN "25 TCNS~PE« YEAR FOR~"~S02 OR  PART
Ol
K * C •' 1 3
PPEMISE ID CODE NO
iALnuO(P. 'jor,, CHfM. OIV.
GLIN MATHieSDN CHEM. CCJ"P.
•"LI1* 'l'ATHltS:N C'lEM. CHOP.
''LI'1* MATHlrSiT. CHrM. COP.
'_LIN "ATHifcSj'i CHE;M. co1* P.
ML ico f H:MI r;.L COP ".
«LL IrU Lhf-MI CAL COK°.
ALLlcl) (."HIC-iL CC«^.
uAvISL'i CHEMICAL (w.fc. GFACF)
io^ici' LMEMIC.ALS cu.
CCNF I'lLf.lAL ;;IL CO.
CONTINENTAL OIL CO.
Cr'.T I\-r.TiL CIL CO.
:r,',r ir,:\TAL OIL CO.-CH-MICALS
A'^KICAN SMELTING £ REFINING CO.
AMERICAN SMELTING C REFINING CO.
A"tJICA'l SUITING I GfflNING CO.
AM^ICAN SMELTING t "^FINING CO.
A-E-'ITAN SMELTING C RCFIMNG CO.
(\-'.fiICAr. SALTING C PF.HrU'-G CO.
AME-ICAN S^F.LTING i. ".cFIMNG CO.
k»LUi.'lN-i'Jl»Kct-MA<9
69
'i9
00
70
41
40
40
40
09
26
52
26
00
00
00
64
00
00
71
71
00
55
55
60
72
72
42
44
48
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
68
71
71
00
00
00
00
22
f»9
69
69
69
f>9
69
69
5
4
6
6
6
6
3
6
6
6
2
2
2
3
4
2
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
2
t.
4
4
4
4
4
3
6
5
5
5
4
2
2
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
5
5
'>
5
5
\jK 1 U
LOCA
17
10
10
10
10
10
10
16
16
16
22
22
22
22
22
22
15
15
15
14
14
14
1'.
14
14
14
14
10
10
10
20
22
15
15
15
15
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
-•—-em 3i I un nui
S02 PART
152.0
193.0
5100.0
4410.0
6620.0
4410.0
658.0
^150.0
135UO.O
4150.0
1290.0
433.0
433.0
0.0
208.0
208.0
b/4.0
874.0
601.0
387.0
307.0
836. 0
1490.0
613.0
5468.0
9590.0
15V70.0
361.0
224.0
224.0
0.0
865.0
205.0
205.0
205.0
1020.0
168.0
168.0
360.0
360.0
140.0
140.0
167.0
0.0
350.0
960.0
960.0
960.0
960.0
960.0
26.0
33.0
267.0
230.0
363.0
2JO.O
206.0
52.0
58.0
52.0
100.0
80.0
HO.O
163.0
51.0
49.0
159.0
159.0
4<».0
71.0
71.0
153.0
272.0
11.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
66.0
250.0
250.0
150.0
0.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
14.0
54.0
54.0
33.0
33.0
15.0
15.0
2.0
430.0
72.0
0.0
0.0
n.o
0.0
0.0
NOX
333.0
430.0
4275.0
3fe80.0
5530.0
3180.0
2140.0
2705.0
12110.0
2705.0
673.0
490.0
490.0
0.0
119.0
119.0
501.0
501.0
344.0
246.0
24/S.O
532.0
900.0
351.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
207.0
142.0
142.0
0.0
135.0
372.0
372.0
372.0
1150.0
256.0
256.0
132.0
132.0
91.0
91.0
110.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
CO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
237.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 '
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
55.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
825.0
0.0
54800.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
HC
6.0
8.0
81.0
70.0
105.0
70.0
66.0
83.0
373.0
83.0
20.0
14.0
14.0
2°3.0
•3.0
3.0
14.0
1*. 0
10.0
9.0
9.0
20. 'J
.> 0 . vT
10. 0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6.0
4.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
41.0
7.0
7.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
21.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
OTHER
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
90089.0
90C89.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6090.0
6990.0
6990.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
19011.0
13001.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

-------
Table 9.  BALTIMORE CITY GRID SOURCES




    MARYLAND AREA  SOURCES




          EMISSIONS  (TUNS/DAY)
GRID
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lo
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2^
25
PART
0.13
0.19
0.18
0.26
0.25
0.63
0.34
0.29
0.14
0.26
0.97
0.53
0.16
0.07
0.12
0.24
0.86
0.44
0.41
0.03
0.20
0.23
0.35
0.44
0.43
S02
0.18
0.28
0.28
0.37
0.40
1.11
0.57
0.44
0.25
0.49
1.67
0.92
0.23
0.16
0.24
0.44
1.39
1.06
0.59
0.14
0.89
0.45
0.55
0.61
0.65
CO
11.22
16.83
15.58
21.82
19.97
48.64
26.81
24.31
10.64
16.94
73.56
41.77
14.33
4.38
7.58
14.50
66.76
29.92
35.52
0.04
0.92
16.26
2 ti . 7 1
38.02
36. n
NOX
1.41
2.11
1.95
2.75
2.55
6.16
3.40
3.06
1.41
2.26
9.30
5.29
1.79
0.60
1.07
1.98
8.47
4.00
4.47
0.09
0.70
2.16
3.66
4.78
4.63
HC
1.80
2.70
2.50
3.51
3.23
7.85
4.32
3.91
1.73
2.79
11.86
6.73
2.30
0.71
1.25
2.44
10.78
4.82
5.71
0.03
0.33
2.65
4.64
6.11
5.91

-------
regional planning district (RPD)  boundaries  identified for the Baltimore
SMSA by the Planning Commission.   Figure 5  illustrates the problem encountered
in relating planning district growth data to the Maryland grid emission data.
In this study,  emissions from each of the grids  were proportioned on an area
basis to each of the regional planning districts before making growth pro-
jections on air quality from area type sources.   Several simple computer
programs were developed to make projections  based on planning data.   Table 10
is a sample of the output of program P1985 which takes planning data and
existing area source emissions to project future emissions by year (in the
example 1977) for each grid.  The heading "TGFC" refers to the total growth
factor for cars.  Similarly, the  headings continue for trucks (TGFT),  home
or residential sources (TGFH), and small commercial sources (TGFS).   "CARS,"
"TRUCKS," etc.  refer to the projection data for  each of these classes.
For cars and trucks the projection and data are  in 1,000's of VMT.   For
"HOME" the data are dwelling units and for "SMALL" (small commercial facil-
ities), the data represent employment.  The  table also includes the splits
for emissions from cars (EM-C) trucks (EM-T), etc. in tons per day.   The
projected emission total for the  grid for that year is listed in the far
right column.  When no projection data were  available a message was pre-
sented for that grid (e.g. "no projection found  for grid xxx").  In such
cases, growth was assumed to be 1.0 for the grids.
     The current emission inventory is given in  Table 11.  Planning data
were used to make computer projections by each regional planning district,
based on:
     (1)  Residential heating - number of dwelling units
     (2)  Small commercial - employment (extensive)
     (3)  Industrial processes -  manufacturing employment (intensive)
     (4)  Cars - vehicle miles traveled (light duty)
     (5)  Trucks - vehicle miles  traveled (medium and heavy duty)
Planning data were available to project emissions for only about one-third
of the base year emissions.  To project the remaining two-thirds of the
emissions to future years, growth factors were used as follows:
                                     47

-------
Table 10.  PROJECTED AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR 1977 BASED ON PLANNING DATA
1977. 1.
1977. J.
1*77. «.
1977. b.
1 r* 7 7 . 7 .
1*77. 9.
1977. 10.
1977. 12.
	 -tGPC 	
2. 1
1.3
1. 1
. i
1.5
1. 1
1.2
1. 1
1.8
1. 1
1977. 13. 1.1
-Mt» PpOJECflOH— f OTHD-fflft-
1 J 7 7 . 1 U . 1.0
EfadOfr ESCOUN1
IS77. 17.
1977. 18.
HO PROJECTION
1977. 21.
1977. 22.
-1-.77, 	 ti, 	
1977. 2«.
•EBLD «ITH
	 *r 0 	
1. 1
1.0
POUND fOfi
1.2
1 .3
	 1 r? 	
1 .0
1977. 25. 1.0
-NO CaOJlCTIOH— POUKD FOB
\-ill. 20. 1.0
2.1
1.3
1. 1
1.5
1. 1
1.2
1. 1
1.8
-V.~i 	
1. 1
1.1
1.0
15.
1. 1
1.0
CHID
~~ t . 0
1. 1
1.3
-V,-2 	
1.0
1.0
1 .0
	 TGI
1. 1
1.2
1.2
. 1-
1.2
1. 3
1.2
1. 1
	 1v~3-
1.3
1. 1
1.0
EXEC.
1.0
1. 1
20.
	 J.-O-
1. 1
1.0
	 IT«-
1. 1
1. 1
1.0
•H 	 TGPS—
1.2
	 l.J 	
1.0
1.0
1.2
0.9
1.0
I iv "~"~-
1.0
1. 1
	 1 .~3 	
1.0
o.H
1.0
CONTINUING
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
	 1.0 	
1.0
0.9
1.0
— CABS
43.9
54.7
16. 1
H»3.9 	
U2.0
32.3
HI. 1
33.0
H49.2 	
57.6
U7.8
M7.8
-70. -9 	
-33.^) 	
11.5
23. 1
-<4l.-0 	
-<4»fO 	
70.9
-441.5 	
52.6
52.6
52.6
TRUCKS HOHE - SflAtt—
11.0 7360.0 12033.0
13.7 23376.0 9662.0
U.O 7B4J.O 3153.0
10.5 1d37b.O 10109.0
8. 1 tf<4J9.0 10908.0
.3 16506.0 9060.0
10.3 9755.0 UMJ6.0
8.3 82d3.0 21678.0
-12.-3— 3565.0 1869M.O 	
13.<4 1B659.0 33918.0
11.9 6526.0 3153.0
11.9 B528.0 J153.0

10. « 17797.0 15725.0
5.8 8188.0 4519.0

15.9 7277.0 12553.0
36.8 8219.0 514000.0
— 10. 4-1 7797.0 -15725.0 	
13.2 19U78.0 7513.0
13.2 19*78. 0 7513.0
13.2 19M78.0 7013.0
	 B.1-C-
0.1
V • »
0.1
0. 1
—0^1 —
0.2
0.1
-o.-i —
0.1
0.1
0. <4
0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.0 —
— Os-1 	
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.1
— OH 	
0.2
0.2
0.1
	 EB-*-
0.0
0.0
0.0
	 OrO 	
0.0
0.0
	 0-;0 	
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
	 0.0
	 Oi 0 	
0.0
0.0
1 (r» v ••••"
0.0
0.0
	 v* 0
0.0
0.0
0.0
	 E8-H-
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0. 1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
— OH 	
0.3
0.1
— • OvO
0.0
0.1
	 0-H 	
0.1
0.1
0.0
	 EB-S-
0.0
0.1 ..
0.1
0.1
w • »
0.1
0. 1
. 1
0.0
0.1
v • £
0.1
0.0
0.9
	 0*-0 	
	 OvO
0.2
0.1
	 0,0 	
0.0
0.1
	 OH 	
0.1
0.1
0.0
	 EB-O— PBOJ EJIIS-
0.0 0.10
-0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
— o.o —
0.0
-0.0
0.0
1 0 rfO™ " ~"
0.1
0.1
	 OrO 	
0.2
0.0
'" W . V1 — * '
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.10
0.1)
	 0.21 	
0.36
0. 15
C.05
0.15
0.22
0.08
0.02
	 0.05 	
0.35
0.15
no
0.0
0.10
	 OH 7 	
0. 19
0.18
0.11

-------
Table 10.   PROJECTED AREA SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR 1977 BASED ON PLANNING DATA (continued)
I CUB-
- HO
1 (7
VO
uo
— 1 ( )
E.I
E n
b'O
r<7
ER
MU
- r»;
Erf
l>7
197
1 > 7
u»iu i u r i'
7. 27. 1.0
rOi LnCOOMTEiLO
?rtuJELriG:i FC'J;.D
7. 23. 1 .0
I' i: ij J E C i 1 0 !< f 0 J S D
7 / ^ 10
iJn M.CUUHfLULU
fSJJECTIOH FOUND
'. )0. 1.0
did E.'ICUUXTEBLD
FUOJKCTION fOUND
1. Jl. 1.0
.ijn LJiCOUXTEiUD
i
7. 3<*. 1.4
7 H 1 U_
	 1
-FOk
Fun
.ITU
FOH
WITH
roB-
klTII
FOB
WITH
FOH
liITH
rod-
WITrt-
1477. 36. 1.6
KG
1 't 1
197
197
197
BO
1*7
L>»T» FUd BPD 301
3iTi FOB BPO 302
i j 7 j7
7. 3d. l.u
7. 39. 1.3
/. 	 *Z. — — 1. 3
7. 41. 1.2
PBOJLCTIOH FOUKD
7. K2. 1.0
Ea.OS eliCGUNTCaiD
HO PROJECTION FOUND

l>7
HO
Ml
aOa Ll.i-OJKTEhLD
PkOJCiriOH JOUKD
7. 4u. 1.0
«0i< UlCOUkTEflta
•'flOJECIIUg FOUXD
7. U5. 1.0



FOB
•«ITH
FOS
WITH
KOH-
Foa
rcrr 	
1.0
GRID
1 .0
CHID
29.
I.O
- )0,-
CHID
1.0
31.
GRID
1.0---
J2.
1.0
33.
l.U
1.6
1.4
1.3
1.2
OHO
1.0
GRID
43.
-GRID —
1.0
CBIO
I.O
— TOfB"
27.
1.0
EltC.-
2d.
I.O
EIEC.
2).
Lite.
1 A

1.0
COHTI NilIKG
1.0
COUTIHUIKG
i n
CONTINUING
I.O 1.0
EIEC.-COHTIHUING
31.
I.O 1.0
EiKC.
32.
- 1.0
EIEC.
1.0
1. 3
1.5
	 «.->-
1.4
1.4
1.1
42.
1.0
EXEC.
43.
1 A-
F.XEC.
1.0
1.0
COKTIHUIMG
CONTINUING
1.0
COHTINUIKG
0.9
1. 1
1. 1
1.1
— - — 1^1 	
0.9
1.0
COIIINUIHG
	 V.O 	
CONTINUING
1.0
-CONTINUING
1.0

52.
52.


52.
52.
52.
52.
150.
75
138.
-12.
34.
106.
-39.
18.
18.
-18.
18.
18.
19 •
6
6


6
6


6
6
9
6
7
3
3
6
6


6
6
•TIUC
13
13


13
13
i 	

13
37
19
34
3
8
25
4
4
It

4
4
:»s • HOI
.2 19478.
.2 15(OB.
.2 19478.
.2 19478.
.2 1947B.
.2 19478.
.2 19478.
.6 10303.
.0-13631.
.6 12066.
5 2101
.6 J507.
.6 24824.
.6-16479.
.6 3938.
.6 3938.
.6—3938,
.6 3
-------
                                 Table 11.   BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS FOR 1973
                                                    (tons/year)
Ul
o


Fuel combustion stationary
sources
Residential
Commercial/Institutional
Industrial
Power plants
Total stationary fuel
combustion
Industrial process
Solid waste disposal
Transportation
Miscellaneous
Totals
Anne Arundel
County


210
394
55
487
1,146
177
154
3,299
0
4,776
Baltimore
County


567
685
1,264
510
3,026
15,719
257
1,677
0
20,679
Carroll
County


146
129
18
0
293
4,744
28
162
0
5,227
Harford
County


106
142
25
124
397
180
46
238
0
861
Howard
County


62
39
55
0
156
72
28
135
0
391
Baltimore
City


990
1,121
783
356
3,250
2,434
3,032
1,525
0
10,241
Regional
total


2,081
2,510
2,200
1,477
8,268
23,326
3,545
7,036
0
42,175

-------
       LEGEND
       BALTIMORE SMSA
       REGIONAL PLANNING
       DISTRICTS
       MARYLAND EMISSION
       GRID
Figure   5.   Baltimore  SMSA  regional  planning districts
              and Maryland emission grids
                               51

-------
     (1)  Residential heating - population growth for rural  counties
     (2)  Small commercial - regional employment
     (3)  Industrial heating - regional manufacturing employment
     (4)  Industrial processes (sources less than 25  tons  per year) -
          regional manufacturing employment.
Particulate emissions from power plants for 1973 were obtained  from the
Maryland emission inventory.  Future or projected power plant emissions
for 1977, 1980, and 1985 were obtained from Federal Power  Commission Form
67.  (The FPC requests projections of generating capacity  as well as
future emissions.)
     Table 12 summarizes the gross projected emissions for all  source
categories through 1985.  On a grid-by-grid basis, projections  were made
from the Planning Commission data.  For example, in the base year there
were 6,508 dwelling units located in RPD #101.   The projection  for 1977
indicated a growth to 7,843 dwelling units.  RPD #101 is a part of Grid #4
which also includes 10 percent of RPD #107.  By weighted averages the
emissions increase for Grid #4 was determined to be 1.2.  In the  base  year,
residential home heating emissions totaled 0.06 tons  per day of particulate
emissions.  The projected 1977 emissions for Grid #4  were, thereby, calcu-
lated to be 0.072 (0.06 x 1.2) tons per day-  In a similar manner, projections
were determined for all grids and all source categories.  However, several
grids, especially in the more rural areas, did not have planning  agency
projection information.
     All emissions were summed for the base years of those grids  which had
projection data; for those grids which had no projection data a generalized
growth factor was applied.  These computer projections and the  generalized
projections by source category were summed by  source category  for 1977,  1980,
and 1985  (Table 12).  The computer projected values were considered most
accurate because they were determined discretely, grid-by-grid.  However,
the generalized growth factors produced essentially the same rates of
increases in emission rates.
     Projections of industrial emissions in this analysis  were  not considered
totally accurate for the Baltimore AOMA.  For cities less  industrialized,
                                     52

-------
                            Table 12.   BALTIi'iOKE AQM/i  PARTICULATE EMISSIONS  FOR FUTURE YEARS
                                                          (tons/year)
Ln
1973 1977
Fuel combustion
Residential 2,081 2,562
(a) 1,752 2,194
(b) 329 368
Commercial 2,510 2,745
(c) 1,129 1,263
(d) 1,381 1,482
Industrial (e) 2,200 2,222
Power plants 1,477 1,546
Industrial processes 23,326 23,731
(c) 3,570 3,577
(d) 19,756 20,154
Refuse disposal 3,545 2,530
Transportation
(?) 3,588 4,719
Pi) 3,448 3,697
Totals 42,175 43,752
1980 1985

2,738 3,036
2,336 2,573
402 463
2,881 3,351
1,318 1,624
1,363 1,727
2,278 2,336
1,982 2,522
23,761 25,691
3,303 4,716
20,458 20,975
2,530 2,530

5,517 5,570
4,105 4,251
45,432 49,287
                   Basis of projections
                   (a)  Based on dwelling units by RPD  -  computerized
                   (b)  Based on population change for  Harford  and Carroll County from RPC.
                   (c)  Based on manufacturing employment by  RPD - computerized
                   (d)  Based on manufacturing employment of  entire region.
                   (e)  Based on Maryland BAQ data
                   CO  Based on Federal Power Commission
                   (g)  Based on VMT by RPD - computerized
                   (h)  Based on 1.76 percent per year  growth (ships, planes, trains, etc.)

-------
a methodology based on manufacturing employment may be adequate.   In Balti-
more, however, a major portion of all particulate emissions  was  generated
from industrial point sources.  In 1973, some 9,000 industrial sources  dis-
charged 88 tons per day out of a total of 115 tons per day discharged for
the AQMA.
     In addition, some plants in the AQMA were developing or installing air
pollution abatement equipment and plans for compliance had been filed with
the Maryland Bureau of Air Quality.  Reductions contemplated from those
sources on a compliance schedule, which emitted more than 25 tons per year,
were incorporated into the emission inventory for the year 1977.   It was
assumed that a 90 percent reduction in particulate emissions would occur
at each plant which had a compliance schedule on file with the Bureau of
Air Quality.  The compliance schedules themselves did not indicate which
processes were being controlled.

RELATING EMISSIONS TO AIR QUALITY USING AQDM
     To calibrate the air quality display model  (AQDM), ES used emissions
from most of the residential sources, one-half of the transportation sources
(all cars and trucks but no ships, trains, and planes), one-half of the
commercial sources, 12 percent of industrial point sources  (all over 25
tons per year), and all of the power plant sources.  These emissions totalled
37 tons per day or 32 percent  (37/115) of the actual total emissions in the
AQMA (Table 13).  There were 131 sources included in the AQDM model, of
which  approximately 50 were area type sources and 81 were point sources.
     Had computer files not been available for the Baltimore AQMA,
calibration of  the AQDM would have been nearly impossible.  For other air
quality maintenance programs developed in the future it is suggested that
the small sources be lumped together  for each grid and entered as an area
source.  For example, in the Baltimore  SMSA  there were approximately 55 grid
locations  (sections of the county, city blocks,  etc.).  Those small point
sources emitting less than 25  tons per  day could  then be distributed among
the 55 grid locations and included in the AQDM for calibration purposes.
Because of time limitations imposed on  the preparation of this trial plan,
no attempts were made to spread  the remaining omitted sources to each of the
grid locations  for subsequent  computer  runs.
                                     54

-------
     Table 13.   BALTIMORE AQMA PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS FOR 1973
     UTILIZED IN THE AQDM TO OBTAIN CALIBRATION OF THE MODEL

Source
category
(a)
Power plants
Industrial plants
Commercial
Residential
Cars'''
Trucks (c)
Totals
Emissions
(tons/year)
3,409
3,570
1,128
1,752
3,110
478
13,447
Emissions
(tons /day)
9.34
9.78
3.09
4.80
8.52
1.31
36.84
(a)   Data obtained from FPC form 67
(b)   Represents  only 12 percent (9.78/88)  of the total of this
     category
(c)   Base year emission inventory for mobile sources was calculated
     from 1970 data
                                55

-------
     The AQDM calibration factor was obtained using ambient air quality
data from 29 stations located throughout the metropolitan area.  The  AQDM
compared predicted concentrations with measured concentrations  (Table 14).
     A best fit linear relationship of observed versus predicted concentra-
tions was developed by the AQDM (Figure 6).
     In the equation:
                        Y = 41.8 + 3.1234 X
         where:  Y is the observed concentration and
                 X is the computer predicted concentration,
                                        3
the y intercept in Figure 6 of 41.8 yg/m  represents background concentra-
tions.  The background level identified in the calibration was  fairly con-
sistent with background levels measured at rural stations throughout  the
State of. Maryland as tabulated below:
                                      Concentrations (yg/m )
         Station                      1973              1974 (1st qtr)
         Harwood                       33                38
         Oakland                       32                36
         Accokeek                      34                39
         Friendship  Rd.                30                40
             (Eastern Shore)

PROJECTED ANNUAL AIR QUALITY
      Using the computer projected emission data of Table  12 as input, the
 AQDM was  run to predict ground level particulate concentrations  on an
 annual basis.   Concentration isopleths were prepared for  each  source category
 so that various control strategies could later be analyzed for their impact
 on reducing not only emissions but also  air quality levels.  The projected
 concentration isopleths for each source  category are illustrated in  Figures
 7 through  13 on the  following pages.   As expected the  maximum  concentrations
 from area  sources  were  located near the  downtown area.   Because  only a
 portion of  the actual emission data was  used in the calibration, the predicted
 concentration levels were proportioned upward to the anticipated totals  for
 all categories.  For example,  residential home heating emissions in  1Q85

-------
   Table 14.   COMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND PREDICTED PARTICULATE
              CONCENTRATIONS IN THE BALTIMORE AQMA
Receptor location
(kilometers)
Station Hori-
location zontal Vertical
Anne Arundle Co.
Glen Burnie 358.9
Harmons 355.0
Harwood 359.4
Linthicum 357.3
Odenton 354.1
Riviera Beach 369.4
St. Johns 369.7
Baltimore Co.
Catonsville 349.9
Cockeyesville 357.7
Essex 372.4
Garrison 348.0
Landsdovme 357.1
Solless Point 369.7
Middle River 378.6
Towson 362.5
Baltimore City
Fire Dept. Hq. 361.2
Fire Dept. #10 363.0
John Hopkins 362.7
Morgan 363.7
NW Police Station 354. 7
NE Police Station 363. 6
SE Police Station 366.5
SW Police Station 356. 5
Poly 363.4
State Ofc. Bldg. 360.1
Carroll Co.
Westminister 329.0
Harford Co.
Bel Air 384.1
Whiteford 384.8
Howard
Simpsonville 337.6

4337.2
4334.5
4303.0
4341.4
4325.9
4335.4
4315.6

4348.0
4372.2
4356.8
4363.1
4344.1
4344.7
4354.8
4363.1

4350.1
4344.1
4350.8
4356.2
4356.2
4355.5
4349.6
4348.7
4356.2
4351.3

4380.4

4376.9
4395.6

4338.9
Particulate
Observed

79
69
38
77
55
58
60

47
61
80
82
73
78
67
51

97
151
76
59
80
66
102
84
66
85

46

57
44

53
concentration
Computer
predicted

9
7
3
9
6
9
4

8
6
11
5
10
13
10
8

14
12
18
12
9
12
15
11
12
18

4

5
3

5
yg/m
*
Computer
dorrected

69
63
51
69
60
69
54

66
60
75
57
72
81
72
66

84
78
96
78
69
78
87
75
78
96

54

57
51

57
*flomputer corrected equals  computer predicted times  3.1  plus  background
 of 41.8 ug/m .
                              57

-------
140
130
120
110
100
 90
 80
 70
 60
 40
 30
 20
 10
              1      I      T
                                        MODEL CALIBRATION
                                        Y= 41.8 +3.1x
                                           PROBABLE CALIBRATION
                                           IF ALL SOURCES HAD
                                           BEEN  INVENTORIED
BACKGROUND, 41.8 ug/nT
                           8
       10
12
14
16
18
20
                            CALCULATED, ug/m
                                          3
      Figure  6.   Comparison  of observed and  predicted
  particulate concentrations in  the Baltimore AQMA-1973
                           58

-------
FREDERI
 COUNTY
                               BALTIMORE
                                 COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COU\TY
              10
       MILES
             NOTE: INCLUDES EMISSIONS FROM SHIPS.  PLANES, AND TRAINS  AND
                  FROM FUGITIVE DUST SOURCES AND  FROM BACKGROUND .
  Figure  7.   Average  annual  concentrations  of particulates
               from all  sources  in  1985  (jjg/m3)

-------
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                             BALTIMORE
                              COUNTY
                          PRINCE
                          GEORGE
                          COUNTY
                                   ANNE
                                  ARUNDEL
                                  COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
 Figure  8.  Average annual  concentrations  of  particulates
             from  1S85 domestic  sources (ug/m3)
                               60

-------
                            BALTIMORE
                             COUNTY
                        PRINCE
                        GEORGE
                        COUNTY
                                  ANNE
                                ARUNDEL
                                 COUNTY
     MONTGOMERY
       COUNTY
Figure  9.   Average annual  concentrations of particulates
           from 1985 commercial sources (jug/fir)
                             61

-------
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                             BALTIMORE
                               COUNTY
                                    1
                          PRINC
                          GEORGE
                          COUNTY
                                    ANNE
                                  ARUNDEL
                                  COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
             10
       MILES
 Figure  10.  Average annual  concentrations of particulates
            from  1985 power  plant sources (jjg/m3)
                               62

-------
                           BALTIMORE
                             COUNTY
                        PRINCE
                        GEORGE
                        COUNTY
                                 ANNE
                                ARUNDEL
                                COUNTY
    MONTGOMERY
      COUNTY
Figure  11.   Average annual  concentrations of particulates
           from 1985 industrial sources  (j
                             63

-------
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                          PRINCE
                          GEORGE
                          COUNTY
                                   ANNE
                                  ARUNDEL
                                  COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
             ID
       MILES
Figure 12.
Average  annual concentrations  of  particulates
  from cars in 1985  (ug/m3)
                               64

-------
                           BALTIMORE
                             COUNTY
                        PRINCE
                        GEORGE
                        COUNTY
                                 ANNE
                                ARUNDEL
                                COUNTY
    MONTGOMERY
      COUNTY
Figure 13.   Average  annual  concentrations of  particulates
             from trucks  in  1985  (jug/m3)
                              65

-------
were predicted by the AQDM to produce a maximum annual particulate average
         3
of 5 yg/m .  Because this concentration would result from 85 percent of the
                                                     1             3
emissions, the concentration was increased by 1.17 (    ) to 6 yg/m .  For
                                                    U .85
the residential  and commercial source categories, this proportioning technique
would likely result in an overstatement of concentration maximums because
emissions in the rural areas of the AQMA would not have significant impact
on the downtown area where the maximums occurred.  However, for industrial
processes the proportioning scheme is probably more adaptable because the
9,000 plants are scattered throughout the metro-Baltimore area and will likely
increase production and particulate emissions quite randomly between 1975
and 1985.'
     Prior to listing and evaluating candidate control measures it was
deemed advisable to show projected air quality by source category for 1977
and 1985 at two locations in the Baltimore AQMA  (Table 15 and Figure 14).
The significant difference between the emission  split and the split on air
quality impact is the localized influence of motor vehicles and other area
sources.  Such differences could be important in terms of selecting effective
control measures that address those sources responsible  for the localized air
quality.
                333
     Thirty yg/m  were accounted for, 9 yg/m  were estimated, and 41 yg/m
were added for background.  However, fugitive dust sources in the AQMA could
add somewhat more than the 4 yg/m  and could be  contributing significantly
              3
to the 41 yg/m  identified as background.  From  the projection, it would appear
that 80 yg/m  will be the air quality level in Baltimore in 1985 unless
maintenance measures are implemented.

SHORT TERM AIR QUALITY
     For this trial air quality maintenance program  for  the Baltimore SMSA,
no attempt was made to compute  1975 or 1985 short term concentrations of
particulates.  Several methodologies exist for making such projections
for the future periods of 1975  and 1985.  One 'of the easiest methods for
estimating short term concentrations is to use existing  ambient air quality
                                     66

-------
               Table 15.   PROJECTED 1977 and 1985 SUSPENDED PARTICULATE
                  CONCENTRATIONS AT TWO LOCATIONS IN THE BALTIMORE AQMA
                            BY SOURCE CATEGORY CONTRIBUTION
                                      (ug/m3)
      Source category
Industrial heating

Power plants

Industrial process

Refuse disposal

Cars and trucks

Ships, planes, trains
             C2)
Fugitive dustk '

   Subtotal

Background

   Total
                                         1977
                                                                 1985
                                Central               Central
                                business  Industrial  business   Industrial
                                district    area      district     area
Residential
Commercial
6
7
2
2
6
8
2
3
                                       1

                                       6
_4_

34

41

75
  I

 45



  2
   i
  4

  4^

 60

 41

101
                        1

                        7
           1

          19
39

41

80
                                                                      39

                                                                      41
                                                                      80
  +  Included in  the air quality  identified  as  being due to the industrial
     process category
  *  Estimated
(1)   Consists of  natural background  (25  i_i/m  ) and  fugitive  dust (approximately

     16 mg/m ).
(2)   Estimated  fugitive dust  due  to  city activities  in addition to fugitive dust
     in background.
                                         67

-------
                     1977  -  75 ug/m3
1985  -  80 ug/m3
00
                                                      RESIDENTIAL


                                                      COMMERCIAL

                                                      -POWER
                                                     INDUSTRIAL
                                                       PROCESS
                                                      CARS AND
                                                       TRUCKS
                                                 SHIPS, PLANES, TRAINS
                                                    FUGITIVE DUST
                     Figure  14.   Distribution  of  particulate  concentration  in the
                              central business  district  by source category

-------
data and Larsen's technique  of relating  expected maximum  annual  concentra-
tions to short 1-hour,  3-hour,  and  24-hour  concentration maximums.  This
procedure is  most appropriate when  considering historical  data and is most
applicable for metropolitan areas.  For future periods, where changes in
emission rates at many  large point  sources  could be expected, the Larsen
technique would not be  so applicable.
     Several  short term dispersion  models have been developed by  the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.  One  model entitled PTMTP could be applied
to the Baltimore AQMA.   However,  considering the number of sources and the
inflexibility of the PTMTP model, much time would be required in  order to
make such short term predictions.   A proprietary short term dispersion
model entitled APMAX, developed by  Engineering-Science, Inc., could have
been applied  to the Baltimore SMSA  for computing the 10 minute, 1-hour, 3-
hour, and 24-hour concentrations of particulate and sulfur oxide.  Also, the
cost of running the APMAX program is inexpensive when compared to the AQDM.
For future assessment of the Baltimore maintenance needs it is suggested
that one of the dispersion models be utilized in estimating future short
term particulate concentrations.
*Larsen, Ralph I., "A Mathematical Model for Relating Air Quality Measure-
 ments to Air Quality Standards,"  USEPA, Publication No. AP-89.
                                    69

-------
                                 CHAPTER IV
               PROJECTED AIR QUALITY  ANALYSES:   SULFUR DIOXIDE

BACKGROUND
     Maryland air pollution regulations  for the  control of sulfur dioxide
emissions were designed to meet  state secondary  ambient air quality standards,
as follows:
                                                         3
               Annual arithmetic average           39 pg/nu
               24-Hour average                     131 yg/nu
               1-Hour average                     262 yg/m
Because of the stringency of these standards (approximately one-half  the
NAAQS), very severe control measures  were deemed necessary and were promulgated
by the  BAQC.
     Essential to these measures was  the requirement that on  and after  1 July
1975 all residual fuel oils must contain 0.5 percent or less  sulfur by  weight.
In view of the uncertainties of  low sulfur fuel  availability  (as well as
cost) and the low levels of SO-  concentration measured by the West-Gaeke
reference method, the BAQC was considering easing  the 0.5 percent regulation.
The recommended choice of action proposed by the BAQC was to  postpone the
effective date of the 0.5 percent sulfur requirement to 1980  pending  analysis
of the  1974-1975 heating season  data.
     In the context of maintenance plan  development, the postponement would
have no effect on the SO- emission inventory and resulting air quality  from
1980 to 1985.  Between 1975 and  1980, with postponement, total SO- emissions
from power plants will still be  significantly reduced from the 1973 emissions
by reduction in generating capacity within the region.  Furthermore,  because
maintenance of NAAQS rather than state standards was the issue in the Natural
Resources Defense Council litigative  action, this  analysis was based  on the
federal ambient air standards and currently effective SO- control regulations.

AIR QUALITY •
     Tables 16 and 17 list air quality data for  the years 1972 and  1973.
As expected, the continuous flame photometric values are  greater than those
reported by the reference method, perhaps because  of decay  of the bubbler
                                    71

-------
           Table 16.  BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
                          FL.AHI; PHOTOMETRIC METHOD
                                  (yg/m3)
                                                           1973
Station location
Site code
       Max.
AAM   24-hr
Average by qtrs.        Max.
 1234   AAM    24-hr
Calvert and 22nd St. 210120018   24    131
Green and Lombard    210120019   22     79
  Street
Essex                210680001   46    131
Garrison             210140003   24     86
Goucher              211640001   29     79
Wimarco Avenue       210120012
Read Street          210120004
Robinson and Toone   210120010
Sun and Chesapeake   210120011
                            59  13  14  36   31    183
                            54  16  17  33   30    210

                            52  33  40  87   53    187
                            48  53  94 104   75    160
                            57  47  39  35   45    183
                                    29  30         160
                                    57  54         267
                                    38  66         240
                                    67  79         288
                                        72

-------
Table 17.  BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
               24-HOUR BUBBLER METHOD

1972
Station location
Harmons
Harwood
Odenton
Johns Hopkins
Morgan
Poly
Catonsville
Cockeysville
Lans downe
Middle River
Follens Point
Westminster
Bel Air
Whiteford
Ellicott City
Calvert & 22nd St.
Simpsonville
Site code
210080006
210080008
210080002
210120020
210120015
210120016
210140004
210500001
211040001
210120021
210620001
211720002
210180001
210920002

210120018
210960003
AAM
15
6
16
37
22
3
22
8
24
2
29
7
14
3
29

Max-
imum
100
26
84
121
128
33
83
62
90
26
86
49
64
23
71

Average
1
23
20
17
43
9
15
46
6
31
8
40
12
15
1

6
1973
by
2
9
5
6
33
2
2
2
0
11
3
25
9
5
3

3
qtrs.
3
3
4
2
10
1
1
5
0
11
3
11
3
2
2

5
2
Maximum
62
46
82
104
54
112
104
20
60
80
106
27-
42
11

12
12
                            73

-------
concentrations before analysis.  However, none of the NAAQS were  exceeded,
as determined by either method.
     An additional air quality data set for a part of 1973 was  available from
the National Aerometric Data Bank.  The 24-hour bubbler data was  insignifi-
cantly different from the BAQC data.  However, some of the  flame  photometric
values were very much higher than those reported by the BAQC.   For example,
values for the last three days reported in September 1973 showed  averages of
                      3
785, 862, and 940 yg/ra , respectively, with hourly values never below 576.
An analysis of weather conditions during that period indicated  meteorological
conditions not conducive to continued high values of point  source dependent
concentrations.  In fact, a cold frontal passage (with attendant  rain showers,
wind shift, and increased visibility) occurred approximately midwav through
the period.  It is, therefore, believed that these high values  are in error,
and consequently the BAQC data was used in the analysis.

BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY
     The 1973 emission inventory was obtained from the same source as that
for particulate emissions (Section III).  This inventory is summarized in
Table 18.

RELATING EMISSIONS TO AIR QUALITY USING AQDM
     The 1973 air quality data and emission inventory were  used in the AQDM
model with the Briggs plume rise  formula to compute the annual  average con-
centration field.  All area sources and  those point sources with  an emission
rate of greater than 25 tons/day were considered  (comprising approximately
85 percent of total emissions).  The referenced method air  quality data were
used for calibration.  The resulting regression line had a slope  of 0.79,
a y-intercept of 0.9, and a coefficient  of 0.67.  Figure 15 shows the re-
sults of the computer calculations.
     An additional analysis by the AQDM was made considering only point
sources greater than 25 tons per  day.  The results of that  analysis are
shown in Figure 16.  A visual  inspection of Figures 15 and  16  indicates
that the maximum concentration from area sources alone would be approximately
       3
18 ug/m  located near the city center.

-------
                              Table 18.  BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FOR 1973
                                                       (tons/year)
Ln
Fuel combustion - Anne Arundel
stationary sources County
Residential
Commercial /Institutional
Industrial
Power plants
Total stationary fuel combustion
Industrial process
Solid waste disposal
Transportation
Miscellaneous
Totals
1,171
1,259
149
43,611
46,190
91
0
4,917
0
51,198
Baltimore
County
1,730
2,058
9,383
18,341
31,512
28,911
3
2,429
0
62,855
Carroll
County
358
453
123
0
934
41
0
123
0
1,098
llarford
County
334
365
81
393
1,173
103
0
186
0
1,462
Howard
County
186
122
230
0
538
1
0
109
0
648
Baltimore
City
3,163
3,566
4,458
9,107
20,294
10,560
362
1,926
0
33,142
Regional
total
6,942
7,823
14,424
71,452
100,641
39,707
365
9,690
0
150,403

-------
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                             BALTIMORE
                               COUNTY
                          PRINCE
                          GEORGE
                          COUNTY
                                   ANNE
                                  ARUNDEL
                                  COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
    Figure  15.   1973  sulfur  dioxide air  quality from  all
             sources  in the Baltimore AQMA
                               76

-------
                       BALTIMORE
                        COUNTY
                    PRINCE
                    GEORGE
                    COUNTY
                             ANNE
                            ARUNDEL
                            COUNTY
MONTGOMERY
  COUNTY
Figure 16.   1973 sulfur  dioxide  air  quality  from
   point  sources in  the  Baltimore  AQMA
                          77

-------
PROJECTED EMISSION INVENTORY
     The 1975, 1980, and 1985 projected emission inventories are presented
in Table 19.  Bases for the projections were as follows:
     (1)  Residential and commercial/institutional heating was based on a
          population growth rate of 1.52 percent per year.  This estimate
          was conservative because of the decreasing percentage of oil heating
          for this source category.  No coal heating starts were reported
          for 1973 and January to March 1974.
     (2)  Industrial heating was based on growth of manufacturing employment
          at the rate of 0.5 percent per year.  Fuel split projections were:
                                         1973      1975      1980      1985
          Light oil (M gal)            54,451    54,997    56,386    57,809
          Heavy oil (M gal)           147,986   149,470   153,244   157,113
          Natural gas (MM ft3)         16,825    16,825    16,825    16,825
          In 1975 light oil was limited to 0.3 percent sulfur by weight and
          heavy oil was limited to 0.5 percent sulfur by weight.
     (3)  Power plant emissions were based on growth rates presented in
          Appendix D, Figure D-2, and on the use of 0.5 percent sulfur fuel
          in 1975.  The growth rates for power generation within the AQMA
          were:
               1973 - 1975  :          -30.8% per year
               1975 - 1980  :          + 3.8% per year
               1980 - 1985  :          + 1.6% per year
          The emission values derived by this method differed  from those
          obtained by linear interpolation of Federal Power Commission
           (FPC) data.  Interpolation from the 1978-1983 FPC projected SC>2
          emissions indicated a  five percent per year growth  rate with the
          following total emissions:
               1975  :                  15,716  tons/year
               1980  :                  20,806  tons/year
               1985  :                  25,89h  tons/year
                                      7S

-------
Table 19.   BALTIMORE AQMA SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS
                             (tons/year)


Fuel combustion
Residential
Commercial /institutional
Industrial
Power plants
Total stationary fuel combustion
Industrial process
Solid waste disposal
Transportation
Totals
1973

6,942
7,823
14,424
71,452
100,641
39,707
365
9,690
150,403
1975

7,155
8,063
7,038
17,084
39,340
40,105
172
10,467
90,084
1980

7,715
8,694
7,216
20,551
44,176
41,118
172
12,577
98,043
1985

8,320
9,375
7,398
22,285
47,378
42,156
172
13,662
103,368
                                  79

-------
     (4)  Industrial process emissions were based on the 0.5 percent  per
          year growth rate of manufacturing employment.
     (5)  Refuse disposal emissions were based on prohibition of open burning
          of solid waste and shut down of incinerators.
     (6)  Transportation growth was based on the growth rate of vehicle
          miles traveled (Appendix C).

PROJECTED AIR QUALITY
     The analyses indicated that NAAQS will not be violated during the decade
from 1975 to 1985.  This conclusion was based on the following observations:
     (1)  The 1973 maximum annual average concentrations and 24-hour concen-
          trations of sulfur dioxide as measured by the reference method were
          each less than one-half the primary standard;
     (2)  Maximum 3-hour concentrations, as measured by the flame photometric
          method, were much less than the secondary standard;
     (3)  The AQDM modeled results predicted low levels of annual concen-
          trations ; and
     (4)  The projected S0? emission inventory showed a net reduction of
          sulfur dioxide emissions of 35 percent by 1980 and 31 percent by
          1985.
     A new Brandon Shores power plant was the only significant new generating
source expected in the area during the next decade.  Because of its location
near the presently operating Wagner plant, SO, plumes from the two sources
conceivably might reinforce each other and produce higher concentrations than
either alone.  A comprehensive study by Johns Hopkins Applied Physics
Laboratory  examined  the concentrations which might be expected from these
two power plants.  It was concluded  that no standards, either Federal or
state, would be violated when both the Wagner and Brandon Shores facilities
were operating.
*Extended Analytic Air Quality Estimates.  The Johns Hopkins University,
 Applied Physics Laboratory, Chesapeake Bay Institute Department of
 Geography and Environmental Engineering.  Baltimore, Maryland.
 January 18, 1973. 32 p.
                                     80

-------
     It is  therefore  concluded  that  no plan maintenance will  be  required
for the Baltimore  AQMA to maintain sulfur  dioxide  air quality levels  below
the national ambient  air quality  standards.
                                     81

-------
                                CHAPTER V
                 PROJECTED AIR QUALITY ANALYSES:  OXIDANTS

BACKGROUND
     On 12 December 1973  (38F£ 34240) the Administrator of the EPA imposed
upon the Metropolitan  Baltimore Intrastate AQCR a transportation control plan
(TCP) for the control  of  hydrocarbon emissions.  Based on the 1972 hydrocarbon
emission inventory and the resulting concentration level of photochemical
oxidants and using the procedures  in Appendix J of 40 CFR part 51, it was cal-
culated that a 70 percent reduction in hydrocarbon emissions was required by
31 May 1977 in order to comply with the Clean Air Act.  This reduction was
to be achieved by the  control measures listed in Table 20.  A major part of
the reduction (8.73 tons  per  peak  period) was to be  realized by the limitation
of gasoline distribution.  This measure was  designed to reduce vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) by 50 percent  over  and above  the reduction effected by the other
VMT measures, i.e., exclusive bus  lanes, carpool locator, etc.
     A transportation  control plan proposed  earlier  by Maryland utilized a
different transportation  model and suggested different but similar control
strategies.  The Maryland analysis resulted  in a requirement for 52 percent
reduction in peak period  traffic above that  realized by the suggested strate-
gies, a result surprisingly similar to EPA's 50 percent.  The EPA plan did not
suggest a method for obtaining the 50 percent reduction in VMT other than by
gas rationing.  On the other  hand, the Maryland plan at one stage in develop-
ment considered the possibility of VMT restriction during episodic situations
and suggested a windshield sticker system  for control.  This approach was not
approved by EPA for adoption  as a  control  method.
     A major reduction (3.38  tons  per peak period) was to be obtained  in  the
EPA plan by catalytic  retrofit of  1971-1975  light  and medium duty vehicles.
It is doubtful if retrofit is a viable control measure in view of the  current
difficulties with new  vehicle catalytic  converters.  Nevertheless, in  this
analysis it was assumed that  all TCP measures, except gasoline distribution
                                    83

-------
Table 20.  COMPILATION OF HYDROCARBON CONTROL STRATEGY EFFECTS ON THE
METROPOLITAN BALTIMORE INTRASTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION ON MAY 31,1977
Hydrocarbons


1972 emissions
Reduction required to reach NAAQS
Stationary sources
Emissions without control strategy
Expected reduction from existing regulations:
(1) Solvent control
(2) Gaso.line handling vapor recovery (bulk)
(3) Drycleaning emissions control
(4) Aircraft ground operations
(5) Net result of industrial growth
Promulgated stationary source controls:
Tons per .., <.
peak period
61.0
42.7

13.5

0.85
1.0
0.39
-0.18
-0.17

(1) Control and prohibition of major sources 0.52
(2) Gasoline handling vapor recovery (stage
(3) Gasoline handling vapor recovery (stage
Stationary source emissions remaining
1) 0.57
2) 0.95
9.57
Percent of
base year
100.0
70.0

22.1

1.4
1.6
0.6
-0.3
-0.3

0.9
0.9
1.6
15.7
Mobile sources
Emissions from LDV's, MDV's and HDV's
without control strategy
Expected reductions:
(1) Federal motor vehicle control programs
(2) Inspection and maintenance (LDV, MDV)
(3) VSAD retrofit, pre-1968 LDV's
(4) Air fuel retrofit, 1968-1971 LDV's
(5) Catalytic retrofit, 1971-1975 LDV, MDV
(6) Air fuel retrofit, pre-1974 MDV's
(7) Air fuel retrofit HDV's
(8) Traffic flow improvements
(9) VMT measures: exclusive bus lanes, car-
pool locator, bikeway program, parking
restrictions
(10) Gasoline distribution limitation
Mobile source emissions remaining
Total reductions
Total emission remaining
Total allowable emissions

47.5

18.7
2.23
0.29
0.80
3.38
0.22
1.38
2.61
0.43


8.73
8.73
42.7
18.3
18.3

77.9

30.7
3.7
0.5
1.3
5.5
0.4
2.3
4.3
0.7


14.3
14.3
70.0
30.0
30.0
 (a)  Source:   38  FR  34245
     Defined  as the  period  from  6:00  to  9:00  a.m.
                                     84

-------
limitations, were fully implemented by 1977.  This assumption concerning base
line year data had diminishing effect over the decade as retrofit devices
would be applied to fewer and fewer vehicles.
AIR QUALITY
     The roll back requirements for which the TCP was designed were based on
1972 oxidant air quality data.  1973 data are now available.  Both years are
summarized as follows:
         Highest hourly average
    Year  Location
Value (ppm)
    1972  Calvert & 22nd    0.21
    1973  Essex             0.23
Next highest hourly average
Location	Value (ppm)
Calvert & 22nd     0.21
Essex              0.20
BASELINE EMISSION INVENTORY
     The hydrocarbon emissions inventory upon which the TCP was based is
given in Table 21 along with the estimated 1973 inventory.  No change in non-
automotive emissions is assumed.  Automotive emissions are estimated using
2.26 percent growth in LDVMT, 5.84 percent growth in MHDVMT, and the appro-
priate changes in emission factors resulting from the Federal motor vehicle
control program  (FMVCP).  The VMT growth factors are those used in the TCP
and originated from traffic modeling by the BAQC.
     The estimated 5.4 percent reduction in hydrocarbon emissions has re-
sulted in an apparent 4.8 percent reduction in the second highest oxidant
value.  This reduction is not inconsistent with the value derived from the
postulated relationship given in Appendix J of 40 CFR, part 51.
       Table 21.  BALTIMORE AQMA HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR 1972 AND  1973
                             (tons/6:00-9:00 a.m.)
                                            Hydrocarbon  emissions
                                            1972(a)           1973
 Total non-automotive
 Light duty vehicles
 Heavy/medium duty vehicles
 Total automotive
 Total
                   13.46
                   35.13
                   12.39
                   47.52
                   60.98
                    13.46
                    31.62
                    12.61
                    44.23
                    57.69
 (a)
     Source:   "Technical  Support  Document  for the  Transportation Control Plan
     for  the Metropolitan Baltimore  Intrastate Region," Environmental Protection
     Agency, Region  III,  March  1974.
                                    85

-------
PROJECTED EMISSION INVENTORY - 1977
     The 1977 projected emission inventory assumed full operation of all
controls except gasoline distribution limitations, as promulgated in the
TCP (Table 22).  Important considerations in projecting the 1977 inventory
from the 1972 inventory  (Table 21) are itemized below:
     (1)  Assume a reduction in automotive emission factors by maintenance
          and inspection.  A regulation which requires a dynamic mode in-
          spection of  all gasoline vehicles, when set at an initial failure
          rate of 30 percent, would  result in a 13 percent reduction in
          hydrocarbon  emissions.
     (2)  Assume a reduction of automotive emission factors by retrofit of
          emission control techniques as follows:
          (a)  Vacuum  spark advance  disconnect, pre-1968 LDV-25 percent
               effective.
          (b)  Air/fuel  retrofit,  1968-1971 LDV - 25 percent effective.
          (c)  Catalytic  retrofit, 1971-1975 LDV - 50 percent effective.
          (d)  Air/fuel  retrofit pre-1974 MDV - 15 percent effective.
          (e)  Catalytic  retrofit  1971-1975 MDV - 50 percent effective.
          (f)  Air/fuel  retrofit HDV - 30 percent effective.
     (3)  Assume a decrease of 133,085 LDVMT during the period by carpoolinp
          and exclusive bus lanes.
     (4)  Assume traffic  flow improvements resulting in higher speeds and
          reduced hydrocarbon emissions.
     (5)  Assume a 2.26  percent annual increase in LDVMT from 1^72 with
          appropriate  FMVCP factors.
     (6)  Assume a 5.84  percent increase in HMDVMT with appropriate FMVCP
          factors.
     (7)  Assume a regulation that requires major sources  to not increase
          emissions  and  that prohibits new major sources.

-------
   Table 22.   BALTIMORE AQMA HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS
                        (tons/6:00-9:00 a.m.)

Gasoline storage and handling
Bulk storage
Terminal loading
Service station pumps
Service station pumps
Subtotal
Power plants
Refuse
Diesel and shipping
Industrial processing heat
Dry cleaning (reactive HC)
Other solvents
Miscellaneous gasoline engines
Aircraft
Total non-automotive
Light duty vehicles (Table 26)
Heavy/medium duty vehicles (Table 26)
Total automotive
Total
1977 (a)

0.85
0.32
0.06
0.14
1.37
0.64
0.10
1.20
0.79
0.07
3.88
0.33
1.10
9.53
8.70
8.76
17.46
26.99
1980

0.90
0.34
0.06
0.15
1.45
0.37
0.10
1.23
0.80
0.00
3.94
0.40
1.23
9.52
5.99
9.54
15.53
25.05
1985

0.94
0.35
0.07
0.15
1.51
0.40
0.10
1.35
0.82
0.00
4.04
0.43
1.49
10.14
4.10
10.11
14.21
24.35
Source:  "Technical Support Document for the Transportation Control Plan
for the Metropolitan Baltimore Intrastate Region,"  Environmental Protec
tion Agency, Region III, March 1974.


  (8)   Assume  use  of gasoline  handling  vapor recovery  system at  service

       stations  for truck  to storage tank  emission  control  (Stage  1)  and
       for  pump  to automobile  tank  emission  control (Stape  2}.

       Assume  total conversion to non-reactive  fluids  in  drv cleaning
       establishments.
                                 87

-------
     The EPA transportation control plan was based on a transportation model
developed for the BAQC.  This adaptation of the well-known Koppelman model
generates trip end data by interpolating 1962 and 1980 forecast trip ends
and approximating VMT and average speeds by district.  The traffic model
has been expanded to accept emission factors including those for running
emissions and trip end emissions, cold start, and hot soak.  More sophisti-
cated modeling techniques have been developed by both the BAQC and the
Maryland DOT which have been used in other studies.  The MOOT model was
described earlier in Chapter II of this report.  The data given in Appendix
C were derived from this model and used to project 1977 base line year data
to 1980 and 1985.  A comprehensive report, "Baltimore Regional Environmental
Impact Study  (BREIS)," by the MDOT used the model to predict automotive
emissions to 1980 and 1995.  Results were very similar to the results re-
ported herein, although the conclusions reached were different.
     In order that this analysis would be consistent with the TCP promulgated
by EPA, the 1972 and 1977 emission inventories were based on the BAQC data
and emission factors reported by EPA.  These factors were calculated without
regard to speed or trip end emissions.  Table 23 summarizes the transportation
information which was utilized to predict the 1977 emissions.
              Table  23.   BASELINE TRANSPORTATION  DATA USED  TO
                     PREDICT  1977 HYDROCARBON  EMISSIONS


VMT peak period (1000s ) ^a'
HC emissions , x
(tons/peak period)
Emission factor (g/mile)

LDV
3,892
35.13

8.19
1972
HDV
476
12.39

23.61

Diesel
58
0.21

3.29

LDV
4,352
8.70

1.81
1977
HDV
632
8.76

12.57

Diesel
76
0.28

3.34
 (a)   Source:   "Technical  Support  Document  for  the  Transportation Control
      Plan  for  the Metropolitan  Baltimore Intrastate  Region," Environmental
      Protection Agency, Region  III, March; Maryland  Amendment  to SIP,
      June  15,  1973;  and Tables  21 and  22.
                   HC emissions  (tons)   2,000 Ibs  453.59 g
                                 -  ~    -
         i  .  ,  .                           ,
 (b)  EF  (s/mile) = - VMT  (mile) - X ~T^s - x    Ibs
                                     88

-------
PROJECTED EMISSION INVENTORY - 1985
     The 1980 and 1985 projected emission inventories are presented in Table
22 along with the 1977 predictions.  The bases for non-automotive emission
projections,  in addition to those specified in the TCP,  were as follows:
     (1)  Gasoline storage and handling growth rates were projected at one
          half the growth rate of VMT as shown in Appendix C:
                            Thousands
                   1980  -   ''     Growth rate  "  3'" percent per
                         -
               »l985  -  3,9   K   C««>>rate  '  1-72 percent per vear

          This projection assumed the continuation of the present trend
          toward smaller cars and increased gasoline mileage.
      (2)  Power plant emissions would decrease because of the decrease in
          generating capacity within the AQMA (Appendix D) .
      (3)  No change was projected in hydrocarbon emissions from refuse dis-
          posal because of the ban on open burning and control of incinerators,
      (4)  Diesel and shipping included, for 1977, 0.28 tons per peak
          period for diesel highway vehicles and 0.92 for other diesel
          sources.  Diesel highway vehicle emissions were projected at 1.1
          times the growth rate in VMT as shown in Appendix C to reflect
          increased city bus service.  Other sources were projected at the
          growth rate of transportation employment, 1.2 percent per year.
      (5)  Growth in industrial process heating was based on growth of manu-
          facturing employment, 0.5 percent per year.
      (6)  A reduction in dry cleaning establishment emissions resulted
          from the regulation prohibiting use of reactive solvents.
      (7)  Emissions from other solvent uses were projected on the basis of
          growth in manufacturing employment.
                                      89

-------
     (8)  Miscellaneous gasoline engines were projected to grow at the same
          rate as population, 1.52 percent per year.
     (9)  Aircraft operations would grow at a rate of 7.7 percent per year (*).
          Emissions from aircraft were projected to grow at half this rate
          because of the introduction of bigger and cleaner engines.
     The 1985 automotive emission factors were calculated using methods
given by Kircher and Armstrong    (Table 24).  Appendix A contains the de-
tailed calculations.  Emission factors shown in Table 24 reflect the FMVCP
and appropriate deterioration factors in accordance with vehicle age.  VMT
growth factors, from the 1977 base line year, were obtained from data provided
by the Baltimore Metropolitan Area Region Planning Council (Appendix B).
Appendix C contains the calculations of HC emissions derived from the data
presented in Appendices A and B.
     Table 25 shows the 1977, 1980, and 1985 HC emissions from mobile sources
as projected considering only increase in VMT, speed factors, and application
of the FMVCP with deterioration factors.  TCP mandated control measures were
not included.
     The rather  circumlocutory method for projecting automotive emissions
shown in Table 25 was necessitated for the following reasons:
      (1)  The 1977 base line year inventory was derived  from a different
          transportation model than was Appendix C data.
      (2)  The definition of LDV and HDV was different for the two data sets.
      (3)  Diesel engine-powered vehicles were included in the Appendix C VMT.
      (4)  Different factors for calculating peak hour VMT.
These shortcomings were considered to be overcome by using Appendix C data
as derived from the MOOT model only for growth factors and not for absolute
values.
*  Aircraft Emissions:  Impact on Air Quality and Feasibility of Control, EPA,
   undated.
+  "An Interim Report on Motor Vehicle Emission Vehicle Mix and Mileage,"
   from "Technical Support Document for the Transportation Control Plan for
   the Metropolitan Baltimore Intrastate Region," EPA, 1974.
                                      90

-------
     Year
                Table 24.  MOBILE SOURCE EMISSION FACTORS
                                (g/mile)
                 (Without speed correction or retrofit)
                       Light duty vehicles
NO
HC
                                 Heavy duty vehicles
NO
HC
1972
1975
1977
1980
1985
4.
3.
2.
1.
0.
484
664
638
500
727
8
D
3
1
0
.026
.IM)
.153
.b22
.815
9
9
9
9
9
.321
.259
.230
.214
.200
23
20
18
17
16
.643
.601
.753
.198
.183
     (a)  Emission coefficients iroin "An Interim Report on Motor Vehicle
          Emission Vehicle ilix & Mileage" from "Technical Support Document
          for the Transportation Control Plan for the Metropolitan Baltimore
          Intrastate Region," EPA, 1974.
Table 25.   PROJECTED HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS  FOR GASOLINE AUTOMOBILE VEHICLES
                 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE TCP CONTROL MEASURES
                            (tons/peak period)
TCP va) Appendix
Year
1977
1980
1985
LDV HDV Total LDV
15.49 13.05 28.54 10
5
3
.04
.58
.04
HDV
11
11
12
.78
.74
.09
C
Projected(b)
Total
21
17
15
.82
.32
.13
LDV
15.
8.
4.
49
61
69
HDV
13.05
13.01
13.39
Total
28.
21.
18.
54
62
08
   (a)   Source:   "Technical  Support  Document  for  the  Transportation  Control
        Plan  for  the Metropolitan  Baltimore  Intrastate  Region,"  Environmental
        Protection Agency, Region  III, March  1974.  Total  emissions  can  be
        calculated from Table  20 and the  preceeding discussion:

           Total Emissions  =  (Emissions  without  control strategies)  -
                       (reductions from FMVCP) -   (diesel  highway  emissions)
                            =   47.5  - 18.7 -  0.2S
                            =   28.52
   (b)   Projected emission  (i,j) =
           Appendix C Emission  (i,J)
       For example, LDV
                  i = LDV or HDV
                               5.58
                        1980   10.04
           Appendix C Emission, 1977

               j = 1980 or 1985

             A 15.49 = S.bl
                    A TCP  Emissions
                             1977
                                    91

-------
     Certain of the control strategies mandated in the TCP were applicable,
in part, to 1980 and 1985 automotive emissions.  These were summarized in
Table 26 along with the expected reductions from each strategy.  When these
reductions were applied the final projected emission inventory was complete.
     Base line peak hour YMT may be projected in the same way as peak hour
emissions.  These and the resulting emission factors for 1980 and 1985 are
shown in Table 27.
          Table 26.  PROJECTED 1980 AND 1985 EMISSION INVENTORY
                              (tons/peak period)

Stationary sources (Table 22)
Automotive sources (Table 24)
Total
Allowed (Table 20)
Reduction required
Reductions mandated
(1) Inspection and maintenance
(2) VSAD retrofit, pre-1968 LDV's
(3) Air fuel retrofit, 1968-1971 LDV's
(4) Catalytic retrofit, 1971-1975 LDV/MDV
(5) Air fuel retrofit, MDV
(6) Air fuel retrofit, HDV
(7) Traffic flow improvements
(8) VMT measures
Total reductions
Reductions remaining
1980
9.52
21.62
31.14
18.30
12.84

2.18
0.09
0.24
1.94
0.10
1.54
O.OOU)
o.oo(a)
6.09
6.75
1985
10.14
18.08
28.22
18.30
9.92

1.80
0.00
0.00
0.33
0.03
1.71
o.oo
-------
       Table 27.  PROJECTED VMT (1000's) AND EMISSION FACTOR  (g/mile)
                        FOR 1980 AND 1985 PEAK PERIODS

Year
1977
1980
1985


Year
1977
1980
1985
Table 23
LDV HDV
4352 632



LDV
Exhaust Evaporative
1.104 0.710
0.824 0.298
0.506 0.200
Appendix C
LDV
3256
3622
3944
Emission Factor

HDV
643
715
795
(g/mile)

Total Exhaust
1.814
1.122
0.706
__. . ,, fc Total Emissions (Table
8.452
8.833
8.743
22)
Projected
LDV
4352
4841
5272

HDV
Evaporative
4.122
3.478
3.000

HDV
632
703
781


Total
12.574
12.311
11.743

                         Total Miles (Table 27)
IMPLICATIONS OF THE ANALYSIS
     Table 28 presents a recapitulation of the derived data in the pre-
ceding section.  Figure 17 is a display of the relative importance of the
several source categories.  The increasing importance of emissions from
trucks is readily apparent.  This importance can be demonstrated graphically
with the use of two linear equations which define the allowable emissions
to meet the standards:
     EFTT._. (LDVMT) + EFTTT.1T (HDVMT) + NA  =  18.3 tons/peak period
       LDV            HUV
     where
     EF is the emission factor for the two classes  (tons/mile) and LDVftT
     and HDVMT are the 6:00-9:00 a.m. vehicle miles traveled for the two
     classes and, NA is the total non-automotive sources.  The allowable
     emissions are 18.3 tons/peak period.
     1980:  1.122 (LDVMT) + 12.311  (HDVUT) = 7.97 x 106
     1985:  0.706 (LDVMT) + 11.743  (HDVMT) = 7.40 x 106
                                     93

-------
Table 28.   SUMMARY OF DERIVED DATA RELATING TO HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FROM
                             MOBILE SOURCES

1977
LDV HDV
Automotive emission factors (g/mile)
FMVCP plus deterioration 3.153 18.753
with speed factors and control 1.814 12.574
measures
VMT (1,000's/peak period) 4,352 632
Emissions (tons/peak period) 8.70 8.76
Total automotive 17.46
Total non-automotive 9.53
Total 26.99
Total allowed (tons/peak period)
Reduction required (tons/peak period)
Reduction required (%)
1980 1985
LDV HDV LDV
1.622 17.198 0.815
1.122 12.311 0.706
4,841 703 5,272
5.99 9.54 4.10
15.53 14.21
9.52 10^14
25,05 24.35
18.30 18.30
6.75 6.05
27 25

HDV
16.183
11.743
781
10.11







-------
   12


   11


   10


    9
=   6
   1977
 NA
?
      32%
    1980
NA
                                6S/
                                     LDV
19B5
                                        NA
                            HDV
                                                  /,
                                                   13%
                                                  N7*
                                                     \
                                                        LDV
                               LEGEND
                 POWER, INDUSTRY
                 INCINERATION
           Y/A GASOLINE STORAGE
                                  LDV
                 NON AUTOMOTIVE
                 MOBILE
           KV1 SOLVENT OPERATION
     Figure 17.   Baltimore  AQMA  hydrocarbon  emissions  for
              for  future years by  source category
                                  95

-------
     These two lines are plotted in Figure 18  together with the 1977
equation.  Using the VMT projections from Tables 23 and 27, plotted on the
figure, it is observed that, as projected, the VMT points do not converge
to the appropriate line.  This indicates continued large gasoline distribu-
tion limitations without reductions in VMT or further control of non-auto-
motive sources.
     This can be further illustrated by additional equations which describe
the percent reduction required in the two VMT classes to meet standards,
as follows:
     1977:  7.39 (LDVMT%R)  +  7.94 (HDVMT%R)  =  788
     1980:  5:43 (LDVMT%R)  +  8.65 (HDVMT%R)  =  612
     1985:  3.72 (LDVMT%R)  +  9.17 (HDVMT%R)  =  549
     These equations are plotted in Figure 19.   As can be observed for
1977, a 100 percent reduction is required in either LDVT or HDVT (or  50
percent in both or stated in the TCP); by 1980 either 103 percent in  LDVMT
or 71 percent in HDVMT or 43 percent in both; by 1985, 148 percent in
LDVMT or 60 percent in HDVMT or 42 percent in both.  Of course, rather
than reducing VMT by these amounts, emissions might be reduced a corres-
ponding amount.  This illustrates the impossibility of meeting standards
by control of LDVMT or increasingly stringent exhaust pipe devices.  On the
other hand, 60 percent reduction in HDVMT might be possible and certainly
exhaust system controls are feasible.  If the 60 percent reduction were
made here, the emission factor would be approximately 4.7 g/mile a re-
duction of nearly 80 percent over 1961 pre-controlled vehicles.
     The projections of non-automotive sources is optimistic and depends
upon strict adherence to the regulation prohibiting new sources.  Any new
refinery operations or gasoline storage and handling facility will have a
marked negative effect. For instance, one 100 ton per year source is  equiva-
lent, in 1985, to 44,000 LDVMT during the 6:00-9:00 a.m. peak period or 2,600
HDVMT.
     Figure 20 demonstrates the relative distribution of emission sources
for hydrocarbons upon which the maintenance measures were based.  A 25 per-
cent reduction of hydrocarbon emissions is required to meet the NAAQS for
oxidants of 0.08 ppm in 1985, but a 27 percent reduction of hydrocarbon emis-
sions is required to meet the NAAQS in 1980.
                                      96

-------
    14






    13






    12






    11






    10
CD
i     i     r
i     i     i      i     r
                                               1985
                2     3
                                 7     8
                           10
                               HDVMT x 10
                                      -5
           Figure  18,   Allowed VMT  to meet  standards
                             97

-------
  10    20    30   40    50   60   70   80   90   100   110  120

                HDVMT REDUCTION REQUIRED, %
Figure  19.  Automotive  emission  reductions
         required  to meet  standards
                   98

-------
1972 TOTAL 60.98  TONS
1985  TOTAL 24.35 TONS
                                 GAS DISTRIBUTION
                                   SOLVENTS
                                MOBILE (NON-AUTO)

                                	OTHER
         Figure  20.   Distribution  of  hydrocarbon emissions
                 by  source  category  (tons/6-9  am)

-------
                                CHAPTER VI
             PROJECTED AIR QUALITY ANALYSES:   NITROGEN DIOXIDE

BACKGROUND
     The Maryland SIP for attainment of NAAOS in the Metropolitan Baltimore
Intrastate Air Quality Control Region (Area III) was disapproved at 40  CFR
Section 52.1075 because the plan did not provide for the degree  of reduction
of nitrogen oxide emissions that was attainable through the application of
reasonably available control technology.  An attainment date for the N0_
NAAQS of July 1975 was imposed upon the. State.  Maryland air pollution  con-
trol regulations were then amended to include the degree of control of  NO
                                                                         .A.
emissions mentioned in the EPA Administrator's action disapproving the
original SIP*
     Later, Section 52.1075 was revoked; Area III was reclassified from
Priority I to Priority III for NO^ and the region was declared to be in
compliance with NAAQS for this pollutant.  This action resulted from the
investigation of the reference method for the measurement of N0? as reported
in FR 38 15176, dated 8 June 1973.

AIR QUALITY
     The Maryland BAQC inaugurated an N0? monitoring program in early 1972
which used the continuous Saltzman method of analysis, one of the candidate
reference methods proposed by EPA for N0?.  Latest results from this monitor-
ing program, as listed in Table 29, show the region to be in violation of NAAQS.
* Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.  Rules and Regula-
  tions Governing the Control of Air Pollution in Area III, Sec. 10.03.38.
  Baltimore, Maryland.  Secretary of the Maryland State Department of Health
  and Mental Hygiene. 43 p.
                                    101

-------
        Table  29.   BALTIMORE AQMA NITROGEN DIOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
                                 (yg/m3)
Station
Calvert and
22nd Street
Green and
Lombard Street
Site code
210120018
210120019
1972
4
143
94
1
141
109
1973
2
87
85
3
97
97
Annual
average
117
96
     Based on roll-back techniques the required emission reduction should
equal 15 percent to meet the 100 ug/m  standard:

                           X     100     =     15 percent
EMISSION INVENTORY
     The emission inventory for baseline year 1973 and projections  to 1985
are presented in Table 30.  The bases for the projections were,  in  general,
the same as for hydrocarbon emissions; briefly, they were:
     (1)  Power plant projections in accordance with Appendix D.
     (2)  Decrease of refuse by 1975, with no later growth due to the ban on
          open burning and control of incinerators.
     (3)  Increase in residential/commercial heating and small gasoline
          engines at the population growth rate, 1.52 percent per year.
     (4)  Increase in diesel and shipping at the rate of 1.5  percent  per year.
     (5)  Increase in aircraft at 7.7 percent per year.
     (6)  Increase in industrial heating and processing at 0.5 percent per
          year.
     (7)  Automobile emissions were estimated using the emission  factors
          in Table 24 and the speed and growth factors  from Appendices
          B and  C.  Certain of the EPA controls mandated for  hydrocarbons
          will have a beneficial effect on NO  emissions, particularly in
                                   102

-------
     Table 30.   BALTIMORE AQMA NITROGEN OXIDE EMISSIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS
                               (tons/year)


Power plants
Refuse
Residential/ commercial heating
Diesel and shipping
Aircraft
Industrial heating
Industrial process
Automotive
Miscellaneous gasoline
Total
1973(1)
43,200
4UO
12,500
27,800
1,300
17,900
35,800
48,900
400
188,200
1975
24,700
300
12,900
28,600
1,500
18,100
36,200
45,500
400
168,200
1980
21,000
300
13,900
30,800
2,200
18,500
37,100
29,100
400
153,300
1985
22,700
300
15,000
33,200
3,200
19,000
38,000
24,100
500
156,000
(1)  Designation of State Air Quality Maintenance Areas,  Maryland BAQC,
    May 1974.
          1980.   By 1985  the  retrofit  measures  will  have  little  effect  on
          total  emissions, but  the  inspection and maintenance measure might
          provide some  additional benefit.
     A yearly maximum  total of 160,000 tons emissions is required to main-
tain the standards as  determined from the proportional model.  Although the
projected 1975 NOX emissions are shown to exceed the 160,000 tons, the
standards will be met  in both 1980 and 1985.  Reductions in VMT suggested
in the oxidant control measures and the catalytic converter retrofit of LDV
would result in further reductions.

PROJECTED AIR QUALITY
     The analysis -shows that NAAQS will be achieved between 1975-1980 and
that the Standards will not be violated during the decade following attain-
ment.   It is recommended that no AQMA plan be required for NO  emissions
for the Baltimore area.
                                   103

-------
                                 CHAPTER VII
                     METHODOLOGY  FOR STRATEGY  DEVELOPMENT

INTRODUCTION
     It  was determined  that  air quality  maintenance  plans  were required for
the control and distribution  of paniculate and hydrocarbon  emissions.   In the
case of  hydrocarbons  this  amounted to a  25 percent reduction in projected 1985
emissions and a 27 percent reduction in  projected 1980 emissions, and in the
case of  particulates  an improvement in air quality of 20 yg/m .  Furthermore,
the review of air pollution control regulations currently mandated by the
State and the EPA indicated the very stringent control already in effect.
     This information quickly led to the conclusion  that heroic measures would
be required to meet the air quality standards  during the decade 1975 to 1985.
It would be necessary to consider every  conceivable  additional control measure
and to study  in depth all  the options available for  input  into the air quality
maintenance strategy  and plan development.  This required  a  systemized con-
ceptual  approach  that went far beyond that  required  in the usual state imple-
mentation plan.  One  such  conceptual approach  is provided  by the "Residual
Environmental Quality Management" C&EQM)  framework  and will be discussed in
this chapter.

RESIDUALS - ENVIRONMENTAL  QUALITY MANAGEMENT
    Residuals-environmental quality management provides a framework for  the
systematic analysis of the range of options available for responding  to  air
quality maintanance requirements.  Inherent within  this framework is  the
 *The adaptation of the REQM framework to the air quality maintenance problem
  was conceived and developed by the Regional Environmental Management Program,
  Washington Environmental Research Center, Office of Research and Development,
  U.S.E.P.A., under the program management of Charles N. Ehler.  Much of the
  material in this s'ection was taken from working notes and papers perpared by
  him and his colleagues.
  The original work on the REQM approach was performed by the Quality of the
  Environment Program, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., under the
  direction of Allen V. Kneese and Blair T. Bower.
                                     105

-------
concept  that  all production  and  use  activities  of society result  in  the
generation  and  discharge of  some material and energy residuals, and  that
the weight  of residuals  discharged to the air,  water,  or land  is  approximately
equal  to the  weight  of the raw materials  entering various production proc-
esses  (plus the weight of oxygen added from the atmosphere during production)
less the weight of the product produced.   By examining regional production
processes it  becomes possible  to identify numerous points where control
measures may  be applied,  including final  demand modification,  changes  in  the
spatial  distribution of  activities,  raw material and energy input changes,
residuals modification,  storage  and  recycling,  and others.   Employing  a con-
sistent  conceptual approach  to air quality maintenance,  allows for the pos-
sible  analysis  o.f all the variables  of regional air quality and the  considera-
tion of  a wide  range of  control  measures,  enabling the designated agency  to
make explicit the assumptions  it has made due to limitations of resources.
     The following definitions and assumptions  are helpful.
     (1) Residuals:  material (solid,  liquid and gases)  and energy  (light,
          heat, noise, etc.) outputs  from production processes (industrial,
          agriculture, transportation, etc.) which have no economic value
          in existing markets  or have  a value less  than their variable costs
          of production or use.  These no-value  or  low-value materials and
          energy  flows tend to be  discharged  into  the various environmental
          media  (land, air,  and water) for  "final" disposal, usually at little
          or no cost to the discharger, rather  than being recovered,  recycled
          or reused as an input to other production processes.
     (2) Control Measure:   a  specified action  which results in a change  of
          the quantity,  type,  timing,  or  spatial location of residuals dis-
          charged into the ambient environment.   Control measures can  be
          categorized in  the following way:*
          A.    Measures  For  Reducing The  Discharge of  Residuals
                (i)   Measures  for  reducing  residuals generation
                     (a)  Change  raw material inputs
                     (b)  Change production processes
*Modified from Bower, Blair T. and Basta, Daniel J. Residuals-Environmental
 Quality Management:  Applying the Concept, Baltimore, Maryland:  Johns
 Hopkins Center for Metropolitan Planning and Research, October 1973, p. 12.

                                    106

-------
                (c)   Change mix of product outputs
                (d)   Change product output specifications
          (ii)   Measures  for modifying residuals after generation
                (a)   Materials or energy recovery (direct recycle)
                (b)   By-product production (indirect  recycle)
                (c)   Residuals treatment (without recovery—for reuse—
                     of any material or energy)
     B.    Measures Directly Involving Environmental Assimilative Capacity
          (i)    Measures  for making better use of assimilative capacity
                (a)   Emissions redistribution over space and/or over time
                (b)   Change the time scheduling  of activities
                (c)   Change the spatial location of activities
          (ii)   Measures  for increasing the assimilative capacity
                (a)   Modify atmospheric conditions
                (b)   Modify topographical conditions.
(3)   Policy  Instrument:  a mechanism to achieve  a specified control
     measure by either requiring the adoption of a specific control
     measure (e.e.,  requiring a scrubber) or by  allowing the activity
     several options as to the control measures  it selects (as when
     an  emissions  tax is  applied).   For any given control measure there
     are often  several policy instruments available for their  implementa-
     tion.   Policy instruments include economic  incentives, subsidies,
     grants, emission taxes, standards setting,  zoning, capital improve-
     ment programs,  emissions limitations, performance or product speci-
     fications, compliance schedules, and so on.  For example, a change
     in  the  raw material  input (fuel) to a power plant (a specified con-
     trol measure) could  be achieved by writing  and enforcing  a specifi-
     cation  (a  policy instrument) on the sulphur content of the fuel
     used in energy  conversion.  Similarly, a change  in the spatial loca-
     tion of activities (a specified control measure)—for example,
     heavy industry—can  be achieved through zoning modifications (a
     policy  instrument).
(4)   Evaluation Criteria:  the list of considerations which will permit
     the value  judgement  of the preferable set of measures.  Not only must
     the selected  set result in the required effectiveness but it must
                               107

-------
          be acceptable to the policy and decision making bodies.   This in-
          fers,  of course, that the measures must each be finally acceptable
          to the public.
     (5)  Institutions:  the arrangement and relationships of organizations,
          both public and private, whose actions through specified policies
          can affect ambient environmental quality.  Public institutions in-
          clude all levels of government (Federal, state, regional, and local)
          as well as functions of government (legislative, administrative,
          judicial, etc.).
     (6)  Strategy:  set of control measures, related policy instruments, and
          designated institutions selected to achieve a specified level of
          environmental quality.
     The linkages between the competent parts of the REQM system are shown in
Figure 21.  The REQM framework assumes that control measures may be applied at
each step in the generation of each gaseous residual for each source category.
Some examples of measures for the reduction of particulate residuals from
power plants under each class are listed below:
     (1)  Reduce final demand for power
          (a)   Convert from incandescent to fluorescent lighting
          (b)   Require better insulation
     (2)  Change raw material input
          (a)   Reduce ash content of coal
          (b)   Switch to gaseous fuel
      (3) Change production process
          (a)   Convert to nuclear power generation
          (b)   Convert to solar power
     (4)  Change product output
          (a)   Increase voltage
     (5)  Decrease environmental discharge
          (a)   Improve control technology
          (b)   Add more control devices
     (6)  Improve assimilative capacity
          (a)   Increase wind speed

                                     108

-------
o
VO
4 CONTROL MEASURE/
RESIDUALS SOURCES CLASS POLICY INSTRUMENTS
GASES
CO
HC
N0x
TSP
so2

SOLIDS

LIQUIDS

NOISE

HEAT

ETC



4

















POINT:
INDUSTRY
ENERGY CONVER
ETC.

LINE:
TRANSPORTATION

AREA:
AGRICULTURE
RESIDENTIAL
SILVACULTURE
ETC

NOT DEFINED:
BACKGROUND
FUGITIVE


*

















FINAL DEMAND
MODIFICATION
RAW MATERIAL INPUT
CHANGES
PRODUCTION PROCESS
CHANGES
PRODUCT OUTPUT
CHANGES
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY
APPLICATION
SPATIAL/TEMPORAL
REDISTRIBUTION
OF ACTIVITIES/
RESIDUALS
ASSIMILATIVE
CAPACITY
MODIFICATION
4

















TAX POLICY
ECONOMIC INCENTIVES
GRANTS
SUBSIDIES
ZONING
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAMS
STANDARDS-SETTING
EMISSIONS/EFFLUENTS
LIMITATIONS
SPECIFICATIONS
PERMITS
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
ETC.





                                                                           EVALUATIVE CRITERIA   INSTITUTIONS
EFFECTIVENESS
SECONDARY EFFECTS
INTER/INTRA-MEOIA
LAND USE
ENERGY USE
ECOSYSTEM
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
PRIVATE
SOCIAL
TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
POLITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
PUBLIC
RESPONSIVENESS
ETC.
4

















1 PUBLIC:
FEDERAL
STATE
REGION
LOCAL

PRIVATE












     Source:  Washington Environmental  Research Center
                      Figure 21.   Residuals environmental  management  linkages

-------
     (7)  Alter  spatial/temporal  distribution
          (a)  Utilize peak  shaving/storage
          (b)  Require high  stacks
     For each measure listed,  the environmental and  socioeconomic  effects
are estimated and catalogued.  Examples of considerations used for the
evaluation of individual control measures include:
     (1)  Environmental Impacts
          (a)   Intra-media effects, e.g., do control measures for CO
                affect the discharge of TSP?
          (b)   Resultant time and spatial patterns  of air emissions gen-
                erated and discharged due to AQM strategy
          (c)   Time and spatial pattern of ambient  air quality
          (d)   Inter-media effects, e.g., do control measures for more
                solid waste for land disposal?
          (e)   Energy use implications of AQM  strategies
          (f)   Land use implications of AQM strategies
     (2)  Economic Impacts
          (a)   Direct impacts on the operating costs of air pollutant
                dischargers, e.g., private industry, municipal incinerators,
                public utilities, etc.
          (b)   Direct benefits of the AQM strategy, e.g., the reduction
                in damages
          (c)   Indirect impacts  on income distribution, interregional pro-
                duction location  decisions, and so on
          (d)   The distribution  of the costs of the AQM strategy, i.e.,
                who pays?
          (e.)   The distribution  of the benefits of  the AQM strategy
     (3)  Timing Considerations
          (a)   Time required  to  implement individual control measures of
                the AQM strategy
          (b)   Time required  to  obtain first benefits from the AQM strategy
     (4)  Administrative Impacts
          (a)   Costs of administering the AQM  strategy, including manpower,
                facilities, monitoring instrumentation, etc.
                                    110

-------
     (b)   Simplicity of administration,  i.e.,  the ease with which the
          rules and procedures required  by the control measures could
          be implemented
     (c)   Flexibility of the AQM strategy, i.e.,  ability to respond and
          adapt to changing conditions and/or  objectives over time
(5)   Legal Considerations
     (a)   Legal constraints, i.e.,  the extent  to  which existing legisla-
          tion would have to be changed  to enable implementation of the
          AQM strategy
(6)   Political Considerations
     (a)   Policy makers'  perceived  urgency of  the air  quality maintenance
          problem  in terms  of the views  of their  different  constituents
     (b)   Policy makers'  perceived  urgency of  the air  quality maintenance
          problem  relative  to other problems of society,  e.g.,  housing,
          transportation, regional  economic development,  and so on
     (c)   Policy makers'  perceived  impact  of the  AQM strategy on various
          political groups
     (d)   Impacts  of the AQM strategy  on inter-governmental relations,
          i.e.,  Federal-state,  Federal-local,  state-local,  and so on
     (e)   Impact upon relations of  air quality control agencies with
          other planning and management  agencies, e.g.,  land use, trans-
          portation,  and so on
     (f)   Potential conflict with existing policies  and regulations,
          e.g.,  land use policies,  capital improvement programs, taxa-
          tion policies,  etc.
(7)   Public Acceptance/Responsiveness
     (a)   Extent of public's participation in  the objective-setting,
          plan preparation, and plan evaluation process
     (b)   Public's perception of the adequacy  of  the AQM strategy to
          adequately deal with the  AQM problem
     (c)   Extent of coincidence of  the proposed AQM strategy with the
          values of the public regarding such  issues as equity and
          efficiency
                               111

-------
          (d)  Public's acceptance of the proposed strategy, e.g., gas
               rationing, parking surcharges, etc.
     Essential to the operation of the REQM framework is the value judgement
input from the public.  Each candidate measure and its impact must be ex-
amined in light of public responsiveness and acceptance before it can become
part of the final maintenance strategy.

APPLICATION OF REQM FRAMEWORK
     The system was applied to the development of the Baltimore air quality
maintenance plan essentially as outlined above.  The operative tool was a
matrix, Figure 22', which provided a means of listing and displaying all the
information as it was developed.  Most of the entries on the form are self-
explanatory.  The others are defined below.

     (1)  Effectiveness:  the percent reduction in total emissions from that
         source category expected from the control measure, without regard
         to other measures.  In many cases, the estimate w?s made entirely
         subjectively, particularly in the case of land use measures.
     (2)  Emission Reduction:  Obtained as the product of effectiveness times
         the source category contribution to emission.
     (3)  Improved Air Quality:  Obtained as the product of effectiveness
         times the source category contribution to concentration.
     (4)  Administrative  Considerations:  Flexibility refers to the ease with
         with which a control measure may be applied or removed.  Continuous-
         Non-Continuous  describes whether the control must be applied all
         the time or whether it can be applied at some times and not others.
         Selective-Uniform describes the ability of the control measure to
         be applied to certain sources (either within a class or between
         classes) as opposed to all sources.
     (5)  Timing Considerations:  The effectiveness referred to in Years
         Before Effectiveness Realized is that percentage identified in the
         column, Percentage Range of Effectiveness and the resulting emis-
         sions reduction or improved air quality listed in the following
         columns.
                                     112

-------
SOURCE CATEGORY
CONTROL
MEASURES


POLICY
INSTRUMENTS


i

j





i












PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
































































in































UJ
















UJ
B
06















ECOHOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 HOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3 VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
£
















g















at
at















~
£
1















ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
to
s
















0
















MOKITOR















~
s
<=>















SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
£















UJ
5
UJ















2
REGION*















--.
S
1















ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

^















UJ
CD
UJ
ai
o















UJ
i















UJ
UJ















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L

§















1
5
















1
















UNIFORM















TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
ee _i
UJ K
•7















•7















2















o ae
UJ U. U
>- UJ oe
7















in
I















2

















^















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
UJ —1
CJ















UJ















REGIONAL















g















0-















LE6AL
CONS 10-


-------
      (6)  Economic  Implication:  The purpose of  this section is to provide
          some measure of the relative economic  impact of a particular con-
          trol measure coupled with some policy  instrument.  The nature of
          the impact has been categorized as:   (1) Direct Costs to the pol-
          luter  (e.g., an industrial polluter who has to control stack emis-
          sions, or an automobile  owner who has  to maintain some retrofit
          device on his car, etc.), to the consumer  (e.g., one who pays higher
          prices for goods or services that are  more expensive because of
          pollution abatement regulations), to  the government  (as part of its
                            •
          transportation plan),  or to some other entity that may suffer out-
          of-pocket costs;  (2) Administrative Costs.  These are indirect
          costs of  program management, enforcement, monitoring, etc. paid by
          public funds for the institution and maintenance of specific pol-
          lution abatement strategies; and  (3)  Social Costs or costs suffered
          by a community or  society as a whole,  costs that indirectly manifest
          themselves as having a negative impact on area income  (e.g., where
          opportunities for  growth are forestalled), area employment  (e.g.,
          where a firm actually  has to cut back  its production), regional
          prices, or on some other measure of community or area well-being
          such as population level, growth rate, etc.
      Several notations were  utilized in the matrix rating environmental,
social, economic, temporal and political criteria.  The shading and numerical
notations are self-explanatory.  One exception may be the column entitled
Public Responsiveness.  The  numerical entries in the five subcolumns ranging
from  least acceptable to most acceptable represent the number of responses
for or in opposition to a particular control measure.  These responses were
recorded at meetings of the  Air  Quality Task Force.  The variations in total
responses between measures result  from the fact  that not all members responded
to each measure.  The composition  of the Task Force was such that all groups
in the BMAQMA were  not equally represented and  the numbers in the public
responsiveness spaces should be  viewed accordJngly.  More important, perhaps,
than  these numbers  were the  comments recorded at the meetings reflecting the
concerns, questions and reactions  of Che group  toward the measures.  A Y (yes)
or N  (no notation was used in the  legal considerations column.  Finally, inter-
media environmental effects  were divided into five sub-categories.  Positive
                                      114

-------
intermedia environmental effects resulting from a particular control measure
were noted with the symbol X and negative effects were noted with a minus
symbol (-).  Where there were no effects the space remained blank.
     A separate display was made for each source category and pollutant upon
which was entered that category's percent contribution to the 1985 pollutant
concentration.  A comprehensive list of candidate control measures and the
policy instruments for implementation was made based upon the seven classes
of control measures in the REQM framework.  First estimates of matrix entries
were entered at this time except for public responsiveness, entries for which
were solicited from the Air Quality Task Force.
     During the next six weeks, the matrices' entries were refined and changed
and finally completed as presented in Chapter VIII.  Measures were added and
in some cases, because of triviality or time frame for implementation,
eliminated.
     A series  of  four meetings was held with  the Air Quality Task Force
during the  course of development of  the final plan.  At  each meeting  the
latest version of the control measure matrices was distributed  to the panel
for discussion and comment.  In  the  final version, it  is believed that a
new consensus  had been  reached for each entry.
     At  the final meeting, a number  of candidate strategies were  presented
to the panel  for  discussion and  comment.  These  strategies are  discussed  in
Chapter  IX.
                                    115

-------
                                CHAPTER VIII
                       SELECTION OF MAINTENANCE MEASURES

INTRODUCTION
     The following chapter presents the maintenance measures developed using
the REQM framework.  Eleven tables are presented enveloping particulate and
hydrocarbon emissions.  The matrices, as explained in Chapter VII, describe
the generated residuals, methods for their prevention, as well as secondary
impact resulting from socioeconomic implications of the control measures
and policy instruments.
     The tables are ordered in relation to Source Categories, beginning with
Suspended Particulates (Tables 31 through 36) and continuing with Hydrocarbons
(Tables 37 through 41).
     (1)  Domestic and Commercial Heating and Cooling  (Table 31)
     (2)  Industrial Processing and Heating  (Table 32)
     (3)  Power Plants (Table 33)
     (4)  Transportation (Table 34)
     (5)  Fugitive Dust (Table 35)
     (6)  Land Use Measures, Stationary (Table 36)
     (7)  Non-Automotive Sources, Stationary  (Table 37)
     (8)  Non-Automotive Sources, Mobile  (Table 38)
     (9)  Light Duty Vehicles (Table 39)
    (10)  Heavy Duty Vehicles (Table 40)
    (11)  Land Use Measures  (Table 41)
                                     117

-------
     Preceding these tables is a list of the control measures with a brief
description for each item.  Their order coincides with the tables for easy
reference.  Several of the control measures are discussed in more detail
(including specific examples of implementation and references to previous
studies) and can be found in Appendix F of this report.  The descriptions
of the potential control measures, in some cases, include references to the
policy instruments which may be used to influence the selection of that con-
trol measure.

POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Domestic and Commercial Heating and Cooling
     The following potential control measures are applicable for domestic
and commercial heating and cooling:
          -(1)  Improve domestic and commercial insulation - Improving or up-
     grading building code specifications for insulation of domestic and com-
     mercial structures would effect a reduction in the amount of heat that
     is lost by radiation and would thus result in substantial savings in
     energy production due to compensating for heat loss.
           (2)  Control room temperatures  for air conditioning and heating -
           Reducing  thermostat  settings  for heating could result in an 11 per-
           cent savings in  energy  requirements.  Raising  the thermostat set-
           ting for  air conditioning could result in more substantial savings
           due to  the  larger energy demands required for  cooling.
           (3)  Concentrate new development at densities that will allow for
     measures to reduce emissions per capita or per unit of production -
     Increasing multifamily housing (as opposed to detached units), operating
     fewer large industrial and power generation facilities (instead of many
     small ones), and carefully locating new sources may result in reduced
     emissions per capita through economies of scale providing increased
     feasibility for new control equipment,  as well a's increased operating
     efficiencies.
          (4)  Reduce window area - Reducing the amount of window area would
     reduce possible entrance and exit sites for heated or cooled air.   Thus

                                    118

-------
     less cold air could infiltrate heated areas during winter and less
     heated air could escape;  conversely,  less cooled air could exit  during
     summer and less radiated  heat  could  enter through glass.
          (5)   Increase fuel costs  - Raising the cost of fuel  would tend to
     force the consumer to conserve; however,  the regressive nature of such
     costs to  individuals with low  incomes should be considered.
          (6)   Diurnal room temperature -  A substantial savings in fuel de-
     mand could be gained by introduction  of diurnal room temperature during
     sleeping  hours.
          (7)   Reduce ash content of fuel  - The use of fuel processing tech-
     niques to reduce ash content would lower  the amount of ash emitted
     during ignition/combustion.
          (8)   Improve furnace design - Increasing the efficiency of  furnace
     combustion by improving design would  have an overall effectiveness of
     5 to 15 percent.  For example, the Southern California Gas Company is
     recommending the use of a "turbulator" which is a baffle-type device of
     crooked "zig-zag" configuration that  is inserted into boiler tubes.  The
     turbulator acts to slow hot  gases entering the tube thereby allowing better
     heat transference.  The use  of a turbulator has been reported to increase
                                     *
     boiler efficiency by 15 percent.
          (9)   Improve maintenance  of heating/cooling systems  - Amending
     building  codes to require more frequent inspections of heating/cooling
     systems would enforce a higher degree of  efficiency that  could realize
     a 5 to 10 percent effectiveness (e.g., replacing worn parts, dirty air
     filters,  etc.).
         (10)   Modify pilot light - Changing from a continuous pilot  light
     in gas appliances (which  annually uses 8 percent of total gas consumed)
     to an electrical ignitor  could save  20 to 30 percent of the energy con-
     sumption  of a gas range (when  used in conjunction with better oven insu-
     lation).
*
  Southern California Business.   XXXVII (31):10.  August 1974.
                                    119

-------
         (11)  Design home heating and air conditioning systems as a unit -
     A greater percentage of efficiency is obtained by installation of a
     bi-modal climate control system for residential units.
         (12)  Orientation of buildings and windows - Modifying the design
     of building and window orientation can reduce heating air conditioning
     demand from 2 to 5 percent.
         (13)  Install control devices on small combustion units - Changing
     the design specifications to modify combustion units or adding "black
     boxes" such as a main baghouse or high-efficiency cyclone could have
     an efficiency in reducing emissions of 50 to 100 percent, depending upon
     the degree of enforcement.
Industrial Process and Heating
     The following potential control measures are applicable to industrial
process and heating:
          (1)  Reduce demand for industrial products - Industrial process
     emissions are by far the most significant source of emissions in the
     Baltimore AQMA.  Nearly 55 percent of the total particulate emissions
     in the Baltimore AQMA are from industrial process; therefore, a reduc-
     tion in demand for products would reduce emissions.
          (2)  Exclude high pollutant sources from AQMA - This measure is
     self-explanatory.
          (3)  Modify production hours - Decreasing production hours would
     limit the amount of particulate emissions; furthermore, a shift in
     production hours would redistribute the amount of emissions.
          (4)  Modify raw material inputs - Improving the specifications of
     raw materials would have an effectiveness of 2 to 5 percent; selection
     of raw materials of high grade and consistency would produce less
     residual emissions during their use.
          (5)  Recycle residuals back into production process - The recycling
     of by-products from industrial processing can have an effective range
     of 2 percent.
                                    120

-------
          (6)  Improve product efficiencies - The value of improving the
     efficiency of energy consumptive products and the consequent reduction
     in energy demand is evident.
          (7)  Modify production output - Modifying production output would
     include making products more durable, improving packaging techniques
     to decrease the amount of material used, etc.  Such methods would re-
     duce the amount of raw materials and energy required to produce and
     deliver goods.
          (8)  Improve collection efficiency - Improving collection efficiency
     to improve upon EPA Standards,  which currently utilize the best avail-
     able technology to effect emission reduction, would require a tech-
     nological breakthrough.
          (9)  Predict alerts - The predicting of alerts would in effect
     allow emergency measures to be initiated to prevent pollution from
     reaching dangerous levels.
Power Plants
     The potential control measures for power plants are:
          (1)  Utilize daylight savings time - Legislation passed by Congress
     during the height of the energy crises, which made daylight savings
     time mandatory throughout the year until 1975, has an effectiveness of
     approximately 1 to 2 percent.
          (2)  Increase electrical rates for large users - Restructuring
     the rate scale for large users could have an effectiveness of from 2
     to 5 percent.
          (3)  Improve domestic and commercial building insulation - See
     Particulates, Domestic and Commercial Heating and Cooling.
          (4)  Improve efficiency of electrical appliances - The value of
     energy efficient appliances is self-explanatory.
          (5)  Control room temperature for heating and air conditioning -
     Reduced thermostat settings for heating and raised thermostat set-
     tings for air conditioning could result in substantial savings in
     energy demands.
                                    121

-------
     C6)  Ration electricity - One option open to curtailing electrical
demand may be rationing on a limited basis.
     (7)  Move all power plants outside the region - Move existing
facilities or through attrition build new plants outside AQMA.
     (8)  Surround power plants with land use buffers - Providing buffer
zones to surround power plants would prevent sensitive receptors (such
as hospitals, schools, etc.) from locating near a potential pollutional
source.
     (9)  Utilize storage of peak shaving with clean fuel - Having the
potential to use clean fuel such as hydro power during peaks.
     (10)  Limit uses by area or time to even out demand - See above
item (6), Ration Electricity.
     (11)  Reduce ash content of fuel - Reducing the ash content of fuel
would decrease the amount of particulate residue that could be emitted.
     (12)  Convert to clean fuel - Shortages of clean burning natural gas
or oil have made this measure unlikely especially when conversion of
generating facilities to coal has begun on a limited basis.
     (13)  Generate more power in newer, larger facilities - Concentrating
particulate emissions would result from operating fewer but larger
generating facilities.
     (14)  Reduce transmission losses - Higher grade insulation coupled
with higher voltage transmission results in less loss in transmission
to source.
     (15)  Use total energy systems - Utilization of individual electric
power producing units for facilities such as shopping centers and
utilize by-products such as waste heat for space heating.
     (16)  Improve collectors - Increasing collector efficiencies will
require improved technology.  Immediate solution is to "add on" control
devices in series.
     (17)  Add more collectors - See item (16), above.
                              122

-------
         (18)  Increase actual stack heights - Tall stacks produce decreased
     ground level concentrations of suspended particulates due to increased
     dispersion.
         (19)  Increase effective stack heights - See item (18), Increase
     actual stack height.
         (20)  Utilize intermittent control with weather conditions - Controls
     would be used when weather conditions present an alert situation and
     probable increase in concentrations are predicted.
Transportation
     The potential control measures for the hydrocarbon source category
Transportation are equally applicable to particulates; i.e., the potential
control measures to reduce hydrocarbon emissions will also effect reduc-
tions in suspended particulates and are discussed more fully later in the
chapter in the sections Non-automotive Sources, Mobile (pages 126 and 127),
Light Duty Vehicles (pages 127 to 130), and Heavy Duty Vehicles  (pages 130'
and 131).  Also please refer to Tables 38, 39, and 40.  For ease of refer-
ence and to present a general overview of the type of control measures
applicable to this source category (Transportation), the following 12 con-
trol measures were delineated in this section (and Table 34):
           (1)  Reduce vehicle ownership;
           (2)  Improve attractiveness of other modes;
           (3)  Reduce number of drivers;
           (4)  Improve road network outside of region;
           (5)  Restrict highway availability;
           (6)  Increase gas mileage;
           (7)  Use smaller engine to weight ratio;
           (8)  Limit auto accessories;
           (9)  Optimize speed/volume specifications;
         (10)  Increase auto occupancy rate;
         (11)  Add emission control devices; and
         (12)  Predict alerts.
                                  123

-------
Fugitive Dust
          (1)  Reduce demand for transportation, construction, agriculture,
     and other activities - This measure is self-explanatory.
          (2)  Limit agricultural activity during dry weather - Local
     ordinances to curtail agricultural activity during dry weather would
     create a method to reduce particulates during these dry periods.
          (3)  Limit activity on unvegetated lots - Limiting selected
     activities from unvegetated lots would reduce the amount of fugitive
     dust generated from these sites.
          (4)  Modify tire and brake wear design - Redesign tires and brakes
     to reduce the generation of particulates during the normal vehicle
     operating cycle.  This measure requires the implementation of basic and
     applied research and development programs and should probably be
     sponsored by the Federal Government.
          (5)  Eliminate unpaved parking lots - Tax incentives would be the
     more effective program to eliminate unpaved parking lots as fugitive
     dust generation sites.
          (6)  Control unpaved streets - Limiting access as well as speed
     would be an effective means of controlling unpaved streets.
          (7)  Plant ground cover on vacant lots - This measure is an effec-
     tive means to help alleviate the amount of particulates that could be
     generated from vacant lots.
          (8)  Control construction sites - Chemical stabilization, site
     watering, treatment of temporary access roads to main thoroughfares
     and minimizing the period during which cleared and regraded lands are
     exposed are means to limit the amount of dust from construction sites.
          (9)  Limit speed on unpaved roads - See item (6), above.
         (10)  Control of open bodied vehicles - Covering of large open bodied
     vehicles while carrying full loads of dirt would considerably reduce
     the fugitive dust emitted while in transit.
         (11)  Control of deposition of roads - Washing down construction
     vehicles before leaving project sites would have a range of effectiveness
     from 10 to 25 percent in the control of fugitive dust.
                                   124

-------
Land Use Measures,  Stationary
     The following  measures are applicable to land use.
          (1)   Exclude  new sources  from selected  hot  spots  - Areas which have
     been designated  as high areas  of  pollution should be excluded from any
     consideration  of new development  that might  further degrade the ambient
     air quality  of the region.
          (2)   Exclude  high pollutant  sources from AQMA - This  measure is
     self-explanatory.
          (3)   Concentrate new  development at densities which allow for
     measures  to  reduce emissions per  capita  or per unit -  Increasing multi-
     family housing (as opposed to  detached units), operating fewer large
     industrial and power generation facilities (instead of many small ones),
     and carefully  locating new sources may result in reduced emissions per
     capita through economies of scale providing  increased  feasibility for
     new control  equipment,  as  well as increased  operating  efficiencies.
          (4)   Control  of existing  land uses  - Utilize zoning or urban de-
     velopment to control existing  land use activities and  possibly replace,
     through attrition,  older high  emission sources with new low emission
     facilities.
          (5)   Regulate timing  of new  development - Controls can be utilized
     to  regulate  new  development so that it coincides with  the  introduction of
     new control  technology for existing sources  or with their  removal.

POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR  MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS
FOR HYDROCARBONS
Non-Automotive Sources, Stationary
     The control  measures include:
          (1)   Reduce demand for reactive hydrocarbon solvents  - Through
     taxes and fees,  a  reduction in reactive  hydrocarbon  solvents should be
     initiated co reduce emissions  from these sources from  25 to 50 percent.
          (2)   Improve  methods  of  bulk storage -  Reduction  of automotive travel
     in turn limits the amount  of  gasoline required in reserve bulk storage;
     in turn less handling is required and the chances of  accidental spills are
     lessened.
                                   125

-------
          (3)  Regulate service station, terminal facilities - Reducing
     handling and leakage and increasing storage and transportation could
     have an effectiveness of 2 to 4 percent.
          (4)  Improve service station storage - The reduction of emissions
     from service station pumps and terminal loading would be reduced pro-
     portionately to the reduction of usage.
          (5)  Change industrial process - Change process methods for individ-
     ual industrial operations to eliminate wasteful or heavy pollutional
     loading emissions.
          (6)  Control miscellaneous gasoline engines - The banning of gaso-
     line power mowers through fees, or the application of emissions
     control regulations to all gasoline engines are measures that could be
     applied to reduce hydrocarbon emissions.
          (7)  Regulate refuse incineration - The reduction in emissions
     resulting from incineration of solid waste can be achieved by more
     complete incineration; however, this will produce only marginal improve-
     ments in what is already a minor source.
Non-Automotive Sources, Mobile
          (1)  Controls on diesel and shipping - The potential control measures
     for the section Heavy duty vehicles pages 130 and 131 are applicable to
     this control measure.
          (2)  Reduce demand for diesel and shipping - Policies which would
     reduce the requirements for the transportation of goods to the region
     or within the region would in turn reduce the demand for the operation
     of diesel-powered engines and thereby reduce the hydrocarbon emissions.
          (3)  Reduce emissions from diesel engines - Due go the small share
     of total emissions, diesel engines have not been subject to the same
     control as gasoline-powered engines.  In the very near future this will
     change due to the emission controls placed on automobiles.  It is esti-
     mated that the introduction of new emission standards on all new diesel-
     powered trucks, and on other diesel engines in the Baltimore region
     could reduce hydrocarbon emissions from those sources by up to 50 percent.
                                    126

-------
          (4)   Relocate truck traffic from region - Construction of a
     circumferential highway around the region could reduce emissions from
     diesel bus and truck traffic in the region.
          (5)   Episodic controls - Ban on non-essential truck travel has
     the potential to reduce the hydrocarbon emissions from diesel trucks
     during poor meteorological conditions.
          (6)   Control aircraft emissions - Limited reductions of hydrocarbon
     emissions from aircraft and aircraft related activities can result from:
     (a) reduction in flights;  (b) use of larger, cleaner aircraft; (c) reduc-
     tion of ground maneuvers;  and (d) control of non-aircraft ground
     sources.
          (7)   Reduce low speed running of aircraft engines - Revision of
     aircraft  taxiing maneuvers are currently being revised in major air-
     ports.  Taxiing with only  two engines running, aircraft towing, reduc-
     tion of run-ups, and use of mobile lounges are being considered.
          (8)   Reduce ground equipment emissions  - Ground support vehicles
     contribute approximately 30 percent of the total airport-generated
     vehicular traffic; this can be reduced by the following methods:
     (a) installing control devices on fuel handling equipment at the air-
     port to prevent spills, (b) limiting movement of ground support vehicles,
     and (c) limiting automobile access to airport.
Light Duty Vehicles (LDV)
     A prime means of reducing  hydrocarbon emissions is to reduce the total
daily amount of automobile travel.  Measures and  policy instruments are
summarized below; for a more detailed description, refer to Appendix F.
          (1)   Reduce vehicle ownership - This may be attained in three
     ways:  applying additional excise taxes on new vehicles, reducing the
     number of eligible drivers and instituting a strict vehicle inspection
     system.
          (2)   Divert auto passengers to transit  and rail - This measure
     could be accomplished by making major improvements in the level of
     transit service, for example increasing the frequency of current service
                                   127

-------
and expanding new service which may employ new busways.  Also, the
reduction of public transportation fares (possibly to zero) is another
incentive to lure auto riders to transit.  As a disincentive to auto
driving, increased downtown parking costs would influence the modal
split in favor of less expensive transit alternatives.
     (3)  Reduce number of drivers - This method would establish age
restrictions, for example raising the permitted age for drivers from
16 to 18 or setting an upper limit on permitted age (e.g. 62).  Other
restrictions on drivers could include a more liberal use of license
revocation for multiple violations or selected types of violations.
     (4)  Decrease the use of highways - Highway tolls and extra
taxes on gasoline would dissuade highway travel.  Any other additional
expense directly incurred in auto use would tend to discourage travel.
     (5)  Reduce am peak period VMT - Variations in the typical work
week will change the intensity of auto travel during the am peak period.
For example, the four day, 40-hour work week would mean that employees
would work four 10-hour days instead of the regular five 8-hour days
during the week.  Staggered work hours, on the other hand, could per-
haps lengthen the entire peak period but decrease the intensity of the
peak as people came to work in shifts from 6 to 7, 7 to 8, and 8 to 9.
Carpooling, by increasing auto occupancy, also represents a way to reduce
the number of cars on the road during the am peak period journey to work.
Many computerized efforts have been initiated in major cities to identify
potential carpool participants.
     (6)  Reduce summer VMT - Coordination of vacations could shift a
higher percentage of vacations to the period June through August and
thereby reduce the number of employee auto trips to work.  As another
measure, fuel rationing for the summertime could be instituted, and,
during the three-month period, the rationing would decrease the propen-
sity to make auto work trips.  Federal and state control and monitoring
of such a rationing scheme would be required.
                              128

-------
     (7)  Restrict travel - A variety of approaches to fuel rationing
would address this control measure.  For example, a year-round rationing
program might ration fuel to the retailer or wholesaler as was experi-
enced in the 1973-1974 winter allocation program.  These approaches
would require Federal and state participation and should be national
policy as opposed to region-wide to be successful.
     (8)  Relocate traffic out of the region - Through traffic could be
diverted from travelling in the region by affording clearly identified
circumferential routes.  These routes would conceivably be. as fast or
faster to autb drivers as the peak hour trip through Baltimore conges-
tion and would eliminate the frustrations tied to driving in busy
rush hour conditions.
     (9)  Restrict highway construction/improvements - This control
measure can be attained by withholding grants and funds for further
new, construction or major improvements.  In so doing, tax dollars would
be saved for other purposes—perhaps encouraging faster progress on
the rapid rail system.  The selection of which highways are and are not
to be constructed or improved would determine the extent of effective-
ness of this measure.
    (10)  Decrease use of auto accessories - Heavy excise taxes on non-
essential auto accessories would inhibit their purchase and use and sub-
sequently increase the mileage of auto engines.  These non-essential
auto accessories include air conditioning, power brakes, power steering
and other secondary users of gasoline.
    (11)  Modify engine type - The policy instruments related to
this control measure include the use of electric-engined automobiles.
It must be recognized that this measure could only be realized when
electric engines became a product reality.
    (12)  Encourage optimum traffic flow - Improved traffic flow can
be promoted chiefly through TOPICS programs, and improvements in sig-
nalization, intersection design, parking restrictions and other road-
way improvements.  Capacity restrictions can be  implemented through
freeway surveillance, driver information systems and ramp metering to
increase the efficiency of highway traffic.
                               129

-------
         (13)  Increase auto occupancy - Auto occupancy can be increased
     through, parking incentives, i.e., reduced rates for carpool cars or
     reserved spaces for carpool cars.  Other forms of incentives include
     tax reductions and insurance premium reductions for carpool participants.
     Express lanes available for carpool use encourage higher auto occupancy.
         (14)  Improve emission controls - Stricter standards at the Federal
     level would improve the total auto emissions produced.  For instance,
     if standards were established to control emissions per gallon instead
     of emissions per mile regardless of engine size, then total auto hydro-
     carbon emissions would be further reduced.
         (15)  Alert control of VMT - This control measure can be employed
     by imposing periodic bans on auto travel.  Restrictions on non-essential
     trips would be one way of effecting total auto travel during periods
     of high emission levels.  Auto stickers issued on the basis of family
     size and other factors would assist in enforcing partial bans on driving.
     Emergency holidays for employees based upon periods of high emission con-
     ditions would also control auto driving as required in the summer.
Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV)
     In reducing the total VMT contributed by heavy duty vehicles, the
following measures and policy instruments are appropriate:
           (1)  Reduce truck ownership - As with the policy instruments applied
     to automobile ownership, increased fees and taxes as well as more
     rigorous inspection are deterrents to excessive truck ownership.
               ^
           (2)  Reduce gasoline truck ownership - This policy instrument is
     more precise that the one above and would call for fees and taxes which
     discriminate against gasoline truck ownership and in favor of diesel
     and electric-enginea vehicles when the latter are produced and marketed
     widely.
           (3)  Prohibit truck movement - Within tr.uck-free zones, trucks would
     be prohibited either completely or within certain hours of the day.
     Multiple use and coordination of truck deliveries for government offices
     including the diversion of truck deliveries to public transit vehicles
     during off peak hours afford a further possibility for limiting truck
                                    130

-------
     movements.   In better defining truck routes,  local and regional
     agencies can assist in the smoother flow of truck traffic.   Route se-
     lection and delivery schedules are primarily the responsibility of
     private businesses.
          (4)  Reduce am peak period VMT - Prohibiting truck movement in
     the am peak period or eliminating the use of thoroughfares  to trucks
     in the morning rush hours would decrease hydrocarbon emissions from
     trucks in proportion to the number off the road and would further re-
     duce hydrocarbon emissions from light duty vehicles which can flow
     more easily in the absence of  trucks.  Restricted loading zones would
     further discourage truck travel in the critical am peak period.
          (5)  Modify engine type - Policy instruments related to this con-
     trol include replacement of the gasoline engine in heavy duty vehicles
     by the electric engine.  Manufacturer's specifications would be required
     and complementary incentives for smaller engined trucks include possible
     tax incentives.
          (6)  Increase use of smaller vehicles - Taxation by weight would
     encourage smaller engined truck ownership, thus encouraging the use of
     light duty trucks which are currently under stricter controls.
          (7)  Improve emission controls - This measure would rely on a
     policy instrument of mandatory retrofitting of emission control devices
     on trucks.   This is a requirement which necessitates new Federal
     standards and implementation at the Federal and state levels.
          (8)  Episodic control of  VMT - A ban on non-essential  truck travel
     during high pollution periods  would be similar to the measure proposed
     for light duty vehicles.  A sticker system would allow travel on alter-
     nate days or some other proportional approach.  Emergency holidays for
     public and private employees,  including truck drivers, would provide
     episodic control.
Land Use Measures
     Refer to Appendices F and G.
                                   131

-------
Table 31.  POTENTIAL  CONTROL MEASURES  FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED  PARTICULATES
                                      DOMESTIC AND COMMERCIAL  HEATING AND COOLING
SOURCE CATEGORY
DOMESTIC AND COMMERCIAL HEATING AND COOLING
t T.f CONCENTRATION
13 PARTICULAR EMISSIONS
CONTROL
•Fl.rE •_•.»!•. '1C >hO
'. OIWK IL h'. : L* t Oh
'.Oh'FOL POO* 'FMF FCC
1 C IhO HEMINL.
1 ..hf.lh'HIE hil '.EtEi'.snEh'
* i OFhO : it: •- 1 ci *...>•
F» S'. '.1.0 <•£» C«PI T» 01
FEI. .hi i (IF n-:i.o ' oh
(EDUCE IINC01 >Ht
KCtEt'.E FUEL O'jSU
Dili mi Kin !E»F
HEtilCE •'.- OOK'ENT OF i ,£L


- F i ' >t . '.',',,, h o : < -. ' i v
*'. '. F. p . rjT L'0-l
OEO id* rOME HEM -hO ihO
* '. 0 ' 0 T El* 11 . ii T
OF- : EhTIT , Oh OF fe J lO INGS
* i. o • ' h : o p •.
'.•.'i.u ooh'i-'.- otir.r. oh
'>! . '.'.w> . '„ • -.1. .in TS

POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
BUILDINC COOES
I0,[»ll VI.O
INOEISING IUI II Fl«a<
HOUSING >S OPPOSED TO
LEltCHEb UNITS

HjlLOIKC O'jDEi
'lit'-. SURCH««GE
'.F-EO IF 1 C»I ION
'II FOLIO'
UPtOa OESICN SPECS
F'EOOLlTORt CODE
•OOIFI OE; 101.
[E'.ICK SPECS COOE
KFOu KHEM SUBSIDIES
OEOICW SFEOO COLE
S[Cl'JIPE«EhtS O'.E'. 011'-
PEOJLMION^ IMPROVE

PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS



•


•




•
•



1




•

•





•


LO
•
•





•
•
•





to















0
in
to
«••<















0
C3
to













•

=3
UJ
ac
ac
o
co
co
B
o
o-
1 0
1 0
1

-,

5
1 0
1 0
1 0
'
1
',
a e


a
UJ
O
Oil
1
1
'

'j
I
'
1
1
, 1
'
1

10 e

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3 VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ
—I
O
0
1
'
2

t
•
1
2
>
1
1
1
•
'

TO CONSUMER
2
'
2

1
1
1
2
7
i
1
1

'

TO GOVERNMENT
i
i
i

i
2
1
'
i
1
1
1
•
1

UJ
ac
UJ
3=
0


-

-
-
-
-


-
-
-
-


ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO IS
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

i


<
'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I

ENFORCEMENT
i
i
1

i
-
i
•
i
•
i
i
i
i

MONITORING
i
i
i

i
i
i
i
i
i
.
i
i
i

-
E
a
ac
UJ
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
i
2
1
1
1

1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1

AREA EMPLOYMENT
i
i
i

i
i
i
i
i
•
i
•
i
i

RE6IONAL PRICES
i
i
i

i
i
•
•
i



i
i

UJ
ac
t—
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
X
UJ
u_
•



•


•
•


•

•

SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE


•


•






•


MODERATELY FLEXIBLE









•





UJ
ae
UJ

•




•








AP
CA
CO
a
o
•

•

•
•
•
•
•


•
•
•

'LI
no
Tft
ae
o

•







•





1 OF
L
SELECTIVE
•
•


•
•
•
a
•
•

•
•


UNIFORM















TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
"7
c
•
•
•

•
•
•


•
•
•
•
•

7







•
•






C9















CO
UJ CO
ac UJ
££
uj »• a
a> — UJ
CO CJ —
ae uj _*
** u_ •*
uj u. uj
i»- uj ac
I

•




•


•
•




kO
1


•












s
•



•
•

•
•




•

4
O











•
a


POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
—t UJ
UJ — J
»• o-

OE
UJ
^

•
•

•


•
•

•
•
•
•

^

•
•

•


•



•
•
•

C0
ae

•













2
•
•
•

•
•

•

•

•
•
•

UJ
*—
OS
Ou

•


•

•
•
•
•
•




LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
LEGAL PRECEDENT EXISTING
r
y
r

y
y
N
y
N
y
N
y
y
y

NE1 LEGISLATION REQUIRED
y
H
'

y
y
H
y
y
y
y
y
y
y

ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
Cd
ca
X
X
X

Jf,
I
X
X
X
X

X



UJ
•I















UJ
CO
S
S





r









CO
X














Cfl
S
I
I
«

I
«
I

«
«
I
I
J




1 LEAST ACCEPTABLE
i
0
g

4
1
f
1
0
0
0
1
'
7

PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS

2
3
0

1
2
1
9
0
1
0
1
1
0


0
4
1

2
4
2
1
1
1
0
2
'
1


3
2
0

0
1
0
1
2
1
1
3
3
1

o_
ca
i
m
9
2
0

1
0
9
2
e
e
7
3
9
2


o
UJ
ac
i
ac
UJ
UJ
















-------
Table 32.  POTENTIAL  CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICIPATES
                                          INDUSTRIAL PROCESSING AND HEATING
SOURCE CATEGORT
iNsu'.Tun PROCE::ING ANO HEATING
9'.T'.f> CONCENTRATION
52 OF PARTICULATE EMIICION:
CONTROL
Kfl'.URE:
PEOIJCE fjEMAHU FOB
EJCLUOE HIC* t'JLL'jTAM
:I.K.I: >*'.* »'JK«
^ r (. '
W'.l/i Ff fiAl KME^ * .
ii f- , ' '.
^UTiSSn.V"-' "l10
«»••.. E mOS EFF r. HCIE1

l»H".iE COLLECTION
PREDICT l
KCEM'lE'
IKPH«E OESICN $F£C:
P«OD DE'.ICB IPfCIFIClllOK".
m>JL»I'JK CODE
l»^^'Jlt FOIE'.A'.TIKC






PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
0

•
•

•
•

•
•






tdO
1
•
•

•


•








10

•













1

•













lf>
1
r*t

•













a

•













-'..EMISSION REDUCTION
. -.
2,,
'
1 8
I
5
< e
;
•,







ex:
ac
a_
E
0 3
0 1
1 •
0 3
0 1
0 1
0.3
0 .
0 1






ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
ac
^
°
'


J
2
'
2
1
1






ac
UJ
co
o
°
'
'
t
1
'
t
1
1
1






UJ
s
s
'
'
1
1
1
1
'
1
2






£
ae
£
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-






ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
L4J
|
f
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1







2
ac
UJ
1
1
I
I
1
1
1

1







~
S
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1







u.
S
ac
o
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-






SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
=
ac
«c
2
1
7
I
1
1
1
.
'






UJ
o
B
ac
3
1
7
1
1
'
1
1
1






co
UJ
ac
g
at
3
1
1
2
'
'
2
1
1






£
ac
£
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
03
UJ
















UJ
—J
CO
UJ
F,
s
•
•

•



•







UJ
ca
UJ
u.
UJ
ac
S


•

•










— j
CD
UJ
UJ





•
•

•






API
CA1
cop
CO
o
•

•
•

•
•
•







Ll-
101
TD(
co
=3
=3
°




•



•






OF
t
UJ
UJ
co
•

•
•
•
•
•
•







o
5








•






TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION

(i
•
•
•




•
•







'



•
•
•










1






•








TEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
RFA1I7FD

i


•





•







'
•






•








1



•
•
•














•




•








POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
C3 UJ
^ UJ
UJ _J
»• tt-
UJ JII

s
•





•
•







UJ

•


•
•

•
•







;
UJ







•
•






_J

•
•
•












UJ




•

•
•








LEGAl
CONSI
ERAT
CO
CO
UJ
UJ
UJ
i
.-J
CO
UJ
N
f
If
r
r
r
N
1
y






0-

UJ
UJ
ac
NEW IEGISLU
T
IT
r
r
r
•
i
N
«






ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
CO
ca
ac
ac















ac
IAJ

'
X
X
X
1
i








UJ
CO
<=>
o
'


X
X

I











X
'
X
X
X

K







CO
oc
IAJ
I



X

•
„







PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
1 LEAST ACCEPTABLE
i
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
0







1
'
3
0
1
0
0
0
0







.
3
1
3
2
0
1
3
1







0
1
0
2
1
1
3
0
1






\
0
4
3
3
4
.
4
5
3






ac
1
ac
UJ
u.
ac

1














-------
Table 33.  POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
                                                  POKER PLANTS
SOURCE (
POWER PLANTS
r. OF TSP CONCENT
5 K OF PARVICULAT
CONTROL
MEASURES
ijl 1 LI ZE DAYLIGHT SAVINGS
TIKE
INCREASE ELECTRIC RATES
FOR LARGE USERS
IMPROVE DOMESTIC AND
COMMERCIAL BLOG INSULATION
IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF
ELECTRIC APPLIANCES
CONTROL ROOM TEMP. FOR
HEATING AND A C
RAT 1 ON ELECTHI Cl TY
MOVE ALL POWER PLANTS
OUTSIDE OF REGION
SURROUND POWER PLANTS IIITH
LAND USE BUFFERS
UTILIZE STORAGE OR PEAK
SHAVING Wl TH CLEAN FUE.
LIMIT USERS BY AREA OR
TIME TO EVEN OUT OEUANU
REDUCE ASH CONTENT OF
FUEL
CONVERT T( CLEAN FUEL
GENERATE MORE POWER IN
NEWER LARGER FACILITIES
REDUCE TRANSMISSION
LOSSES
USE TOTAL ENERGY
SYSTEMS
ATEGORY
RATION
E EMISSIONS
POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
CONGRESSIONAL ACT
REQUIRE RATE STRUCTURE
BUILDING COOES.
SUBDIVIDES
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
ADVERTISING
INCREASE RATES;
ALLOCATION SCHEME
SI T ING POLICY
ZONING
EASEMENTS
DESIGN NEW CLEAN
GENERATING SOURCES
RATION ELECTRICITY
TAI POLICY
TA* POLICY
SUBSIDIES GRANTS
DESIGN SPECS FOR HIGHER
VOLTAGES AND INSULATION
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
ECON INCENTIVES
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
i
•

•


•

•
•
•


•
•

f-J

•

•
•









•
ITJ















10
0










•




g






•








a
CD
*r>











•



CD
t—
C3
UJ
X
3
05
2

2
2

1.9
•'
1
•'
.9
i fl
.'

.2

a
ac
UJ
cc
Ck
E
afi
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3
0
0
0
0 1
0 6
0
0
0
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1. NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ
a.
CD
I
1
'

i
i
3
1
1
I
2
2
1
2
1
UJ
o
1
'
2
'
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
UJ
oc
UJ
CD
t—
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
^
UJ
UJ
CD
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
t—
UJ
31
UJ
as
ac
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
UJ
UJ
CD
UJ
1
1
1



1
1
1






CD
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
^
X
UJ
ac
UJ
CD
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
0
UJ
ac
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
\
1
1
1
1
AREA EMPLOYMENT
i
1
1
1
I
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
REGIONAL PRICES
i
i
i
i
i
i
2
1
1
1
1
1
1


-^
UJ
a
E
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
UJ
—i
ae



•











SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE


•












u.
Uj
0=
UJ
0
o
31

•



•









UJ
UJ
ac
UJ
•














APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L
co
ae
CD















CD





«









UJ
UJ
UJ
CO

•
•
•

•









UNIFORM
•



•










TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
I
a
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•





in
1






•



•
•



IT)












•
•
•
CO
UJ tst
OC UJ
U- UJ
UJ ^ CD
~5 ~
ac. uj — i
« u_ «*
CD

•






•
•





in
•



•
•









CD


•
•


•
•


•
•



o












•
•
•
POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
LEVEL OF
IMPLEMENTATION
OE
a
UJ
u.
•


•

•




•
•


•
CSV
•
•
•


•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
to
UJ
ac

•


•









•
_J


•

•
•

•

•
•
•


•
UJ
ac
a.



•
•

•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
LEGAL PRECEDENT EXISTING
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
r
Y
Y
Y


Y


NED LEGISLATION REQUIRED
Y
N
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y


N


ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
ac
CD











X





UJ











X





UJ
t—
£
es
ft










X
X





UJ
tsi














I


en
UJ
UJ
X
X
X
X
X
X








X




»—
0_
CJ
3
0
1
0
0
7
3
1
1
2
1
1


0
1
PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS

i
2
2
0
2
1
1
1
0
3
1
2


1
0
«*>
2
2
0
1
4
•
3
3
4
3
2
0
2
3
4

1
1
3
4
2
0
a
i
0
i
4
2
1
0
3
5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
I
4
3
e
2
0
3
0
2
0
2
4
2
4
1

cr
tf
ac
X
UJ
ac
ac
tjj
u.
UJ
cc








1







-------
                             Table  33.   POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS  FOR  SUSPENDED  PARTICULATES (Cont.)

                                                                                  POKER  PLANTS
SOURCE CATEGORY
POWER PLANTS (CONTINUED)
CONTROL
MEASURES
IMPROVE COLLECTORS
ADD MORE
COLLECTORS
INCREASE ACTUAL
STACK HEIGHTS
INCREASE EFFECTIVE
STACK HEIGHTS
UTILIZE INTERMITTENT
CONTROL «IIH HEATHER
CONDITIONS










POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
INSPECTION
SUBSIDIES
TAI INCENTIVE
IMPROVE DESIGN
IMPROVE DESIGN
REGULATE










PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
O-J
•
•
•

•










tr>
1



•











CD















\r>
CSI
1















c=>
in
1
IO















a
<=>















o
i—
<_s
a
UJ
ac
CO
co
co
5
. i
. i
. i
.2
. 1










>-
^
=3
UJ
O
c~t
E
DA
0
0
0
0
0










ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
. NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
OC.
UJ
_l
CO
2
!
2
2
1










ae.
UJ
CO
2
2
2
I
1










i*j
>-
<=>
1
1
1
)
1










u_
a:
LU
oc
-
-
-
-
-










ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
UJ
3K
-e
a:
1
1
1
1
1










UJ
















Ll-
10)
TR
co
=3
C3
^
CO
O















OF
L
UJ
H-
UJ















2
C3















TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
oc (—
<=> •«
uj z
co uj
•* a.
UJ X
>- —
1


•
•
•











•
•













<=>
I















co
UJ CO
a: UJ
CO Z
u_ uj
uj =1. ca
CD 	 UJ
i— r**i
co cj —
ce uj —
UJ U_ U
>- uj ac




•
•













•












1
•
•































POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
X
CO
U_ Z
O LU
_1 LU
UJ ^
»• o.
UJ *•
LU
•
•
•
•
•










UJ
>—
•
•
•
•
•










CO
UJ




•










CO
•
•


•










UJ
0=
•
•
•
•











LEGAI
CONS
ERAT
3K
co
UJ
UJ
a
UJ
UJ
ac
a.
tit
UJ















0-

UJ
o=
=>
LLJ
CO
t—
CO
63
UJ
*
UJ















ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
co
UJ
CO
•«
ca
LU
=c
X
X















-
-














UJ
CO
X
X














UJ
co
















CO
0=
















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
IB
*•«
UJ
CJ
CO
iiO
_i
0
o
2
0













3
2
2
3













1
2














2
2
0
0
3










UJ
_i
a
X.
10
2
2
1
1
2










CO
i—
CO
UJ
CO
co
^
UJ
oc
CO
t—
UJ
UJ


2

3










OJ
en

-------
                                    Table  34.   POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING  AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES

                                                                                      TRANSPORTATION
SOURCE C
TRANSPORTATION
16°. TSP CONCENTRAT
20-: PARTI CULATE EN
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE VEHICLE
OWNERSHIP
IMPROVE ATTRACTIVENESS
OF OTHER MODES
REDUCE NUMBER OF
DRIVERS
IMPROVE ROAD
NETWORK OUTSIDE REGION
RESTRICT HIGHWAY
AVAILABI LI TV
INCREASE GAS MILEAGE
USE SMALLER ENGINE
TO WEIGHT RATIO
LIMIT AUTO
ACCESSORIES
OPTIMIZE SPEED/VOL
SPECS
INCREASE AUTO OCCUPANCY
RATE
ADD EMISSION CONTROL
DEVICES
PREDICT ALERTS



ATEGORV
ION
ISSIONS
POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAXES. SURCHARGES
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
ANNUAL TESTING.
INCREASE COST
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
WITHHOLD
GRANTS FUNDS
TAXES
TAX BY WEIGHT
OR DISPLACEMENT
TAXES.
DESIGN CHANGES
HIGHWAY
IMPROVEMENT
PARKING INCENTIVES
FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS
BAN ON NON-ESSENTIAL
TRAFFIC



PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
1


•
•

•

•
•
•

•



i
•





•








i

•













CNI
1




•





•




0
in















a
in















% EMI SSI ON REDUCTION 1
0.7
1.7
0.2
0.2
3.5
0.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
0 2
3.5
0.2



a
ae
UJ
a.
ro
0.4
1. i
0 1
0. .
2.2
0 1
0.,
O.I
O.I
O.I
2.2
0. i



ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ

1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1



UJ
o
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1



UJ
UJ
CO
1
2
t
2
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1



UJ
O
ae
UJ
3:
o
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
i—
ae
UJ
UJ
tiJ
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1



ENFORCEMENT
i
i
i

i
i
i
i


2




ca
ac
1

1
1
1
1




2
1



u.
t~
ae
UJ
ae
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UJ
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



AREA EMPLOYMENT
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•



UJ
CO
ac
a.
UJ
a=
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



^
UJ
UJ
t—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
03
X
UJ
u_















SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE
•

•


•



•
•
•




Uj
00
X
UJ
-~J
u.
t-
ac
UJ
a

•




•
•
•







UJ
ta
UJ
as
LtJ












•



APPLI
CATIO
CONTR
CO
CD
•
•
•


•
•
•
•
•
•
•




to
CD
9
C3
1
















« OF
L
UJ
t—
UJ
UJ
co
•
•
•


•

•
•
•
•





UNIFORM






•




•
•



TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS


ae i—
U_ 1—
OD UJ
CO UJ
ae _*
4 O_
r*
1
cs
•

•


•
•
•
•
•
•

•



•7

•









•




CD
T
in
















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
CNI
1
CD
•

•













m





•
•
•
•
•
•

•



I

•








•




£















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
O
U_ 3E
O UJ
_l UJ
UJ — «
*• o_
iu al
—i —
at
UJ
UJ
u_

•
•


•

•
•

•
•



UJ
1—
CO
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•



ta
UJ
ae









•
•
•



CD
_i

•
•

•



•
•
•
•



UJ
t—















LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CO
1—
CO
UJ
t—
3C
UJ
UJ
UJ
ae
a-
co
UJ
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
1
Y
r



UJ
ae
UJ
OS
0
I—
to
CO
UJ
UJ
ae
Y
Y
Y
n
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
N



ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
u.
x
1
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X



ae
UJ















UJ
CD
CD
CO















UJ
CO
0















i
UJ
UJ

















ac
t—
o_
UJ
CJ
tf.















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
(X















































UJ
as
t—
o-
UJ
u
CO
s
in
















>
CO
UJ
CO
CO
M:
ac
1
1—
ae
UJ
u_
UJ
ac















OJ
cr>

-------
Table 35.   POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS  FOR  SUSPENDED  PARTICULATES
                                                 FUGITIVE DUST
SOURCE CATEGORY
FUGITIVE DUST
2.5-, OF TSP CONCENTRATION
- •'. OF PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE DEMAND FOR
TBANSP CONST AGRIC I
OTHER ACTIVITIES
LIMIT AGRI ACTIVITIES
DURING DRY HEATHER
LIMII ACTIVITY ON UN-
VEGETATED LOTS
MODI FY Tl RE AND BRAKE
•EAR DESIGN
ELIMINATE UNPAVED
PARMNG LOTS
CONTROL UNPAVED
STREETS
PLANT GROUND COVER ON
VACANT LOTS
CONTROL CONSTRUCTION SITES
LIMIT SPEED ON UN-
PAVED ROADS
CONTROL OF OPEN
BODIED VEHICLES
CONTROL OF DEPOSITION
ON ROADS




POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TA« POLICY
LOCAL OWDIN.'NOES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
DESIGN SPEC FOR
GREITER DURABILITY
LOCAL ORDINANCES
TAX INCENTIVES
LIMIT ACCESS
LOCAL ORDINANCES.
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LIMII ALLOWABLE
RURAL SPEEDS
LOCAL
ORDINANCES
LOCAL
ORDINANCES




PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
C-sJ
1





•


•






1

•
•
*
*










1
•





•








1
o







•

•
•




in
CSI















cs
a















€=»
0
LU
ac
CO
co
UJ
5s
















UJ
0
CO
E
oa
1.5
C 7
0.7
0.7
O.1
0.2
„
3 5
0 2
3.5
3.5




ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
ac
C3
0
1
2
1

3
1
1
2
1
2
2




ac.
5
0
•=
1
2
1
i
2
1
1
1
1
1
1




UJ
£
0
o
1
1
I
1
'
2
I
I
1
1
1




ac
2
0=
ac

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-




ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
UJ
CD

oc
£
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
'
1
1






UJ
OC
=
1
1
1
1

1
1
1

:
:





z
i—
S
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1






u_
z
2
0=

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
S

OS
1
2
1
)
1
1
1
1
1
1
i




UJ
at
a.

a=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
'




oo
UJ
0=
_J
0
UJ
1
2
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1




u_
ae
5
0=
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-




ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

CD
UJ
3=









•





UJ
CD
X
UJ
-
S
°
•
•

•
•





•




UJ
UJ
UJ
<=
O


•












UJ
m
UJ

UJ





•
•
•
•






APF
CAT
CON

H
-
o



•
•

•


•
•




Ll-
101
TR
O
=3


=
•
•
«


•

•
•






OF
L
UJ
"
UJ

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•




H
o
=









•





TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
U
G
C
U
LI
a
e.
t
>

1

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
^
•
•




J —
e t-
3 •««
_ t-
-» a
° a
C —
f O-
j a

'
•














•
i
j

















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED

i


•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•





i

•

•












i
•















°















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
O UJ
— J LU
UJ — 1
,*• a.
UJ 3E
UJ
UJ
•


•











UJ
-
•
•
•

•
•

•
•






_J
as
UJ
















o
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•




t—
or



•


•








LEGAL
CONS
ERAT
CD
UJ
UJ
UJ
UJ
CE
O.
CD
UJ
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
y
y
y
y
y




D-
ONS
NEW LEGISLATION REQUIRED
y
»
V
y
y
N
Y
N
N
y
y




ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
i*j
09
OC
UJ
X














3=
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X




UJ
t—
i
°
















X














UJ
X







X






PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
DQ
B_
UJ
CO
L»J
<
S
1
0
1
0
0
0
0









1
1
'
0
0
0
1
0
1









3
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
•









2
1
3
2
4
4
3
3
3








5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
i
0
3
3
'
5
S
4
3








C9
UJ
CO
CO
UJ
oc
UJ
UJ



1


2









-------
Table 36.  POTENTIAL CONTROL  MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT  AIR  QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
                                            LAND USE MEASURES, STATIONARY
SOURCE CATEGORY
LAND USE MEASURES, STATIONARY
CONTROL
MEASURES
EXCLUDE NE» SOURCES
FROM SELECTED HOT SPOTS
EXCLUDE HIGH POLLUTANT
SOURCES FROM AQUA




CONCENTRATE NEW DEVELOP-
MENT AT DENSITIES WHICH
TO REDUCE EMISSION
PER CAPITA OR PER UNIT





CONTROL OF EXISTING
LAND USES

POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
REVISION OF GENERAL 8
ZONING PLAN
SPECIAL USE
PERMITS
FLOATING ZONE
PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
EIS/EIR - A-95
EMISSION DENSITY
ZONING
SPECIAL PERMITS
FLOATING ZONES
AGRI/CONSER. ZONES
HOLDING ZONES
LAND DANKING
PUD
TAX POLICY
REVISION OF GENERAL S
ZONING PLAN
URDAN RENEWAL 8
REDEVEL. INCENTIVES
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•


in
CNI















in















C3















in
(X















T















t—
=>
UJ
IS3
m
s?
















0
po
e
2.2
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0. 1
0.1
0.1
0. 1
D.I
O.I
0. 1
5.4
5.4
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1. NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. 'VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
0=
e
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
'
1
1
2
2
1

^
£
0
1
'
1
1
'
i
i
i
2
1
1
1
2
1
2

=
•=
e
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
2
3
p
^
S
=
£
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
LU
*
o=
g
2
1
1
'
2
'
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3

UJ
-
UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
'
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
2

E
»=-

i
1
i
•
1
i
1
i
i
•
i
i
2
1
1
u.
^
=
=
£
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SOCIAL
COSTS

U


2
'
1
'
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
UJ
i


2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
t
2
1
1
1
2
1
UJ
«
_.
£
K
2
1
t
•
'
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
u_
£
2
«
£;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

CD
UJ
=















eo
,-
i
eo

•






•

•
•


•


u.
"-
ul
«
E
•

•


•



•


•
•

•
•
Ul
X
UJ

s;

















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTROL

±3
-
CJ


•






•
•


•



:=
p
u
3=











•
•

•


UJ
"
UJ


•


•



•
•
•
•
•





=
-

•






•





•



TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
L
C
e
L
1
o
t
i
i
9

jl


•


•



•
•
•
•
•
•




MPLEMENTAT


i
•
•






•






•



i


















CO
UJ Sfi
OK UJ
£ S
LU > C3
03 	 UJ
f— f-J
c/» u —
as uj —i
UJ U_ UJ
>- uj ce

1


•







•
•







1




•





•
•





1
•
•




•





•
•



=



i*












POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
z
°i
_1 UJ
UJ —1
uj ae
^
UJ
















UJ
>-




•





•

•



^
UJ




•












=
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•


£
"=















LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CD
ts>
UJ
t—
Ul
UJ
u
UJ
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
0
UJ
09
UJ
UJ
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
N

N
N
ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
csy
UJ
CO
ea
UJ
£
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
Ul
•*
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X


X
UJ
=
X
X
X

X
X

X
X
X
X




X
UJ
Go
C3
X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X


X

£
X


X
X
X





X
X


X
PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
LU
CO
UJ































































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE















0
u
UJ
UJ
UJ
'

2



3






4


-------
Table 36.  POTENTIAL CONTROL  MEASURES  FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES  (Cont.)
                                                LAND  USE MEASURES.  STATIONARY
SOURCE CATEGORY
LAND USE MEASURES. STATIONARY (CONTINUED;
CONTROL
MEASURES .
CONTROL OF E; 1 ST ING LAND
'JIES (CONTINUED!

REGULATE TIMING OF NER
DEVELOPMENT












POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAI POLICf
< 1, LOCATION INCENTIVES
. RAPID AMORTIZATION
LAND BUFFERS
THHOUGH PURCHASE
PUBLIC PRIVATE OR ZONING
REVISION OF GENERAL I
ZONING PLAN
DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICTS
MORATORI A
EIS ElR
HOLDING ZONES
LAND BANKING
TAI POLICY
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAMMING






PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
1


•
•
•
•
•
•
•







•
•













<=>















1















tjO















a
i















ae
0
UJ
a















UJ
<=>
E
5.4
5 4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0






ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
FO POLLUTER
2
1
!
1
2
2
1
2
1






UJ
i
o
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2







UJ
ac
UJ
to
1
2
2
1
2
2
3
1
1






^
UJ
UJ
2C
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1






ENFORCEMENT
i
i
1
i
i
i
i
2
1






3NIJJ01INOI
2
i
i
2
1

t
2
1






^
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
2

2
1
2
2
2
2
1






IREA EMPLOYMENT
'
1
2
t
1
J
2
1
t






UJ
Ou
_*
2
1
2
1
2
•
1
2
1






^
UJ
a
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-






ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
UJ

•


•










SONEWAT FLEXIBLE
•





•
•








t—
UJ


•
•

•










UJ
to
UJ
LL-
















APPLI-
CATIOI
CONTR
0
SS
t—

•

•
•











(
•





•
•








OF
L
UJ
3

•

•
•
9
9










S
£
•






•








TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
,
•
•


•
•
•
«








1


•
•












«=>
















tst
UJ *•»
is
ID — UJ
»— »"^
<>9 O 	
ae uJ -j
>- uJ ae
)

•


•

•









1





•









=
•


•



•







,















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
LEVEL OF
IMPLEMENTATION
1















UJ
»—
•
•

•
•
•

•







1
UJ





•









_J
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•






UJ
ae

•













LEGAL
CONSI
ERATI
CO
CO
UJ
UJ
UJ
UJ
0=
O-
UJ
V
r
Y

•
Y
t
Y
Y






0-
ONS
HEI LEGISLATION REQUIRED

Y
N

Y
Y
Y

'






ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
LU
ae
•
i
X
X
X
X
X
I
X







X

X

I
X

X







UJ
0
o


X

X
I









*J
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X







UJ
«
-
X
-
X
X

X
X






PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
LEAST ACCEPTABLE































































i,
u















1—
UJ
**»
1
UJ
UJ


5













-------
Table 37.  POTENTIAL  CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING
                                    NON-AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS
 STATIONARY
SOURCE CATEGORY
NON-AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES. STATIONARY
26 OF HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE DEMAND FOR
REACTIVE HC SOLVENTS

IMPROVE METHODS OF
BULI STORAGE
PECULATE SERVICE STATION
TERMINAL FACILITIES

IMPROVE SERVICE
STITIQN STORAGE

CHANGE INDUSTRIAL
PROCESS
CONTROL MISCELLANEOUS GASO-
LINE ENGINES


REGULATE REFUSE
INCINERATION



POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAXES I FEES
BAN REACTIVE SOLVENTS
FLOATING ROOF OR VAPOR
RECOVERY SYSTEM
REDUCE HANDLING
OPERATIONS
LARGER GASOLINE TANK.
TRUCK TANKS. I
STORAGE TANKS
REDUCE LEAKAGE
INSTALL VAPOR RECOVERY
I FLOATING ROOFS
MODIFY PRODUCTION
HOURS. LIMIT OUTPUT
BAN
CHARGE USE FEE
EMISSION CONTROL REGISTERS
BAN



PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
CV*
1
a



•

•
•

•
•
•
•



i


•




•







in
















•














in
C-J

•













in















o
=3
UJ
ac
CO
1
„
10.5
2.0
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
2.0
2.0
0.3
0.3
0.3




0
oc
a:
a.
E
aft















ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
oe
UJ
t~
_J
_J
C3
0
)
3
3
2
2
1
1
3
3
2
1
2



o=
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
«
1
1



•x.
UJ
oc
UJ
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
2
1
2



->
UJ
C3.
UJ
DC
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
1
1
i
1
1
I
i
1
1
1
1
2



ENFORCEMENT
i
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3



MONITORING
i
i
t
i
i
i
i
i
2
1
1
2



u-
UJ
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
g
Ixl
0=
1
1
1
1
1


•
1
1
1
1



AREA EMPLOYMENT
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
2
1
1
1
1



UJ
0=
0
UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1



u-
UJ
ca
0=
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
£

•






•


•



SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE
•

•
•



•
•

•





UJ
_J
UJ
_J
UJ
0=
UJ
C3











•




UJ
CO
UJ
UJ
















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L
=3
CD

•
•
•



•

•
•
•
•




•







•







UJ
UJ
—1
UJ
•
•

•



•
•
•
•
•




»
















TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
C3
ae f—
UJ X
03 UJ
£ *
UJ X
T
•
•
•
•



•
•
•
•
•
•



T
















LT>
















UJ CO
ac uj
£ UJ
DO 	 UJ
1— r-i
O.C-3 	
5 u_ ^
uj u- uj
>- UJ €X
CSI
1



•



•
•
•
•
•
•



in
1
CSI
•
•













o
1


•












A















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
CD
t—
U, Z
O UJ
_J UJ
UJ — •
»• ex.
UJ .,•
4
ac
u,
u.
•
•
•





•


•



UJ
1—
1—
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•



_J
UJ



•




•


•



,
^
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•



UJ
H-
ac





•
•

•


•



LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CO
•x.
t—
X
UJ
1—
UJ
UJ
CJ
UJ
o.
C9
UJ
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y



UJ
ae
UJ
ae
S
NED LEGISLAT
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y



ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
ce
ae
u-
t—
<
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X



ae
UJ
i—

X














UJ
t—
CO
— 1
















UJ
CO
o









X
X

X



Cfl
OB
UJ









X
X

X





u.
ac
u
CJ
ej
t—
u.















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
















































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
















•x.
UJ
«<9
ae
1
t—
ac
UJ
u_
UJ
ee
















-------
Table 38.  POTENTIAL  CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING  AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS  FOR HYDROCARBONS
                                      NON-AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES, MOBILE
SOURCE CATEGORY
NON-AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES. MOBILE
13 OF HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
CONTROL
MEASURES
CONTROLS ON DIESEL
& SHIPPING
REDUCE DEMAND FOR
DIESEL AND SHIPPING
REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM
DIESEL ENGINES

RELOCATE TRUCK TRAFFIC
FROM REGION
EPISODIC CONTROLS
CONTROL AIRCRAFT
EMISSIONS

REDUCE LOI SPEED RUNNING
OF AIRCRAFT ENGINES


REDUCE GROUND EQUIPMENT
EMISSIONS



POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
LAND USE
CONTROL
TAX POLICY
EMISSION STANDARDS FOR
DIESEL ENGINES
EMISSION CONTROLS ON
DIESEL ENGINES
CIRCUMFERENTIAL
HIGHWAYS
BAN NON-ESSENTIAL
TRUC« TRAFFIC
REDUCE DEMAND FOR
AIR TRAVEL
LIMIT
OPERATIONS
GROUND MANEUVERS
TOWING
MOBILE LOUNGES
VAPOR RECOVERY DEVICES
ON FUEL HANDLING
LIMIT GROUND SUPPORT
VEHICLES


PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS


•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•


"P
•










•



















IO
CD















tr>
in















0















CD
UJ
3C
co
CO
LU
•5°
0.5
0. .
0.1
0. .
0. i
0.1
0. i
0. 1
0.1
0.1
0. 1
0. 1
O.I



=3
UJ
^
ۥ}
E
fl*















ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1. NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ
=»
S
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
1


UJ
=3
G3
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1


UJ
ae
g
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


u-
t—
UJ
—
=
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
UJ
C9

ac
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


*
*
3
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


ta
—
o
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


UJ
—
OS
-
-
•
-
•
-

-


-

-


SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
t->

1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1


i
CD
a_
UJ
1
I
1
1
2
!
2
t
1
I
1
1
I


UJ
a.
_j
=
I
'
i
•
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


~
UJ
—
°=
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
CD
UJ















UJ
UJ
H-
i

•


•
•
•

•







UJ
UJ
UJ
s
•






•




•
•


UJ
X
LU

















API
CA1
CQK
CO
CD
•
«


•
•

•
•




•


11-
10)
TR(
t—
CD






•









OF
L
UJ
UJ
•
•


•
•
•
•
•



•
•



£
















TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION

•
•


•

•
•
•




•















•



<=>





•










YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED







•
•
•




•




•


•







•



°
•



•










CD















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
»—
u_ :E
— 1 UJ
UJ _J
UJ 3I|
ae
UJ
UJ
«

•
•
•






f



1
t— 1 UJ

•
•
•
•
•





•



•
«


•
•






•


2c
•

•

•
•









UJ
^—
ae

•













LEGAI
CONS
ERAT
CO
co
UJ
t—
3E
LU
LU
UJ
ae
UJ
Y
h
N
Y
N
N





N



D-

ON REQUIRED
CO
CD
UJ
E
Y
N
r
Y
N
'





•



ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
%
X
'
X
I
X
X
X
X
X
<
1
X
X



X














UJ
i
X















X
X






X
X
X

X


[D
X
X

-


X


X
X

X


PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
LEAST ACCEPTABLE































































UJ
u

















UJ
CO
CO
UJ
UJ
UJ
















-------
Table 39.  POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES  FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS
                                           LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
SOURCE (
LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES (L
\)\ OF HYDROCARBON Ml
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE VEHICLE OINERSHIP
DIVERT AUTO PASS TO
TRANSIT AND RAIL


REDUCE NO OF DRIVERS
DECREASE USE CF HIGHIAVS
REDUCE AH PEAK PERIOD VUT


REDUCE SUHHER VUT

RESTRICT TRAVEL
RELOCATE TRAFFIC OUT OF
REGION


ATEGORV
DV)
SSIOKS

POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAXES. FEES. INSPECTION
UPHOVE SERVICE
SUBSIDIZE FARES
INCREASE PARKING COSTS
AGE OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS
USER TAKES AND FEES
4-DAV IORK WEEK
STAGGERED «ORK HOURS
CARPOOL LOCATOR
COORDINATE VACATION
SEASONAL FUEL RATIONING
ALLOCATION
YEAR ROUND FUEL
RATIONING ALLOCATION
PROHIBIT THRU TRAFFIC


PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
OSI
1
0



•
•



•
•


•


in


•


•









in
•
•




•
•


•




in
OSI











•



in
1
in
OSI















0
1
in















a
o
UJ
0
CO
1 3
1 3
0 B
0 2
D 2
06
1.3
1 3
0 2
02
1 3
3 0
02



ae
UJ
ec
a.
E
DO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA


ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3 VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
ac
UJ
=3
_l
0_
3
1
1
3
1
3
I
1
1
1
3
3
2


ac
UJ
CO
t~
3
1
1
3
1
3


1

3
3



TO GOVERNMENT
i
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3


~
t—
ae
UJ
ca
UJ
3:
t—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
h-
Ul
Ul
at
CE
O.
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1


ENFORCEMENT
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i


o
\
\
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


^.
^—
UJ
ca
UJ
a:
t—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
o
Ul
ac
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


UJ
at
UJ
UJ
ac
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


UJ
ac
CO
Ul
o=
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


„
UJ
ca
UJ
ac
i—
ca
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
UJ










•
•



UJ
09
UJ
u_
CO





•

•








UJ
03
UJ
UJ
UJ
ca
ca



•
•

•

•

•


•


UJ
CO
UJ
ac
UJ
•








•






APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L
CO
o
=3
t—
•


•
•
•
•
•
•
•


•
•


NON-CONTINUOUS










•
•




UJ
t—
UJ
UJ
CO



•
•
•
•
•
•
•



•


UNIFORM
•









•
•
•



TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
U
a
e
u
u
a
6
I
1
>
OS
1
«


•
«
•
•
•
•
•

•
•



O
INPLEMENTATI
CNi










•





in













•


YEARS, BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
i
0



•
•
•


•
•

•
•



in
1
*st






»



•





£3
in
•






•








o













•


POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
t—
t—
C3 UJ
— 1 UJ
UJ —t
»- o-
UJ 3E
UJ
UJ
U-



•







•
•
•


UJ
t—
CO
•
•
•

•







•


REGIONAL

•



•

•
•
•


•


CJ
_J

•

•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•



UJ
ce





•
•
•
•
•





LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
UJ
H-
Ul
UJ
a.
C£>
Ul
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N


Y
N
N
Y
Y


UJ
ae
UJ
»—
<
_j
CO
C9
UJ
m
UJ
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
r


N
V
Y
Y
N


ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
fl
ca
oc
X
X
X

1
X
X


X
X
X
X
X


ce
UJ




X
X
X


X
I
X
X
X


UJ
t—
s










X
X
X



UJ
X
X
X

X
X
X


X
X
X
X
X


C0
ae
UJ
UJ
X
X
X














1 LEAST ACCEPTABLE















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
















CO































UJ
-J
act
a.
UJ
CJ
CO
o
in
















C9
CJ
UJ
CO
CO
ae
1
UJ
u_
UJ
ae
'



2





3
3
4



-------
Table 39.  POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES  FOR  MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS  (Cent.
                                              LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
SOURCE CATEGORY
LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES (CONTINUED)
CONTROL
MEASURES
RESTRICT HIGHIAY
CONST IMPROVEMENTS
DECREASE USE OF AUTO
ACCESSORIES
MODIFY ENGINE TYPE
ENCOURAGE OPTIMUM TRAFFIC
FLO*

INCREASE AUTO OCCUPANCY


IMPROVE EMISSION CONTROLS
ALERT CONTROL OF VMT





POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
WITHHOLD GRANTS FUNDS
TAXES DESIGN CRITERIA
HANU SPECIFICATIONS
HIGHIAV IMPROVEMENT
CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS
PARKING INCENTIVES
EXPRESS LANES
TAXES AND INSURANCE
BENEFITS
FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS
BANS ON NON-ESSENTIAL
TRAFFIC
STICKER ELIGIBILITY SYSTEM
EMERGENCY HOLIDAYS



PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
C-J

•


•
•
•








in
1


•
•



•
•


•




10















in

•









•





in









•





a
a















i—
UJ
cc
0
co
CO
UJ
s?
3.0
0 2
0 8
O.B
0 2
0 2
02
0 B
0.6
B.4
3.0
o e




0
CC
UJ
C3
ae
a.
=.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA



ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1. NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
CC
UJ
_l
C3
O
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1



cc
UJ
S
<=
i
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
•
1



t—
UJ
0
=>
1
1
.
'
2
2
1
'
1
2
1
1



E
ca
CC
S
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
UJ
UJ
C3
*
cc
£

i

2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1




UJ
CC
-
1
1
1
1
2
-
2
1
1
2
2
1




=
t—
s
\
1
1
1
1
-
1
1
1
2
1
1



u_
t—
2
cc
-
•
-
-
•
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
0
—
oe
t
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
2
1
1



UJ
i
UJ
=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



UJ
0=
_,
n
UJ
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1



E
ca
ce
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

m
X
UJ
-
«

•
•
•

•

•






UJ
OD
UJ
_
£
°









•





LLJ
(XI
UJ
LU
ce
=

•



•

•







UJ
CD
UJ
"-
UJ










•
•



APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTROL

0
<=
•
•
«
•
•
•
•
•
•






-CONTINUOUS
=









•
•
•



UJ
1—
UJ
•
•
•


•
•
•


•
•



<=>
-



•
•



•
•





TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
u
c
C
Ll
u
a


I
•
•


•
•

•
•
•
•
•



0
> ^
i z
O UJ
•> UJ
c — •
f O.
>J X

'


•
•


•









1















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED

i




•
•



•
•
•




•






•
•








1

•
•
•




•







0
•














POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
O UJ
— 1 UJ
UJ — 1
» O-
UJ S
ae
UJ
•

•
•


•
•
•






UJ
t—
•
•

•
•

•
•
•






••*
UJ

•



•
•


•
•





C9



•
•
•
•


•
•




UJ
ce


•


•

•



•



LEGAl
CONS
ERAT
C9
CO
UJ
IXI
Ul
UJ
0=
o.
UJ
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y


Y
Y


Y



0-

NEW LEGISLATION REQUIRED
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N


N
N


N



ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
CO
UJ
K-
x
X
X
X

X
X


X
X


X



UJ
t—
X




<
«



X


X



UJ
1—
CO
CO
X
















UJ
CO
X


X

X
X



X


X



UJ















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
CD
1—
CL.
UJ
CJ
CO
UJ















e»l















en































UJ
DO
LLJ
ej
CO
in















*—
UJ
CO
CO
UJ
ce
UJ
UJ
ce
















-------
Table 40.  POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES  FOR  MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS
                                           HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
SOURCE C
HEAVY DUTY VEHICl
(HOV)
42'. OF HYOROCARBC
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE TRUCK OWNER-
SHIP
REDUCE GASOLINE
TRUCK OWNERSHIP
PROHIBIT TRUCK
MOVEMENT

REDUCE AX PEAK
PERIOD VMT

MODIFY ENGINE TYPE
INCREASE USE OF
SMALLER VEHICLES
IMPROVE EMISSION
CONTROLS
EPISODIC CONTROL OF
VMT





ATEGORY
ES
N EMISSIONS
POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAXES. FEES. INSP
TAXES. FEES
TRUCK-FREE ZONES
PUBLIC TRANSIT OF
GOODS
PROHIBITION
RESTRICTED LOADING
JONES
MFC SPECIFICATION
TAI BY WEIGHT
FEDERAL AND STATE
REGULATIONS
BAN ON NON-
ESSENTIAL TRAFFIC
STICKER SYSTEM
EMERGENCY HOLIDAYS



PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS

«
•
«
•

•




•
•








•

•
































.

•





1
in
47*1















o
I
in








•






0
1—
CJ
=3
UJ
CO
CO
°0
0.4
0.4
0 4
0 4
1 5
0.4
, j
1 1
31. J
7 4
0 4
0 4




,.
=>
UJ
B
oa
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA



ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ
O
0.
O


'
'
1
*



^
i
i



UJ
O
3
3
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
1



ac
UJ
UJ
o
CO
]
\
1
'
1
I
1
I
I
2
1
1



^,
UJ
oe
UJ
«=
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
t—
UJ
UJ
co
PROGRAM
1
'


1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



1—
ee
o
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
t




o
1
'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1



-^
UJ
UJ
ac
i—
e>
•
•
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UJ
DC
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
'
1
1



UJ
UJ
UJ
ae
•K
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1




co
UJ
a=
1
1
I
t
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1



^
UJ
UJ
t—
O
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
UJ
U.




•

•

•






UJ
OD
UJ
VHM3NOS


•


•

•

•





UJ
CO
UJ
— 1
u.
MODERAT
•
•














UJ
u_
LU











.
•



APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L
CONTINUOUS
•
•
•


•

•
•
•






=3
O
i






•



•
•
.



UJ
SELECT!
•
•
•



•

•


•
•



UNIFORM





•

•

•
•





TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
c*
a
•
•
«


•
•

•

•
•
•



in
1
C--J)







•








tn









•






YEARS' BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
0


•


•
•



•
«
•



1
•







•







s

•













4
43






•

•






POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
U- Z
_l UJ
UJ —*
» a.
OE
UJ
UJ







•
.






UJ
1—
t—
•
•





•
•






0
C0
UJ


•
•
•
•



•
•
•



3


•
•
•
•



•
•
•



UJ
ae
a.



•











LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CO
X
CO
UJ
UJ
a
UJ
UJ
£
to
UJ
_J


Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y



UJ
ae
i
UJ
ae
0
t—
CO
CO
UJ
E


Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
N
h
N
N



ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
UJ
F—


X
1
«
X
X

X
X
X
I
X



UJ



X
I
X
«




'
X



»—
c/9
«J
0










X





UJ
€*»



X
X
>
X



X
X
X



C9
UJ
S

















U.
cc















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
















































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
















§
UJ
60
CO
i
ae
UJ
UJ
1
1














-------
Table 41.   POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES  FOR MAINTAINING  AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS
                                            LAND USE MEASURES
SOURCE CATEGORY
LAND USE MEASURES
CONTROL
MEASURES
CONCENTRATE LAND USES IN
HIGHER DENSITY CORRIDORS










EXCLUDE HIGH POLLUTANT
SOURCES FROM AOMA



POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
REVISION OF GENERAL AND
ZONING PLAN
SPECIAL USE PERMITS
FLOATING ZONES
LARGE LOT ZONING OUTSIDE
OF NCI CENTERS
PUD
AGRICULTURAL AND
CONSERVATION ZONES
OPEN SPACE
AOUISITION EASEMENTS
HOLDING ZONES
LAND BANKING
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS
TAXATION POLICY
REVISION OF GENERAL AND
ZONING PLANS
EIS/EIR AND A-95
REVIEI
INDIRECT SOURCE REVIEI

PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
















•
•
•

«=>
in































a
1















1















=>
d
UJ
o
UJ
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
o.e
0.8

UJ
0
a.
E
00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS

0
1
1




1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

X
0
1
1
'
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1

B

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1

~

UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
fOSTS
LU
UJ
g
0=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
2
1
1
1


s
=
\
1
1
1
1
'
1
1


1
1
1
1


t;
0
1
'
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T
1
1

~

UJ
1—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

SOCIAL
COSTS


0=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
T
t
1
1
1
1
1

Ul
ffl
ac
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

UJ


UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

~

ac
UJ
•-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

LU
=















LU
X
LU

°

«

«

•
•
•

•
•


•

UJ
_*
CD
LU
UJ
0
•

•

•



•


•
•


LU
03
-
LU















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L

=3
0


•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•



co
1
0
















UJ
UJ


•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

•
•


CD
=

•













TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS


YEARS BEFOR
IMPLEMENTAT

1


•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•


1
•
•









J



0
'















CO
uj co
ac uj
O 3E
U_ UJ
UJ >• C3
i— r-j
co - uj ac

'



•


•


•



•


I










•

•


a
1
•
















=

•
•

•
•

•
•


•



POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
ae
t—
t—
O UJ
_J UJ
UJ _J
=«• o_
UJ
UJ








•




•

UJ
1—






•



J

•
•

_*
UJ












•
•


•=
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

UJ
ac















LEGA
CONS
ERAT
CO
UJ
UJ
UJ
LU
OC
a.
5
UJ
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
r
Y
Y
Y
Y
V

0-

UJ
ae
UJ
UJ
E
N
N
Y
Y
N
N

Y
1
1
Y
V
N
Y

ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
co
ca
ac
UJ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

B=
K
X









<
X


UJ
CO
0
X










I
X


UJ
CO
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

fa
UJ















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
1 LEAST ACCEPTABLE ]































































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE















CJ
UJ
co
CO
ae
UJ
t—
ae
UJ
UJ
















-------
Table 41.  POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING  AMBIENT  AIR QUALITY  STANDARDS FOR HYDROCARBONS (Cent.)
                                               LAND USE MEASURES
SOURCE CATEGORY
LAND USE MEASURES (CONTINUED)

CONTROL
MEASURES
REGULATE TIMING OF NEI
DEVELOPMENT















POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
REVISION OF GENERAL AND
ZONING PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
MORATORIA
LAND BANKING
109 REVIEI
TAI POLIO
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAMMING








PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
Csl















in
t
•
•
•
•
•
•
•








0
T
to















in
*7















in















ea
in















CO
t—
UJ
C3
CO
s
o e
o.e
0.6
0.6
o.e
0.6
0.6








t—
ac
UJ
o.
CO
3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA








ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
oe
UJ
a.
i—
1
1
1
1
1
1
1








ae
UJ
CO
I—
1
1
1
1
1
1
1








UJ
UJ
a
CO
,
1
1
3
1
3
1








u.
UJ
UJ
C3
_
-
-
-
-
-
-








ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
t—
UJ
UJ
CO
m
1
I
t
2
1
2
I








ENFORCEMENT
i
i
i
i
i
i
i








CO
i
i
i
i
i
'
1
l








^
UJ
UJ
_
-
-
-
-
-
-








SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UJ
Of
\
I
1
1
1
1
.








t—
UJ
•X
a
a.
LU
UJ
0=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1








co
UJ
C9
UJ
0=
1
1
1
t
1
1
1








--V
UJ
UJ
1—
_
-
-
-
-
-
-








ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
CO
UJ


•












SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE





•
•








UJ
CO
UJ
u_
_J
UJ
UJ
ca
•
•

•
•










UJ
X
UJ
UJ















APPLI
CAT 10
CONTR
CONTINUOUS

•
•



•








NON-CONTI KUDUS



•

•









I OF
L
SELECTIVE

•
•
•
•










|





•
•








TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
O
UJ 	
QC 1—
sB
CO UJ
UJ X
I
€=


•
•
•
•
•








I
CNI
•
•













J,















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
JT-4
1


•

•










in



•


•








in
•
•



•









4
0















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
t—
t—
O UJ
UJ _4
>• 0.

U.
C




•










UJ
1—
1—
CO

•
•
•
•
•









— 1
CO
UJ
ee















g
•
•
•
•

•
•








UJ
t—
CE
Q_















LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CO
v>
bj
UJ
UJ
u
1XJ
CO
UJ
_J


r

r

1








HEW LEGISLATION REQUIRED


Y

M

r








ENV IRON-
DENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
Ifc
C
-------
REMARKS
     The numbered remarks presented in this section correspond to the num-
bered notations contained in the remarks column for the matrix tables.  The
applicable table number is referenced in parentheses following the heading.
Industrial Processing and Heating (Table No. 32)
     (1)  It is a function of the number of new sources to which it is applied.
Power Plants (Table No. 33)
     (1)  Storage of clean fuel could be stockpiled for utilization during
          periods of alert.  Development of new generating sources such as
          water pump storage is required.
     (2)  Increasing actual stack height would in effect change the effective
          stack height.
     (3)  Prediction of alerts is a necessary step to implementing this
          measure.
Fugitive Dust  (Table No.  35)
     (1)  Government grants for research and development would be necessary
          to stimulate industry to seek alternative designs.
     (2)  Assumes particulate dispersion occurring.
Land Use Measures, Stationary (Table No.
     (1)   These two control measures present, different degrees of the same
          measure, prohibiting  the introduction of new sources where standards
          will be  exceeded.  Since particulates are a localized problem it's
          possible to  limit new sources at  selected location.
     (2)   Assumption:   Standards are attained;  use of these controls to
          maintain standard during 10 year  growth period.
     (3)   This measure refers to (1) economies  of scale if several small
          sources  can  combine part of their processes and  share control costs,
          (2)  reducing space heating and  energy demands through attached units
          and  modular  integrated utility  systems.
     (4)   Rapid amortization of obsolete  or ineffective equipment can make the
          introduction of  control equipment more economically  feasible.

                                     147

-------
     (5)  These measures postpone the introduction of new sources until (1)
          control technology improves, (2) emissions from other sources decrease.
Light Duty Vehicles (Table No. 39)
     (1)  Rapid amortization of obsolete or ineffective equipment can make
          the introduction of controls on vehicle ownership feasible.
     (2)  The discriminatory nature of this measure makes its implementation
          doubtful.
     (3)  Fuel rationing should be looked at as a measure of last resort.
          The expensive nature of initiating a rationing program must be
          considered.
     (4)  Assumption being that implementation can be postponed until the
          time that mass transportation  is installed.
Heavy Duty Vehicles (Table No. 40)
     (1)  Rapid amortization of obsolete or ineffective equipment can make
          the introduction of control equipment more economically feasible.
                                     148

-------
                                 CHAPTER IX
                     DESIGN AND SELECTION OF STRATEGIES

INTRODUCTION
      Having selected, categorized and evaluated individual control measures
for particulates and hydrocarbons, as discussed in Chapter VII and presented
in Chapter VIII, the process of designing an air quality maintenance plan re-
mains.  Theoretically, any number of alternate particulate and hydrocarbon
control strategies could be designed by combining mixes of various control
measures to achieve the desired air quality.  However,  realistically certain
measures are not compatible and should not be included  in the same plan.  Of
prime importance for the inclusion of a control measure in a plan is the
degree of effectiveness in reducing emission levels and the social, economic,
public or political implications associated with that measure.  Applying
these general rules to the strategy designing process limited the number of
plans that could evolve.
      The remainder of this chapter will discuss the three alternative hydro-
carbon and particulate control strategies that were designed to maintain air
quality through the year 1985.  In the interest of clarity the hydrocarbon
and particulate plans will be presented separately.  A  final plan is presented
and the social, economic, political impacts discussed.
HYDROCARBONS
      The foremost criterion used in the design of alternative hydrocarbon
control strategies for discussion with the Baltimore Regional Planning Council
Air Quality Task Force and with local agencies was meeting the required reduc-
tion in hydrocarbon emissions during the three hour morning peak period from
6:00-9:00 a.m.  During this period, it is forecast that 24.35 tons of hydro-
carbons will be emitted from all sources in 1985, after the Baltimore Trans-
portation Control Plan is in effect (see Table 22, Chapter V).  The reduction
required to achieve the allowable emissions  (see Table  26, Chapter V) is 6.05

                                     149

-------
tons/peak period.  This represents a 24.8 percent reduction in hydrocarbon
emissions in the three hour period.
      Three separate strategies for attaining the required reduction were de-
veloped, each aimed primarily at one of the three principal sources of hydro-
carbon emissions:  heavy duty vehicles  (41.5 percent of the 1985 emissions),
light duty vehicles (16.83 percent) and industrial solvents other than dry
cleaning (16.59 percent).  These are described below.
Alternative Hydrocarbon Plan Number 1
      The largest source category, heavy duty vehicles  (HDV), was examined as
the basis for the'first plan.  Since HDV's will contribute 41.5 percent of the
hydrocarbon emissions in 1985, a 59.9 percent reduction in projected emissions
from this source could reduce area-wide hydrocarbon emissions to acceptable
levels  (41.5 percent x 59.9 percent = 24.86 percent).  Through an examina-
tion of the "shopping list" of control measures for HDV, the most logical
measure can easily be determined.  The  imposition of emission controls on HDV,
if  75 percent effective, will reduce total projected hydrocarbon emissions
by  31.5 percent.  The public acceptability of this measure can be expected
to  be generally  good, though the business community and those whose interests
are tied to the  trucking industry  could have an adverse reaction.
Alternative Hydrocarbon Plan Number 2
      The second plan for hydrocarbon emission controls places  the emphasis
on  the  control of a group of transportation oriented sources.  The majority
of  the  measures  address light duty vehicles  (LDV) and HDV with  some control
of  industrial hydrocarbon solvents and  aircraft.  The control measures and
policy  instruments are as follows:
       (1)  Restrict highway construction  and improvements by withholding  funds,
       (2)  Divert auto passengers  to rail and bus by improving  service, sub-
           sidizing fares, user  taxes and land use controls  to  concentrate
           development into transportation  corridors using  revisions  to the
           general and zoning plan, use permits,  floating zones, agricultural
           and conservation zones, holding  zones, land  banking, planned unit
           development and tax policies.
                                      150

-------
       (3)  Reduce AM VMT by staggering working hours.
       (4)  Increase auto occupancy by the institution of carpool  incentives
           such as reduced parking rates, opening bus express lanes to  car-
           pools and tax/insurance rate reductions.
      (5)   Reduce  the  use  of  accessories  through taxation or the imposition
           of fees  for use of major accessories.
      (6)   Improve  emission controls  for  LDV through stricter Federal  regula-
           tions.
      (7)   Prohibit truck  movements by the use of truck-free zones and the
           use of  transit  vehicles to move selected goods.
      (8)   Reduce  AM truck VMT through a  selective ban on AM truck use.
      (9)   Increase the use of smaller trucks  (LDV)  rather  than  heavy  duty
           vehicles, through taxes and fees.
     (10)   Reduce  the  use  of  hydrocarbon  solvents (other than dry cleaning)
           by the  imposition  of  taxes and fees.
     (11)   Reduce  aircraft emissions  by  freezing the number of aircraft
           operations  at BWI  Airport.
      Measures 2 (excepting land use  controls),  3, and 4 above will have one
level of effectiveness (that  described in the matrix) when used without
Measure 1,  and a lesser level of effectiveness when combined with Measure 1.
On the other  hand,  the effectiveness  of  the land use controls in Measure 2
will be enhanced when  used in conjunction with transit improvements, fare
subsidies  and carpool  incentives.  The probable degree of effectiveness has
been reassessed accordingly.
      Application  of all of the  above measures will produce an estimated
reduction  in  forecast  peak period VMT of 30 percent.
      It must be recorded  that a number of the above measures can be expected
to have a low level of public acceptability (refer to matrix), more particu-
larly those which  directly affect the out-of-pocket expenses and driving
habits of the automobile driving public.   In addition, the range and diversity
of the measures will make  the administration of this plan  complex.
                                      151

-------
Alternative Hydrocarbon Plan Number 3
      The thrust of this plan is to concentrate controls on industrial hydro-
carbon solvents other than those used in dry cleaning processes.  Control of
the latter is already proposed as part of the control strategy.  A total ban
on the use of the remaining solvents would not alone bring about the required
reduction, calling for the application of selected transportation related
measures in support of the main measure.  Those transportation measures were
used which have the highest level of effectiveness, though excluded was- the
restriction on the construction and improvement of the region's highways.
The plan consists of the  following measures:
       (1)  Reduce use of  hydrocarbon solvents by banning their use other than
           from a very limited number of individual exceptions.
       (2)  Reduce AM HDV  YMT  through a selective ban on truck movements.
       (3)  Increase the use of smaller trucks  (LDV) rather than heavy duty
           vehicles by the imposition of taxes by weight.
       (4)  Divert auto passengers to rail or bus by improving transit service.
       (5)  Reduce AM LDV  VMT  by staggering work hours.
       (6)  Reduce aircraft emissions by freezing the number of aircraft
           operations at  BWI  Airport.
      The plan assumes that the ban on solvents would be 75 percent effective
and takes full credit for reduced VMT through improved transit service.
The public acceptability  of this plan would be dependent largely on the
ability of industry to adapt  coating processes to the ban on hydrocarbon
solvents.  Although numerous  coating substitutes for the oil based products
are available, under current  technology the quality may not be as high.  If
the quality of the new process is within expectations, then this plan could
be acceptable to the public.
                                      152

-------
SELECTION OF TRIAL HYDROCARBON STRATEGY
     The three alternative hydrocarbon control strategies were presented to
the RPC's Air Quality Task Force to test public reaction to each and the
individual measures included in each.   The alternatives were subsequently
discussed with regional and state agency staff.
     The reaction of the citizens, business representatives and agency repre-
sentatives on the Task Force was one of overwhelming support for Plan Number
1.  The participants at the meeting approved of the simplicity of the plan,
having one principal element, and of its probable public acceptance.  A
suggestion which resulted from the task force meeting was that being a state
plan, the range of effectiveness should be measured assuming state regulation
rather than Federal regulation of heavy duty vehicle hydrocarbon emissions.
     In considering this suggestion, it was noted that air/fuel retrofit of
HDV, air/fuel retrofit of pre-1974 MDV, and catalytic retrofit of 1971-1974
MDV were part of the Transportation Control Plan (see Chapter V).  Rather
than the 30 percent effectiveness for HDV air/fuel assigned by 38FR34245, a
greater effectiveness could likely be achieved.  Furthermore, the addition of
a catalytic retrofit program could reduce the hydrocarbon emissions of HDV.
Beyond these two steps, modifications by the manufacturer must be imposed.
It is, therefore, estimated that a 50 percent reduction in hydrocarbon emis-
sions could be achieved beyond that included in the Transportation Control
Plan.  Although a state regulation action by the Federal Government would be
required for the Baltimore Air Quality Control Region to comply with 40 CFR
51.12(g).
     This left a balance of 4.09 percent reduction in emissions to be attained
from other measures.  As described earlier in Chapter IX, light duty vehicles
producing 16.83 percent of the 1985 emissions and industrial solvents produc-
ing 16.59 percent, are the largest residual hydrocarbon sources by 1985 and
appear the most logical targets for such action.  Because of the likely
public acceptance, industrial solvents were included as an element of the
trial plan.  This would require a selective ban or other control on the use
of hydrocarbon solvents in industrial processes such as degreasing or surface
coating.  A 25 percent reduction in the emissions from hydrocarbon solvents
would reduce emissions 4.14 percent, thus achieving the required reduction.

                                     153

-------
     The reduction in hydrocarbons through control of solvents is included in
the plan in preference to the series of land use and transportation measures
described in Alternative 2 for reasons that were spelled out, namely adminis-
trative complexity and low degree of public acceptance of measures which cut
into existing lifestyles and development patterns.  The study team wishes to
record here that because of the political implications of these measures, we
have recommended a plan which does not frontally attack the source of hydro-
carbon problems, this being the major dependence of the American public on
travel and especially on the use of the private automobile.  The long-term
solutions to air quality problems and environmental problems in general does,
it is believed, depend upon changes in lifestyle which will become politically
realistic in the Baltimore Region only when a broader, national commitment to
change is obtained.  The implications of this alternative approach should be
fully understood, if only to assist in public understanding of the rationale
for the preferred plan.
     Appendix G presents the potential impacts of transportation and land use
measures presented in both the hydrocarbon and particulate alternative plans.
Interim Measures to Maintain Standards 1975 through 1985
     The trial plan was developed using projected 1985 data.  But to be fully
responsive to Federal requirements, the plan must also maintain standards
through the intermediate years 1975 to 1985.  The plan, as described, was
therefore evaluated for 1980 under the following assumptions:
     (1)  The HDV retrofit would be in effect by 1980 thus reducing HDV
          hydrocarbon emission by 50 percent in 1980.
     (2)  The industrial solvent controls would be in effect by 1980, thus
          reducing hydrocarbon emissions by 25 percent in 1980.
Applying these assumptions to the forecast 1980 emissions  (see Table 24,
Chapter V), the emission reduction attained would fall 3.9 percent (.976 tons)
short of the 26.9 percent (6.75 tons) reduction required for 1980.
     It is proposed that a group of interim measures, those which can be im-
posed and lifted without excessive disruption-, be used to take up the slack
through the middle years of the planning period.  These are as follows, with
                                    154

-------
an indication of estimated reduction in tons per a.m. peak period which could
be achieved with each in 1980:
     Stagger working hours                                  0.449 tons
     Establish truck-free zones                             0.095 tons
     Selective ban on truck movements in peak a.m. period   0.334 tons
     Limit aircraft operations at BWI Airport               0.130 tons
     The sum of these measures will produce a 4 percent reduction of hydro-
carbon emissions in the a.m. peak period and will maintain Federal standards
through the planning period.
     There is one other advantage attached to these procedures.  If, on
periodic review, the measures included in the 1985 plan are found to be not
achieving desired results, the interim measures may be extended until the
plan proper is effective.

IMPACTS OF THE TRIAL PLAN
Legal Impacts
     The central legal issue raised by the plan proposal for installation of
emission control devices on heavy duty vehicles is that of the proper level
of legal authority.  State regulations for emission control on all licensed
trucks in Maryland could be implemented.  But because the Baltimore region lies
within a heavily travelled truck corridor and is close to other states,
Federal support for the regulations would be required if the measure is to be
effective.   Otherwise, non-conformance on the part of out-of-state vehicles
would render the measure of limited effectiveness.
Economic and Social Impacts
     The social consequences of implementing emission controls on heavy duty
vehicles will be small.  The increased purchase price of commercial trucks
would probably be passed on to customers of truck delivered products and
services, although the pass-through on product costs is likely to be minimal
given the capacity and utility of trucks on a year-round basis and the modest
increase in truck costs with emission control devices  (maximum of $500 per
vehicle).  For those non-business truck owners, the burden of this additional
cost will be weighed at initial purchase and no doubt compared with other
vehicles which might serve the same purpose for less cost  (i.e., LDV).
                                     155

-------
     Similarly, the emission controls or selective ban on hydrocarbon solvents
required to achieve a 25 percent reduction in emissions from that source would
be small.  Any increase in prices which might occur from process changes would
be passed on to the customer and although the cost to the polluter may be
substantial, when distributed to the consuming public, effects will be minimal.
Other Environmental Effects
     The measures in the hydrocarbon control plan will, as a secondary effect,
reduce other pollutants from HDV.  The heavy duty retrofit program will bring
about appreciable reductions in NO  and S00.
                                  .A.       Z

PARTICULATE
     The primary criterion used in the design of alternative particulate con-
                                                                       3
trol strategies for the Baltimore AQMA was meeting the required 20 yg/m
reduction in the 1985 projected particulate air quality  (see Chapter III for
the analysis).  It was readily apparent that because of the potentially signifi-
cant reductions, certain emission categories, such as fugitive dust would be
                                                      3
required for each plan in order to achieve the 20 yg/m reduction.
     Each plan attempted to approach the problem in a different manner in order
to present a range of choices.  The plans were then presented to the Air
Quality Task Force for comment.  The resulting Particulate Trial Plan reflects
the thoughts and comments received at that meeting.
Alternative Particulate Plan Number 1
     The first plan represents an attempt at controlling emissions from the
Domestic and Commercial, Transportation and the Fugitive Dust categories
utilizing a total of fourteen measures.  Several of the measures having sig-
nificant effects in improving air quality levels were also expected to have
significant political impacts; however, these were included in order to com-
plete the plan and to allow for a wider choice in strategies.
     The control measures and policy instruments included in this plan are
as follows:
      (1)  Improve domestic and commercial building insulation by revising
          building codes.
                                     156

-------
      (2)  Control room temperatures (air conditioning and heating) by public
           relation campaigns.
      (3)  Improve design of furnaces for commercial and domestic combustion
           units.
      (4)  Improve maintenance programs for domestic and commercial heating/
           cooling systems by promulgating new regulatory codes.
      (5)  Convert domestic and commercial heating units to clean fuel (gas,
           fuel oil,  electricity).
      (6)  Improve attractiveness of non-automobile mode of travel through
           grants  or  ridership subsidy.
      (7)  Restrict highway availability by withholding grant funding in an
           attempt to reduce particulate emissions from VMT.
      (8)  Develop and install control devices to control particulates emitted
           by automobiles.  This measure could be implemented by the Federal
           Government through regulations.
      (9)  Modify  auto/truck tire and brake wear by changing  the design speci-
           fications  on a Federal level.
     (10)  Eliminate  unpaved or poorly paved parking lots through local ordi-
           nances  or  tax incentives.
     (11)  Eliminate  uncovered vacant lots (undeveloped, or sites scheduled
           for construction sometime in the not immediate future), by planting
           ground  cover sponsored by grants, subsidies and required by local
           ordinances.
     (12)  Control dust from construction sites by passing local ordinances.
     (13)  Control fugitive dust from open bodied vehicles through local
           ordinances.
     (14)  Control soil deposition (which is converted to fugitive dust after
           drying) by implementing such practices as truck washing.
     It  is estimated  that Plan Number 1 will result in a 20.2 yg/m  reduction
of the predicted 1985 particulate concentration.
                                      157

-------
      Included in this strategy were measures with similar goals; therefore
three instances the estimated improvement in air quality was modified to re-
flect the overlapping concepts of the individual control measures.  These were
noted with an asterisk.  For instance, the estimated improvement in air quality
due to implementing a campaign to improve furnace design, measure No. 3., was
        3                                                     3
1.1 yg/m , when considered separately but modified to 0.5 yg/m  when considered
in conjunction with improved building insulation.  A well insulated building
will require less heat (and less use of furnace); therefore, the impact of a
more efficient and lower polluting furnace is lessened.  Similar arguments can
be made concerning overlapping control measures designed for or dependent on
reduced VMT  (measure No. 6. and 8).  Over 50 percent of the air quality re-
duction is due to fugitive dust type measures, with the remaining reduction
divided evenly between domestic/commercial heating and transportation controls.
While all of the measures are considered to be implementable within a five
                                                                          3
year period  (10 within two years), six measures, accounting for a 6.6 yg/m  re-
duction, will probably require 5 to 10 or more years before any effect could
be realized.  As discussed earlier one or two control measures such as re-
stricting highway availability or adding emission control devices to automobiles
are very likely to be politically or socially unacceptable.
      If implemented as stated, measures 2, 4, 6, and 7 would affect the life-
style of the average Baltimore citizen in his home and would have an even
greater impact on his commuting habits.  In general, the impact of the re-
                                          r
maining measures will largely be economic in nature and will affect the in-
habitants of the AQMA either directly or indirectly in their consumption of
goods and services.
Alternative Particulate Plan Number 2
      Plan Number 2 enlisted eight measures involving land use, transportation
and fugitive dust controls to achieve the required 20 yg/m  reduction in
predicted 1985 particulate concentrations.  As with Plan Number 1 this
strategy contains measures which may be politically unacceptable.  In general
the plan is not as specific as Plan Number 1 since the land use and trans-
portation measures, which represent a significant portion of the total reduc-
tion, are designed to ultimately modify the existing patterns through rezoning
and urban renewal.
                                      158

-------
      The control measures and policy instruments included in this plan are
as follows:
      (1)  Excluding new sources from selected high pollution areas by revising
           the general zoning plan.
      (2)  Controlling existing land uses through redevelopment incentives,
           urban renewal programs.
      (3)  Restrict highway availability by withholding grant funding in an
           attempt to reduce particulate emissions from VMT.
      (4)  Reduce demand for transportation, agriculture and  other activities
           in order to reduce fugitive dust.  This could possibly be accomplished
           through a taxation policy.
      (5)  Control dust from construction sites by passing local ordinances.
      (6)  Control fugitive dust from open bodied vehicles through local
           ordinances.
      (7)  Control soil deposition  (which is converted to fugitive dust after
           drying) by implementing  such practices as truck washing.
      (8)  Cover over vacant lots with grass or vegetation through local
           ordinances.
      It is  estimated that Plan Number 2 will result in a 20.0 ug/m  reduction
 of predicted 1985 particulate concentration.
      As in  Plan Number 1, this plan contains measures which  overlap in concept.
 The effectiveness of Measures Number 1, 4, 7 and 8 were modified downward
 to reflect  this situation.  Plan Number 2 also relies heavily on fugitive
 dust control as a basic strategy (approximately 55 percent of the reductions),
 with land use measures accounting  for 35 percent and transportation 10 percent.
 All of the  measures can probably be implemented within a five year period,
 however, three measures will probably require from 5-10 years before their
 effectiveness would be realized.  One of these three longer  term measures is
 the control of existing land uses  which represents the single largest source
 of reductions.  Although it does not attack a specific source it can be
 designed to affect specific areas  in the region.
                                     159

-------
     If implemented as stated, measures 1 through 3 would ultimately affect
development in the Baltimore region.  The remaining measures dealing with
fugitive dust, are more source specific and would probably exhibit secondary
economic effects.
Alternate Particulate Plan Number 3
     Plan Number 3 is designed to control emissions primarily by controlling
area type sources utilizing equipment modifications and "black boxes."  As
with the two previous plans this plan also includes controls in the fugitive
dust sources.
     The control measures and policy instruments included in Plan Number 3
are as follows:
     (1)  Install control devices on small combustion units by changing local
          regulations or improving design specifications.
     (2)  Improving the furnace design of domestic and commercial units by
          improving on specifications.
     (3)  Improving maintenance programs of heating systems by implementing
          new codes.
     (4)  Using smaller auto engine to weight ratios through increased taxation
     (5)  Control of fugitive dust from construction sites by passing local
          ordinances.
     (6)  Control of fugitive dust from open bodied vehicles by passing
          local ordinances.
                                                                  3
     It is estimated that Plan Number 3 will result in a 19.8 yg/m  reduction
of the predicted 1985 particulate concentration.
     The largest single contributor to this reduction is the installation of
control devices on small combustion units, which will probably be the least
politically acceptable to the general public.  It represents 50 percent of the
desired reduction.  In addition, this measure will be -costly and difficult to
implement (both the initial installation and follow-on maintenance).  The
remaining measures have been presented in Plans Number 1 and 2.  Plan Number 3
therefore relies heavily on traditional air pollution engineering to reduce
residual emission from existing controlled or uncontrolled sources as compared
to land use and transportation strategies found in Plans Number 1 and 2.
                                    160

-------
SELECTION OF TRIAL PARTICIPATE STRATEGY
     In the development of the three alternative strategies it quickly became
apparent that without stringent control of fugitive dust and courageous
measures in the area of land use and transportation planning, NAAQS could not
be maintained.  The three plans and this conclusion were presented to the
RPC's Air Quality Task Force.  The panel supported all of the fugitive dust
control measures and indicated tacit approval of those measures directed at
the conservation of energy, e.g., improved insulation and furnace design.  In
the area of land use and transportation planning no consensus could be
reached, although the necessity for air pollution considerations in such plan-
ning was admitted.  For the reasons discussed in the selection of the trial
hydrocarbon strategy no significant measure was directed at the control of
automobile ownership and use, although the direct reduction in particulate
emissions from this source category and the secondary reductions in fugitive
dust from automobile associated activity will have to be considered as
vulnerable points of attack in the future.
     The selected land use measures which are included in the strategy are
considered those most nearly acceptable to the panel.  Effectiveness of the
measures, probably not apparent before the last half of the decade, will
depend on the vigor of the Air Quality Task Force in implementing the
principle of land planning as a tool in the control of air pollution.
     The selected strategy is a hybrid of the three candidate strategies and
includes elements from each.  The measures can be categorized and listed as
follows:
Measures to Control Fugitive Dust
     (1)  Control construction sites
     (2)  Control open bodied vehicles
     (3)  Control deposition on roads
     (4)  Modify tire and brake wear design
Measures to Reduce Energy Consumption
     (1) Improve maintenance of heating systems
     (2)  Improve furnace design
     (3)  Improve building insulation
     (A)  Control room temperatures
                                     161

-------
Land Planning Measures
     (1)  Exclude new sources from hot spots
     (2)  Change existing land use
     Detailed evaluation of the measures is shown on Table 49.
Impacts of the Trial Plan
Legal Impacts - Legal precedent, both in the form of air pollution control
and prevention of a general nuisance, exists to regulate emissions from the
first three fugitive dust sources.  New, specific rules will have to be
formulated and approved.  The same issue as that for control of hydrocarbons
from HDV is raised in an attempt to modify tire and brake design.
     Legal implications of the energy conservation measures include the
limitation on authority of local authorities; however, there is no reason to
consider these measures legally not implementable.  The most difficult aspect
is in enforcement.  In actual operation these measures will finally respond
only to the economic advantage of energy conservation brought on by increased
fuel costs.
     Land use measures are currently within the purview of local and regional
zoning authorities.  Refer to Appendix G for additional comments.
Economic and Social Impacts -  The strategy selected tends to minimize social
and economic impacts by the very nature of the selection process.  The measures
directed at fugitive dust control will have very modest cost to the consumer;
those directed at conservation of energy will, after the moderate capital in-
vestment involved, eventually result in a net benefit to society.  The land
use measures, if implemented over the decade as sources of emissions are
normally retired, will involve no cost, provided equally attractive industrial
sites are provided for the new installations.
Other Environmental Effects - None of the measures selected for the
trial plan have a negative impact on other pollutants.  All have a positive
effect in reducing other air pollutants.
Timing - A review of the particulate trial plan reveals that five of the ten
control measures will have an impact on air quality within two years.  One con-
trol measure will have an impact on air quality in the two-five year time frame.
Taken together these six control measures will reduce air quality levels by
                                     152

-------
         3
11.1 yg/m  by 1980.   The projected air quality for 1980 without controls would
                3
be about 77 yg/ra  (Chapter III).   By substraction then, the 1980 air quality
                           3
level will be about  66 yg/m  with the control measures.  To achieve the NAAQS

earlier than 1985 will require either additional control measures or more

stringent application of the listed measures.  Otherwise the standard will

not be fully achieved until the year 1985.
                                    163

-------
Table 42.   ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS PLAN NO.
SOURCE CATEGORY

CONTROL
MEASURES
•PROVE EMISSION
CONTROLS 















POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
FEDERAL AND STATE
REGULATIONS













"CU. IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
I















tr>
CSI















1
10















irt
1
0















a
in















1
0
ira
•














o
o
UJ
o
f>
*0
s
^o
31.5













31 5

^
o:
UJ
OL.
-














ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
ac
UJ
a.
3














ac
LLf
tO
CJ>
0
1














UJ
ac
1














_
UJ
ac
UJ
i—
-














ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
iOSTS
UJ
UJ
ca
ca
oc
1














UJ
UJ
5
I














ca
ac
'














OTHER (IDENTIFY)
-














SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UJ
oc
1














AREA EMPLOYMENT
i














REGIONAL PRICES
i














*-
u_
1—
UJ
1—
o
-














ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
_J
03
X
UJ
_*
u_
•














SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE















UJ
as
UJ
_J
UJ
ca
ea















UJ
03
UJ
oc















APPLI-
CATIOI
CONTR
=3
0
CJ
•














co
o
C3















1 OF
I

CJ
UJ
UJ















UNIFORM
•














TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
<=















T















C3
in
•














co
UJ CiO
ac uj
U_ UJ
uj a» 13
V» CJ —
ac uj ^
*UJ u. bJ
>- uj a=
1















I















2















4
•














POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
ca uj
-J UJ
UJ — •
UJ 3M
_J —
OE
UJ
UJ
u_
•














CO
•














REGIONAL















o
_J















UJ
ac
a.















LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
C9
X
UJ
a
UJ
OS
a.
ca
UJ
_J
Y














UJ
UJ
ca
UJ
K
UJ
N














ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERNED IA
UJ
CS9
ca,
UJ
X














Ul















UJ
s
0
3















UJ
CO















UJ
UJ
-
















UJ
CJ
UJ















PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
















CO































UJ
_l
UJ
CP
CA
»—
CfV
in















§
tP
O9
i
i—
UJ
u_
UJ
















-------
                                                              Table 43.   ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS PLAN  NO.  2
SOURCE CATEGORY
CONTROL
MEASURES
RESTRICT HIGHHAT
CONST IMPROVEMENTS
Dl - uj ee

•



•









•
•


i
•



•







•




'
















•=




•
•
•
•
•
•
•




POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
O UJ
— 1 UJ
UJ — *
»• o.
— 1 —
i
UJ
•
•
•








•

•

UJ
I—
•
•
•
•









•

_j
O
UJ

•

•








•
.


<=

•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

UJ
ec












•


LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
at
CO
X
UJ
t—
z:
UJ
UJ
cc
o_
C9
UJ
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y

ca
UJ
ec
UJ
ec
t—
CO
C9
UJ
E
N
N
N
Y
'
•
V
Y
.
Y
N
Y
Y
N

ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
CO
CO.
UJ


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

oc
UJ





-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



UJ
1—
CO
=





-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



UJ
CO


X
X
*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
X
X

OE


X
X
X
X
X
X
I
X
X
X
X

X

PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
UJ
U
UJ































































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
















UJ)
CO
co
UJ
1—
oc
UJ
u_
UJ















NUM.BER is DIFFERENT  FROM. AM.OUNI SHOWN ON TABLE OF HE«SURES DUE  TO THE SYNERGISTIC EFFECT OF OTHER «E«SURES IN  THIS PL«K

-------
                                                          Table 43.   ALTERNATE  HYDROCARBONS  PLAN NO.  2  (CONTINUED)
SOURCE CATEGORY

CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE USE OF
ACCESSORIES
IMPROVE EMISSION
CONTROLS ILDV)
PROHIBIT TRUCK
MOVEMENTS

REDUCE AM TRUCK
VII T
INCREASE THE USE OF
SMALLER TRUCKS
REDUCE USE OF HC
SOLVENTS
REDUCE AIRCRAFT
EMISSIONS
REDUCTION IN EMISSIONS FROI
STORAGE AND HANDLING VIA RE







POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
TAKES FEES
FEDERAL REGULATIONS
TRUCK-FREE JONES
MOVE HOODS BV
TRANSIT
SELECTIVE BAN
TAI BV (EIGHT
TAXES FEES
NO GROWTH IN B»l
FLIGHTS
GASOLINE
DUCED VMT





TUTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
i
0
•

•
•











in
1

•


•










0
T
in





•









in
Csl
\















in
in






•








«3
T
in















o/0 EMISSION REDUCTION 1
0.2
O.B
0.4
0.4
1.5
3.1
6 4
1.6
.4





23.9

t—
«j
etc
UJ
O
o=















ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UI
3
0-
S
J
3
2
1
i
»
3
3
1






UJ
i
3
3
1
1
2
2
2
2
1






UJ
at
UJ
CO
O
t—
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1






UJ
UJ
t—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
lANAGEMENT
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
2
1
1







UJ
ca
oe
UJ
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
1







MONITORII
i
i
1
1
i
i
i
i
i






u_
I—
UJ
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UI
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1






1—
UJ
a
UJ
UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1






UJ
UJ
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1






^
UJ
os
UI
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-






ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
flQ
UJ

•


•


•







FLEXIBLE
SOMEWHAT
•

•


•
•

•






UJ
CO
X
UJ
MODERATE
















UJ
OB
UJ
u_
UJ
















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L
CO
0
•
•
•


•


•
•






co
=3
.v—






•
•








UI
UJ
UI
CiO
•

•



•
•
•
•






m
ee
ae

•



•










TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
Li
a
c
u
u
a
ti
a
«
u
>
1
•
•
•


•
•
•
•
•







IMPLEMENTATI
in
1
















0
T
in
















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
evi
1
a


•


•


•







1







•








I
•
•






•






i





•









POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
u_ z
O UI
_J UJ
UJ —I
»• a.
— J
ee
UJ
s

•



•
•
•







UJ
1—
CO
•
•



•
•
•
•






UJ
•

•
•
•



•






CJ


•
•
•

•

•






UI
ee
Q_



•











LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
C3
CO
UJ
1—
E
UJ
UI
£
ta
UJ
Y
Y
'
N
'
r
Y
Y







UJ
NEK LEGISLATION REQUI
•
Y
N
N
N
»
Y
N







ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UI
to
ee
UJ


X
X
X
X









ee
UJ
i


X
X
X










UI
1—
S
v>















UJ
CO


X
X
X
X

X

r





C0
as
UJ
UJ
X
-



X

X
X






PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
n
a.
I—
VI















VM















































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE
















UI
CO
CO
ee
i
ee
UJ
u_
UJ
ee















NUUBtll IS o.fFtBENl FRon mouNl SHO»N ON I»BLt OF HEASURES Out  TO THE STNERGISTIC EFFECT OF OTHER MEASURES IN THIS PLAN

-------
                                                                   Table  44.   ALTERNATE HYDROCARBONS  PLAN NO. 3
SOURCE CATEGORY
CONTROL
MEASURES
REDUCE USE OF
HC SOLVENTS
REDUCE AM TRUCK
VMT
INCREASE THE USE OF
SMALLER TRUCKS
DIVERT >UIO PASS
TO TfllNStT ANO RAIL
REDUCE AM VMT
REDUCE AIRCRAFT
EMISSIONS









POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
BAN ON HC SOLVENTS
SELECTIVE BAN
TAX Br (EIGHT
IMPROVE SERVICE
STAGGER «ORK HOURS
NO GROWTH IN BWI
FLIGHTS








TOTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS


















•














.A


•
•
•










to
1















<=>















a
s
•














ac
o
a
LU
ac
CD
oo
oo
LU
12 e
1 5
3 1
1 3
1 3
1 6








21 6
ac
E
oa















ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
i*j
»—
=3
O
3
2
3
1
2
3









LU
ae
0
°
2
2
2
1
2
2









LU
0=
C3
°
1
1
1
3
1
1









~
z
e
0=
re
-
-
-
-
-
-









ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
t—
LU
LU
X
an
~
1
•

'
1











LU
0=
-
2
2
1
1
2
1










^
=
s
\
1
1
1
1
1









—
1—
2
ac
£
-
-
-
-
-
-









SOCIAL
COSTS
LU
S
—
<=
1
1
1
1
1
2









LU
5J
LU
0=
1
1
1
1
1
2









co
LU

_,
CD
LU
2
2
2
1
2
1









~


a;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-









ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

03
UJ
=
•
•



•









LU
LU
t—
s
°


•













UJ
CO
UJ
LU
0=
°





•










LU
LU
^
LU
















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L

§
<=
•
•
•


•
•









CO
o
CD
















LU
1—
u
LU


•


•
•









S
3E
•
•














TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS

C3
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTAT

i
•
•
•


•
•










1

















i
















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED

'

•



•
•










'
•
















'

















=•


•













POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
1—
t—
U_ 3E
O UJ
_J LU
LU —1
> Q_
UJ X
0=
LU
LU
•

•



•









LU
-
•

•
•
•
•









S
LU
•
•

•
•












•
•

•
•










LU
t—





•










LEGAi
CONS
ERAT
CO
CO
LU
1—
UJ
UJ
UJ
a_
_j
C9
UJ
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y









D-
ONS
UJ
ac
LU
CO
LU
_J
LU
Y
N
Y
N
N
N









ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
UJ
CO
ca
a=
UJ
t—

X
X
X
X










ae
UJ
t—

X













UJ
CO















UJ


X
X
X

X









UJ


X
X
X
X









PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
to
t—
a.
UJ
I—
CO
UJ































































5 MOST ACCEPTABLE















LU
CO
CO
ae
LU
t—
a=
UJ
u_
LU
as















NUMBER IS DIFFERENT  FROM AMOUNT  SHOWN ON TABLE OF MEASURES DUE TO  THE SrNERGISTIC EFFECT OF 01HER MEASURES IN THIS PLAN

-------
                                                                                   Table 45.   THE  TRIAL  HYDROCARBON  PLAN
SOURCF CATEGORY

CONTROL
MEASURES
UPHOVE EMISSION
CONTROLS IHDV)
REDUCE USE OF
HC SOLVENTS














POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
FEDERAL AND STATE
REGULATIONS
BAN ON HC SOLVENTS












TOTAL IKPROVEUEHT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
0















in















in















in
CSI















in
1

25













o
10
50














o/0 EMISSION REDUCTION 1
20.8
4 1












24

i
UJ
i
-














ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
TO POLLUTER
3
j













UJ
V)
o
1
2













LLJ
UJ
O
1
1













i. .
ac
UJ
3C
C3
-
-













AONINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
UJ
UJ
o
Q_
1
1













t—
ENFORCEME
i
2














MONITORIN
1
I













E
UJ
re
e=>
-
-













SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
UJ
1
1













t—
UJ
UJ
UJ
1
1













UJ
ac
0
UJ
0=
1
2













£
OC
UJ
t—
0
-
-













ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

CD
X
UJ
•
•













UJ
OD
UJ
_J
SOMEWHAT















Y FLEXIBLE
UJ
1—
0=
UJ
a















UJ
CD
UJ
U_
ac
UJ
>•















APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTR L

1—
a
•
•













CO
=9
=3
NON-CONTI















UJ
1—
CJ
UJ
UJ
CO















UNIFORM
•
•













TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
L
C
C
u
u
a
c
\
L
»
-

•














'""> nruK
IMPLENENTATI
in















1
tn
•














YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
i
0















in

•













2















,s
•














POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
t—
u- -x.
O UJ
—J UJ
UJ _J
ac
•
•













UJ
CO
•
•













CO
UJ
ac

•













5

•













UJ
ae
o_















LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS
CO
CO
X
UJ
E
UJ
UJ
o.
CO
UJ
y
y













C3
UJ
ac
NEW LEGISLATION REQUI
N
r













ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
CO
UJ
fj
ca
ac
UJ
«
X














ac
UJ
t—















UJ
CO
CO















UJ
CO















CO
as
UJ
UJ
-














PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
1 LEAST ACCEPTABLE































































UJ
OD
UJ
CJ
1—
CO
m
















UJ
CO
CO
OC
1
o
»—
ac
UJ
u_
UJ
oe















cn
CD
                 NU»8EB  IS DIFFERENT FRO» A»OU»T SM01N ON TABLE OF MEASURES DUE TO  ThE SVNEBCISTIC EFFECT  OF OTHER MEASURES  IN THIS PLAN

-------
                                                                Table 46.  ALTERNATE PARTICULATE  PLAN NO.  1
SOURCE CATEGORY
CONTROL
MEASURES '
IMPROVE DOMESTIC AND
COMMERCIAL BUILDING
INSULATION
CONTROL ROOM TEMP
FOR A C i HEATING
IMPROVE FURNACE
DESIGN
IMPROVE MAINTENANCE
OF KEATING SYSTEl
CONVERT TO CLEAN (UEL
IMPROVE ATTRACTIVENESS
OF NON-AUTO MODES OF
TRAVEL
RESTRICT "IGKHAY
AVA ILABI LI TV
ADD EMISSION CONTROL
DEVICES TO AUTO
MODI FT II RE 'NO BRAKE
«E«H DESIGN
ELIMINATE UNPAVEP
PARMNG LOTS
PLANT GROUND COVLR
ON VACANT LOTS
CONTROL CONSTRUCTION
SITES
CONTROL OF OPEN
BODIED VEHICLES
CONTROL OF DEPOSITION
ON ROADS

POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
BUILDING CODES
ADVERTISING
IMPROVE DESIGN
SPECS.
REGULATORY CODE
TAX POLICY
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
WITHHOLD GRANTS .
FUNDS
FEDERAL SPECIFICATIONS
DESIGN SPECS. FOR
GREATER DURABILITY
IOCAL ORDINANCES
TAX INCENTIVES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
GRANTS. SUBSIDIES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
TOTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
i





•









m
1








•
•





1
•
•
•
•






•




in
CVI
1
0






•
•



•
•
•

10















a




•










"/{MISSION REDUCTION
















OS
UJ
ca
CO
Qd
1.1
1 . 1
0 5

o.e
0 2
2 2
I 0
0 7
0 7
1.5
3 5
3.5
1.5
0.2
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1. NOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
OC
=3
CD
t
1
2
'
2
1
1
1
2
3
1
2
2
2

0=
=
s
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1

_

3
t
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

~
£

UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
ANAGEMENT

a
1
\
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1


»
0
1
1
'

1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2



t—
'
1
i




2
'
1
1
1
1
1

u.
=

OS
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ

r,
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i

ye
UJ

UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1

€*>
UJ
a:

S
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1—
ifi

UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY

aa
UJ
•

•









•


UJ
UJ

i






•
•
•
•



•

Y FLEXIBLE
UJ
OS
UJ



•

•









UJ
_J
no
UJ
-

•








•
•



AP
CA1
CO

a
=>
i—
•

•


•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•

Ll-
10
TR
0

•

•







•



OF
L
UJ
=»•
UJ
•
•
•
•

•
•

•
•
•
•

•

&







•




•


TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
YEARS BEFORE
IMPLEMENTATION
i
•
»

•


•

•
•
•
•
•
•




•

•
•

•







<=>















YEARS BEFORE
EFFECTIVENESS
REALIZED
i

•

•





•
•
•
•
•

1








•






°
•

•

•
•
•
•























POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
O UJ
_l UJ
UJ —I
>• o_
UJ X
oc
UJ
UJ

•
•

•
•

•
•






UJ
1—

•


•
•
•
•

•

•



UJ

•





•







0
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

UJ
t—
as

•
•
•
•



•

•




LEGAI
CONS
ERAT
ta
X
UJ
UJ
UJ
UJ
a.
UJ
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

D-

UJ
UJ
DC
O
t—
CK9
UJ
UJ
Y
N
Y
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y

ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA
UJ
UJ
t—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

ec
UJ




X










UJ
CO




X










UJ
09
X














ta
a=
UJ
X
X
X
X











PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
LEAST ACCEPTABLE































































MOST ACCEPTABLE















fr—
UJ
to
OS
UJ
OS
t—
as
UJ
u_
UJ















NUMBER IS  DIFFERENT FROM AMOUNT SHOWN ON TABLE OF MEASURES DUE TO THE SVNERGISTIC EFFECT OF OTHER MEASURES IN THIS PLAN.

-------
                                                                                Table  47   ALTERNATE  PARTICIPATE PLAN  NO.  2
SOURCE CATEGORY

CONTROL
MEASURES
EXCLUDE NEW SOURCES
FROM SELECTED HOT SPOTS
CONTROL OF EXISTING
L«NC USES
RESTRICT HIGHWAY
AVA 1 LABI LI TY
REDUCE DEMAND FOR
TRANSPORTATION. AGRICUL-
TURE AND OTHER ACTIVITIES
CONTROL CONSTRUCTION
SITES
CONTROL OF OPEN
BODIED VEHICLES
CONTROL OF DEPOSITION
ON ROADS
PLANT GROUND COVER
ON VACANT LOTS








POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
REVISION OF GENERAL
ZONING PLAN
URBAN RENEWAL AND
REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
WITHHOLD GRANTS
FUNDS
TAX POLICY
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
SUBSIDIES






TOTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
CNI
1
CO















in
CNI

•













CD
1
tn



•



•







in
CNI
1
0


•

•
•
•








in
in















a
1
•














CD
O
UJ
0=
CO
&
,0
0"
















J.
CP
UJ
CD
oc
E
00
=
i.e
5.4
2 2
i. 1
3 5
3 5
„
1 0






20.0
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
LU
_J
0-
1—
2
1
I
1
2
2
2
1







i
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1







TO GOVERNMENT
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1







u_
1
ae
UJ
a:
i—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-







ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
CO TS
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1







ENFORCEMENT
i
2



2
2








\
1
|
1
1











X
UJ
UJ
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-







SOCIAL
COSTS
LU
UJ
CE
2
1
1
'
i
t
i
i







AREA EMPLOYMENT
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1







REGIONAL PRICES
2
1
1
1
1
1









u_
UJ
- UJ CE
7




•
•
•
•







in
CNI


•












CD
T
in
•
•

•











4















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
LEVEL OF
IMPLEMENTATION
UJ
UJ
U-

•

•











UJ
t—
CO


•
•
'










UJ















3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•







LU
CE
o_







•







LEGAL
CONSID-
ERATIONS

-------
                                                                 Table 48.   ALTERNATE  PARTICIPATE PLAN  NO.  3
SOURCE CATEGORY
CONTROL
MEASURES
INSTALL CONTROL DEVICES
ON SHALL COMBUSTION UNITS
IMPROVE FURNACE
DESIGN
IMPROVE MAINTENANCE
OF HEATING SYSTEM
USE SMALLER AUTO
ENGINE TO (EIGHT RATIO
CONTROL CONSTRUCTION
SITES
CONTROL OF OPEN
BODIED VEHICLES









POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
REGULATIONS.
IMPROVE DESIGN SPECS.
IMPROVE SPECS.
REGULATOR! CODE
TAX BY WEIGHT OR
DISPLACEMENT
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES








TOTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
r-J
1
O














m
CSI


•











0
to
•
•












in
(X
t




•
•









?
CM














o
in
•














o
UJ
<=>
CO
2
S^















=3
UJ
0
(*»
10.8
0.5
I.I
0 4
3.5
3.5








9.8
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
HOT EXPENSIVE
2. MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
UJ
o
1
i
1
1
2
2









UJ
c^>
o
2
2
2
1
1










UJ
UJ
>•
o
1
1
1
1
1
'









u_
UJ
ac
-
-
-
-
-
-









ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
COSTS
ROGRAM MANAGEMENT
I
I
1
I
I
I









>—
UJ
UJ
U
a:
1
1
1
1
1
2









ONI TOR ING
i
I
I
I
i
I









>-
UJ
a=
5
-
-
-
-
-
-









SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
aE
u

1
1
1
1
1
1









REA EMPLOYMENT

1

i
i
i









c*>
UJ
o.
^
o
1
1
1

1
1









>-
U.
UJ
ac
-
-
-
-
-
-









ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
LLJ
00
X
UJ
•
•



•









UJ
LLJ















ODERATELY FLEXIBLE


•
•











LLJ
LLJ




•










APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTROL
ts>
;=>
•
•

•

•









ts>
=
0
t—
o
«0


•

•










UJ
I—
C_j

•
•
•
•










£





•









TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS
0
UJ —
O= 1—
UJ -X.
CD UJ
co uj
0= — >
uj JF
1
•

•
•
•
•









1

•





























«o
UJ €O
ac UJ
U- UJ
LU =»- ea
to — uJ
»•— r-J
CO CA —
OS UJ — 1
LLJ U_ UJ
>- uj a=
1


•

•
•









1



•












•
•





























POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
0
O UJ
_J Uj
UJ _J
»• 0.
35

•
•













UJ
•


•
•










•«
^















_•
•

•

•
•










4

•
•












LEGAl
CONS
ERAT
C9
«•«
UJ
UJ
UJ
CJ
LLJ
oc
C9
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y









0-

LU
=3
UJ
oc
»—
^
_*
&9
UJ
_l
ffi
V
Y
Y
l>
N
»









ENVIRON-
MENTAL
EFFECTS
INTERMEDIA

UJ
C9
^


X
X
X
X
X


























UJ
i—
CO
-«
_l















UJ















>-
UJ

X
X












PUBLIC
RESPON-
SIVENESS
UJ
_J
£
UJ
U
«
t—
CO
UJ































































MOST ACCEPTABLE
















»
UJ
co
ts>
ae
ac
UJ
DC
t—
OC
UJ
u_
o=














' NUMBER  IS DIFFERENT FROM AMOUNT SHOWN ON TABLE OF MEASURES  DUE TO THE SYNEROISTIC EFFECT OF OTHER MEASURES IN THIS PLAN.

-------
                     Table 49.   THE  TRIAL PARTICULATE PLAN
SOURCE CATEGORY

CONTROL
MEASURES
CONTROL CONSTRUCTION
SUES
CONTROL OF OPEN
BODIED VEHICLES
CONTROL OF DEPOSITION
ON RODS
MODIFY TIDE AND BRAKE
•EAR DESIGN
IMPROVE MAINTENANCE
OF HEMING SYSTEM
IMPROVE FURNACE
DESIGN
IMPROVE DOMESTIC I
COMMERCIAL BUILDING
INSULATION
CONTROL ROOK TEMP

EXCLUDE NCI SOURCES
FROM SELECTED HOT SPOIS
CHANCE EXISTING
LAND USES






POLICY
INSTRUMENTS
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
LOCAL ORDINANCES
DESIGN SPECS FOR
GREATER DURABILITY
REGULATORY CODE
IMPROVE DESIGN SPECS.
BUILDING CODES
ADVERTISING
REVISION OF GENERAL
ZONING PLAN
URBAN RENEWAL.
REVISION OF GENERAL
AND ZONING PLAN




TOTAL IMPROVEMENT
PERCENTAGE
RANGE OF
EFFECTIVENESS
t*J
1
CS















in



•











13
T




•
•
•
•







in
CN1
1
0
•
•
•












o
in
in















CD
o
T
0








•
•





%EMlSSION REDUCTION 1
















>-
c3
ac
uj
^
C3
ae
a.
e**
m
00
3.5
3.5
1.5
0.7
1. i
. 0.5
o.e
o.e
2.2
5.4




20 0
ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS
1 NOT EXPENSIVE
2 MODERATELY EXPENSIVE
3. VERY EXPENSIVE
DIRECT
COSTS
TO POLLUTER
2
2
2
2
I
2
1
1
2
1





TO CONSUMER
i
t
i
2
2
2
2
2
1
2





TO GOVERNMENT
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
2
3





ae
UJ
UJ
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-





ADMINIS-
TRATIVE
_£OSTS
UJ
UJ
CO
PROGRAM 1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
2
}






UJ
CE
O
1
2
2
1
1
1

1

2






MONITOR,*






i

i
i





u_
UJ
UJ
1—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-





SOCIAL
COSTS
UJ
ae
3C
UJ
oc
1
)
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
t





»—
LU
O
m
IX>
UJ
ce
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
t
2
1





eo
UJ
e_a
Q_
CD
UJ
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
!
2
1





UJ
UJ
I—
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-





ADMINISTRATIVE
CONSIDERATIONS
FLEXI-
BILITY
UJ
X
UJ
__J

•



•
•








UJ
CD
X
UJ
__l
SOMEWHAT


•
•











UJ
_l
ao
UJ
_i
UJ
DC
UJ
0
o




•



•
•





UJ
_l
CO
UJ
_l
UJ
•






•







APPLI-
CATION OF
CONTROL
CO
S3
«

•
•
•

•
•








CO
=>
o
ae
ej
C3
•



•


•








»
t—
C3
UJ
UJ
•

•

•
•
•
•

•





UNIFORM

•













TIMING
CONSIDERATIONS

C3
ec K-
o ^
U_ I—
uj ae
CD UJ
CO UJ
ae _i
«•* a-
uj ai
a
•
•
•
•
•

•
•







in
CSI





•


•
•





in















CO
UJ CO
Es
UJ > ca
CD — UJ
I— rxj
CO CJ> 	
ae uj _i
^ u_ ^
>- uj oe
CNt
C3
•
•
•

•


•







in
t
e*j



•











tn





•
•

•
•





+















POLITICAL
CONSIDER-
ATIONS
C3
^
t—
u_ -x.
O UJ
— t UJ
UJ —I
> O_
35
««
CK
a
UJ



•

•

•

•





UJ
—
a.
UJ
a>

















1—
t>
UJ
to
CO
>£
ae
UJ
e
oe
UJ
UJ
ac















ASURES DUE TO THE SYNEKCISTIC EFFECT OF OTHER MEASURES IN THIS PLAN.

-------
                                LIST OF APPENDICES

                                                                        Page

A.   Mobile Source Emission Factors                                      A-l

B.   Transportation Data                                                 B-l

C.   Automotive Hydrocarbon Emissions                                    C-l

D.   Power Generating Data                                               D-l

E.   Demographic Data                                                    E-l

F.   Maintenance Control Measures                                        F-l

G.   Description of Impacts From Land Use and Transportation             G—l
    Maintenance Measures
                                      173

-------
                                 APPENDIX A
                      MOBILE SOURCE EMISSION FACTORS

     The Mobile Source Emission Factors are determined by the equation
          e    =   Zc.    d.     m.   s
           np        ip   ipn   in   p
where
     e   =   emission factor in grams/mile for calendar year n and
             pollutant p
     c.   =   the 1975 Federal Test Procedure emission rate for pollutant
             p (grams/mile)  for the i   model year at low mileage
     d.   =   the controlled  vehicle pollutant p emission deterioration
                             f- V»
             factor for the  i   model year at calendar year n
                                                A. 1
     m   =   the weighted annual travel of the i   model year during the
             calendar year n.
     s   =   the weighted speed adjustment factor for exhaust emission for
             the pollutant p (in the determination of the emission factors
             presented here  the coefficient s was taken at 1.0, this is
             useful for average speeds equal to the average speed during
             the 1975 Federal Test Procedure or by the miltiplication of
             s  for any speed road.)
     In  addition to exhaust  emission factors, the calculation of hydro-
carbon motor vehicle emission involves crankcase and evaporative hydro-
carbon emission rates.   Crankcase and evaporative emissions are determined
by the equation
     f   =   Z h.  m.
      n          i   in
                                    A-l

-------
where
     f   =   the combined crankcase and evaporative emission factor for
             year n
     h   =   the combined crankcase and evaporative emission rate for
             «.u   -th   j ,
             the i   model year
     m   =   the weighted annual  travel of  the i   model year during the
             calendar year n
     The final HC emission factor (E  ) is the sum:  e ..„  +  f  .
                                    n               nHL      n
     In order to make the emission factors  city specific, vehicle age
distribution was taken from Maryland  state  registration data for 1971 for
light duty vehicles  (See Table A-21).  For  heavy duty vehicles only nation-
al mileage data was available and thus it is not completely city specific.
The weighted annual travel data  (m) was taken from the "Technical Support
Document for the Transportation  Control Plan for the Metropolitan Baltimore
Intrastate Region," Environmental Protection Agency, (March 1974).
     For the other parameters,  (c and d), the national figures were appli-
cable and were used.  The national figures  and the above equations were
taken from "An Interim Report on  Motor Vehicle Emission Estimation" by
D. S. Kircher and D. P. Armstrong,  (October 1973).
     The emission factors were calculated for the years 1972, 1975, 1977,
1980, and 1985 for the pollutants NO  and HC.  The results of these calcu-
                                    A
lations are presented in Tables A-l  through A-20.
                                    A-2

-------
Table A-l.


  Pollutant  NOX
          CALCULATION  SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
              EXHAUST  EMISSION FACTORS
                                  Vehicle weight  class

                                              GO LDV
  Calendar year.
                  1972
   r~lHDV

Metropolitan area Bait.
Model year
1972
1971
19 70
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960+
older
ci
4.8
4.8
5.1
5.5
4.3
3.6
3:6
3'.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6

di
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00

m1
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011

Si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

ddi.1.1 Ca
0.466
1.080
0.740
0.633
0.383
0.310
0.277
0.220
0.162
0.101
0.047
0.025
0.040

(a)   Final
                     ZcidiVi = A'484 g/mi
                         A-3

-------
Table A-2.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
 Pollutant  N0,
Vehicle weight class
            m LDV
 Calendar year    1975
   C]HDV      |

Metropolitan area Bait.
Model year
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963+
older
Ci
2.2
2.3
2.3
4.8
4.8
5.1
5.5
4'.3
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.6
dl
1.0
1.11
1.18
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
-
S1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
•^^^^^— — ^—
cid-jtn-js-f Ca)
0.213
0.574
0.394
0.552
0.427
0.439
0.424
0.262
0.162
0.101
0.047
0.025
0.040
1
   (a)  Final
                                 =  3.664 g/mi
                          A-4

-------
Table  A-3.   CALCULATION SHEET  FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
Pollutant   N0x
Calendar year	1977
                            	Vehicle weight class

                                EU HDV      GO LDV

                             Metropolitan area Bait.
Model year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965+
older
Ci
0.31
0.31
2.2
2.3
2.3
4.8
4.8
5.1
5.5
4.3
3.6
3.6
3.6
di
1.0
1.34
1.18
1.20
1.21
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
"»1
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cid-jm}Si(a)
0.030
0.093
0.376
0.317
0.248
0.413
0.370
0.311
0.248
0.120
0.047
0.025
0.040
(a)   Final E
            NQ
                x
                            ±s± = 2.638 g/roi
                        A-5

-------
Table A-4.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
   Pollutant   NOX
   Calendar year     198°
             Vehicle weight class

                          HI LDV
                           Bait.
   f~"]HDV

Metropolitan area
Model year
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
19 74
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968+
older
Ci
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
2.2
2.3
2.3
4.8
4.8
5.1
5.5
3.6
-------
Table A-5.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR  GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION  FACTORS
  Pollutant    N03
   Vehicle weight  class

      HDV      Q LDV
  Calendar year   1985
Metropolitan area  Bait.
Model year
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
older
C1
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
2.2
2.3
2.3
di
1.0
1.34
1.77
2.14
2.42
2.73
2.99
3.26
3.48
3.77
1.45
1.26
1.26
"i
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
Si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cid,is,«
0.030
0.093
0.080
0.076
0.067
0.073
0.071
0.062
0.049
0.033
0.041
0.020
0.032
(a) Final Ert =Sc.d.m.s. = 0.727 e/mi
    (b)   approximate
                         A-7

-------
                      Table A-6.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                                          1972 HYDROCARBONS  FROM LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
i
CO
Model year
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960+
older
Exhaust emission factors
ci
2.7
2.9
3.6
4.4
4.5
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8

di
1.0
1.05
1.10
1.18
1.23
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011

Si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

Cjd<;r:ijSj (a)
0.262
0.685
0.574
0.597
0.493
0.757
0.678
0.537
0.396
0.246
0 . 114
0.062
0.097

Crankcase and evaporative
emission factors
hi
0.^
0.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.i'
3 . ?.
3.8
7.1
7.1
7.1CO

mi Kp-j (b)
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
O.''br>
0.036
0.077
0.061
O.GA5
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011

0.019
0.113
0.435
0.345
0.:.67
n.'j-7
0.29J
0.232
0.171
0.106
0.092
0.050
0.078

             (a)   Ecidjtnjsi =  5.498  g/mi


             (b)   Zhimi =   2.5.?* g/mi

             (c)   Total emission  (E^) = 5.498 plus  2.528  =  8.026  g/mi

-------
                       Table A-7.  CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                                           1975 HYDROCARBONS FROM LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
Model year
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963+
older
Exl
C1
1.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.9
3.6
4.4
4.5
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
1AUS t &

mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
u (b)
hiV
0.019
0.045
0.029
0.023
0.045
0.258
0.231
0.183
0.171
0.106
0.049
0.027
0.061
VD
              (a)


              (b)

              (c)
       = 1.247g/mi

Total emission (E )
                 n
3.903 plus 1.247 = 5.150 g/mi

-------
                        Table A-8.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                                            1977 HYDROCARBONS FROM LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
>
i
(b)


(c)
                               2.443 g/mi
                               -


                    Total emission (E^ = 2.443 plus .71 = 2.5114 g/mi
Model year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965+
older
Exh
Ci
.23
.23
1.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.9
3.6
4.4
4.5
8.8
8.8
8.8
aust emission fnctnrp 	
dl
1.0
1.45
1.13
1.13
1.15
1.17
1.20
1.22
1.29
1.35
1.00
1.00
1.00
mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cidjmjSi^
0.022
0.075
0.213
0.351
0.276
0.272
0.268
0.268
0.255
0.170
0.114
0.062
0.097
Crantccase and evaporative
em i ^ ^ i nn f" filters
hi
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.8(c)
mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
W*)
0.019
0.045
0.029
0.023
0.018
0.017
0.039
0.183
0.135
0.084
0.049
0.027
0.042

-------
          Table A-9.  CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                              1980 HYDROCARBONS FROM LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
Model year
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968+
older
Ex
C1
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
1.3
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.9
3.6
4.4
8.0*
haust emission factors
dl
1.0
1.45
1.95
2.40
2.76
1.37
1.20
1.22
1.24
1.26
1.26
1.31
1.0
"M
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
31
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cldimjsj(a)
0.022
0.075
0.065
0.063
0.056
0.153
0.249
0.201
0.151
0.102
0.059
0.040
0.088
Crankcase and evaporative
emission farfm-o
hi
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
3.0
3.0
3.4
mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011
him^)
0.019
0.045
0.029
0.023
0.018
0.017
0.015
0.012
0.009
0.014
0.039
0.021
0.037
           ] = 1.324 g/mi


(b)£hini -.298 g/mi
(c)  Total emission (E )= 1.324 plus  .298 = 1.622 g/mi
                     n

-------
                         Table A-10.  CALCULATION  SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                                               1985 HYDROCARBONS FROM LIGHT DUTY VEHICLES
i—1
ro
Model year
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973+
• — 	 — — — —
Exhaust emission factors
C1
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
.23
1.3
2.7
2.7

<1
1.0
1.45
1.95
2.4
2.76
3.14
3.46
3.79
4.07
4.42
1.63
1.26
1.26

mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011

si
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

ddim^OO
0.022
0.075
0.065
0.063
0.056
0.062
0.061
0.053
0.042
0.028
0.028
0 .024
0.037
Crankcase and evaporative
emiRfilon far-t-n-ra
hi
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2CC)

mi
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.028
0.013
0.007
0.011

hi^ Cb)
0.019
0.045
0.029
0.023
0 .018
0.017
0.015
0.012
0.009
0.006
0 .003
0 .001
0.002

                 (a) ]T c.d.m s  =  .616   g/mi


                      •jmi  = .199g/mi
                 (c) Total emission  (E  ) =  .616  plus  .199  =  0.815  g/mi
                                     n

-------
Table A-ll.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
       Pollutant
                   NO
    Veh1cle weight class

                   LDV
       Calendar year  1972
   QHDV
Metropolitan area  Bait
Model year
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965 '
1964
1963.
1962
1961
1960
+older
C1
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
di
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
.080
.143
.174
.113.
.109
.091
.074
.055
.042
.027
.020
.011
.061
Si
1,0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cidimfsjC3)
.736
1.316
1.601
1.062
1.025
.855
.696
.517
.395
.254
.188
.103
.573
        (a)  Final
= 9.321 g/mi
                              A-13

-------
Table A-12.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE

                  EXHAUST EMISSION  FACTORS
       Pollutant
                  NO
       Calendar year.
                           1975
                      	Vehicle weight class


                          f~x] HDV      (  I LDV


                       Metropolitan area Bait.
Model year
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
+older
ci
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
di
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
.080
.143
.174
.113
.109
.091
.074
.055
.042
.027
.020
.011
.061
S1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cidimisj(a)
.736
1.316
1.601
1.040
1.003
.837
.696
.517
.395
.254
.188
.103
.573
           a)
Final !•    =  /.c.d.m.s.  = 9.^59 g/mi
       NO     *—'  1111
                              A-14

-------
Table A-13.  CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE

                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
       Pollutant
                   NO
       Calendar year   1977
            	Vehicle weight class



                S HDV      CD 5-DV


             Metropolitan area Bait.
Model year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
-folder
Ci
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
9.4
di
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
.080
.143
.174
.113
.109
.091
.074
.055
.042
.027
.020
.011
.061
Si
1*0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cid-jmis-j(a)
.736
1.316
1.601
1.040
1.003
.837
.681
.506
.395
.254
.188
.103
.573
         (a)   Final
= V'c.d.m.s. =  9.230 g/mi
  / -•  1111
                              A-15

-------
Table A-14.
     CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
         EXHAUST EMISSION  FACTORS
       Pollutant
                  NO
                                J/ehicle weight class
                                            CDLDV
       Calendar year   1980
   IxlHDV
Metropolitan area  Bait
Model year
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
-Holder
ci
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.4
9.4
-1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
.080
.143
.174
.113
.109
.091
.074
.055
.042
.027
.020
.011
.061
S1
1,0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
C1dimiS1 (a
.736
1.316
1.601
1.040
1.003
.837
.681
.506
.386
.248
.184
.103
.573
(a)  Final
                                      -  = 9-214 8/mi
                              A-16

-------
Table A-15.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE
                  EXHAUST EMISSION FACTORS
       Pollutant   N0
Calendar year
                        1985
                                  Vehicle weight class

                                              CD LDV
   f x| HDV

Metropolitan area  Bait
Model year
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978 '
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
Ci
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
9.2
di
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
.080
.143
.174
.113
.109
.091
.074
.055
.042
.027
.020
.011
.061
S1
1,0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
cidimisj(a)
.736
1.316
1.601
1.040
1.003
.837
.681
.506
.386
.248
.184
.101
.561
          (a)   Final
                                i  = 9-200 g/mi
                        x
                              A-17

-------
                   Table A-16.
CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS
  1972 HYDROCARBONS FROM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
M
00
                            Exhaust emission factors
                                       Crankcase and evaporative
                                            emission factors
Model year
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
+older
C1
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
17

-------
     Table A-17.
CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS
  1975 HYDROCARBONS FROM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
             Exhaust emission factors
                                       Crankcase and evaporative
                                              emission factors
Model year
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
+older
C1
13
13
16
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
17
17
dl
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
«1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cidimisi(a) hi
1.040 3.0
1.859 3.0
2.784 3.0
1.808 3.0
1.744 3.0
1.456 8.2
1.258 8.2
0.935 8.2
0.714 8.2
0.459 8.2
0.340 8.2
0.187 8.2
1.037 8.2^
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
himi 0>)
0.240
0.429
0.522
0.339
0.327
0.746
0.607
0.451
0.344
0.221
0.164
0.090
0.500
(a)   ^Cidimisi *  15.621 g/mi
(b)   £himi = 4.980 g/mi
(c)   Total emission CO = 15.621 plus 4.980 = 20.601 g/mi
                      n

-------
                    Table A-18.   CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS

                                   1977 HYDROCARBONS FROM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
K3

O
(a)


(b)
                                Exhaust emission factors
                                                       Crankcase and evaporative

                                                            emission factors
Model year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1960
1968
1967
1966
1965
-folder
ci
13
13
13
13
16
16
16
16
17
17
17
17
17
dl
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
*1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
CidimiS1 <*) hi
1.040 3.0
1.859 3.0
2.262 3.0
1.469 3.0
1.744 3.0
1.456 3.0
1.184 3.0
0.880 8.2
0.714 8.2
0.459 8.2
0.340 8.2
0.187 8.2
1.037 8.2Cc)
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
himiCb)
0.240
0.429
0.522
0.339
0.327
0.273
0.222
0.451
0.344
0.221
0.164
0.090
0.500
                                = 14.631  g/mi


                               4.122 g/mi
                 (c)   Total emission (E )  = 14.631 plus 4.122 = 18.753 g/mi
                                       n

-------
   Table A-19.  CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION FACTORS
                  1980 HYDROCARBONS FROM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
               Exhaust emission factors
Crankcase and evaporative
       emission factors
Model year
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
-holder
C1
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
16
16
16
16
17
17
dl
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0,091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
S1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Cidimisi (a) hi
1.040 3.0
1.859 3.0
2.262 3.0
1.469 3.0
1.417 3.0
1.183 3.0
0.962 3.0
0.880 3.0
0.672 3.0
0.432 3.0
0.320 8.2
0.187 8.2
1.037 8.2^c)
mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
hi mi 0>
0.240
0.429
0.522
0.339
0.327
0.273
0.222
0.165
0.126
0.081
0.164
0.090
0.500
(a)   Lci'dimisi  -  13.720 g/mi
(b)   ]Thimi  =  3.478 g/mi

(c)    Total emission (E )  = 13,720 plus 3.478 = 17.198 g/mi

-------
                   Table A-20.  CALCULATION SHEET FOR GASOLINE MOTOR  VEHICLE  EMISSION  FACTORS
                                  1985 HYDROCARBONS FROM HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES
NJ
hO
(a)
                            Exhaust emission factors
                                                           Crankcase and
                                                                emission
                                   13.183  g/mi
evaporative
factors
Model year
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
+older
d
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
16

dl
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061

S1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

cidim1Si(a) hl
1.040 3.0
1.859 3.0
2.262 3.0
1.469 3.0
1.417 3.0
1.183 3.0
0-962 3.0
0.715 3.0
0.546 3.0
0.351 3.0
0.260 3.0
0.143 3.0
0.976 3.0

mi
0.080
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061

himi(b)
0.240
0.429
0.522
0.339
0.327
0.273
0.222
0.165
0.126
0.081
0.060
0.033
0.183

                 (c)  Total emission  (E ) = 13.183 plus 3.000 = 16.183 g/mi
                                       n

-------
                 Table  A-21  WEIGHTED ANNUAL MILES TO TRAVEL
Vehicle
Ap.e
1
2
3
A
5
6
7
. 8
9
10
11
12
134-
Totals
Lif.lit Duty Voliiclc-s
Vehicle
Aftc
Dist.
% (a)
9.7
17.3
12.3
10.7
9.3
9.3
8.8
7.2
5.6
3.9
2.0
1.4
2.5

Miles
Driven
00
9,900*
12,900
11,750
10,650
9,550
9,225
8,675
8,475
7,900
7,225
6,675
5,200
A, 500

(a)x(b)
960.3
2231.7
1445.3
1139.6
888.2
857.9
763.4
610.2
442.4
281.8
133.5
72.8
112.5
9939.6
M-
a x h
ZKaxb)
0.097
0.225
0.145
0.115
0.089
0.086
0.077
0.061
0.045
0.023
0.013
0.007
0.011
0.999
lle.'ivv Dutv Vehicles
Vehicle
Age
Dist.
% (a)
9.1
14.5
12.0
8.5
8.2
8.3
6.8
5.9
4.5
3,6
2.6
2.4
13.1

Miles
Driven
(b)
10,500**
11,700
17,200
15,800
15,800
13,000
13,000
11,000
11,000
9,000
9,000
5,500
5,550

(a)x(b)
955.5
1696,5
2064.0
1343.0
1295.6
1079.0
884.0
649.0
495,0
324.0
234.0
132.0
720.5
11S72.1
M=
a x 1)
Z3.->::b)
O.OSO
0.143
0.174
0.113
0.109
0.091
0.074
0.055
0.042
0.027
0.020
0.011
0.061
1.000
 * Maryland State Data, 1st year .cars driven only 3/4  x 13,200 = 9,900 miles by May 31.
** Since 3,500 for 1st year covers  1/4 of year. 3/4 of year =  3 x 3,500 = 10,500
  miles by Mr.y 31.
                                         A-23

-------
                               APPENDIX B
                           TRANSPORTATION DATA
     Table B-l lists current and projected light duty vehicles (LDV) and
heavy and medium duty vehicles (HMDV) miles traveled and average speed by
regional planning district.  VMT are listed in thousands of miles during
the peak period 6 to 9 A.M.  Speed is in miles per hour.  Details of the
derivation of the data are given in the basic report.
     Data were available for only those planning districts included in the
1964 Baltimore Metropolitan Area Transportation Study.  Figure B-l shows
the study area within the AQCR.
                                   B-l

-------
Table B-l.  VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
    BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
101


102


103


104


105


106


107


108


109


110



LDV(a>
HMDV
SPEED c
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
1970
11.97
2.36
16.90
32.11
6.34
30.80
36.32
7.15
18.60
11.77
2.31
16.20
34.09
6.72
15.00
44.11
8.70
14.90
36.90
7.28
14.20
17.87
3.52
16.90
22.74
4.49
13.70
23.88
4.72
36.50
1977
13.59
2.68
16.20
32.73
6.85
29.70
40.34
7.96
14.90
12.24
2.41
15.70
34.64
6.84
14.50
44.43
8.77
15.00
46.17
9.11
15.50
21.24
4.19
14.00
24.72
4.88
12.50
27.29
5.38
31.30
1980
14.28
2.82
15.90
35.85
7.08
29.20
42.06
8.30
13.30
12.44
2.46
15.50
34.87
6.88
14.30
44.57
8.80
15.10
50.13
9.89
16.10
22.68
4.48
12.80
25.57
5.05
12.00
28.76
5.68
29.10
1985
13.72
2.71
16.00
38.26
7.55
28.10
42.50
8.39
13.20
12.91
2.55
16.60
35.08
6.92
14.60
44.79
8.84
16.40
50.39
9.94
16.30
21.79
4.30
13.30
25.80
5.09
12.70
29.30
5.78
28.60
                         B-2

-------
Table B-l (continued).   VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
          BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
111


112


113


114


115


116


117


118


119


120



LDVU(b)
HKDV
SPEED^
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEiit)
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
SPEED
LDV
HMDV
• SPEED
1970
45.18
8.91
24.00
21.40
4.22
12.00
40.15
7.92
27.90
7.63
1.51
19.30
21.04
4.15
10.60
22.85
4.51
15.70
59.36
11.71
18.30
54.97
10.85
14.60
64.91
12.82
19.70
29.31
5.79
11.90
1977
48.57
9.58
22.60
19.50
3.85
13.60
43.16
8.52
28.80
6.50
1.28
22.70
30.21
5.96
27.70
35.45
7.00
30.30
64.71
12.77
23.10
67.34
13.29
19.80
60.77
12.00
23.90
35.06
6.92
31.20
1980
50.02
9.88
22.00
18.69
3:69
14.30
44.45
8.78
29.20
6.02
1.19
24.20
34.13
6.74
35.10
40.85
8.06
36.60
67.01
13.22
25.10
72.63
14.33
22.00
59.00
11.65
25.70
37.52
7.40
39.40
1985
49.73
9.82
22.40
19.70
3.89
14.30
44.28
8.74
28.90
6.48
1.28
23.00
36.67
7.24
32.70
42.92
8.47
36.40
67.57
13.33
25.00
73.43
14.49
20.80
59.17
11.68
25.30
36.31
7.16
45.70
                                B-3

-------
Table B-l (continued).  VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
          BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
121 LDV^
HMOV^ '
SPEED'0'
122 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
123 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
124 LDV
HMDV

SPEED
125 LDV
HMDV
Sl'hhx)
126 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
201 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
202 LDV
1C1UV
SPEED
203 LDV
HMDV
SPLT.D
204 LDV
HMDV
siT.ru
1970
95.76
18.89
24.50
17.63
3.44
17.70
23.88
4.72
14.80
13.73

2.71
22.40
32.96
6.50
30.40
48.96
9.66
25.20
109.99
21.71
17.50
47.30
9.34
35.70
64.94
12.82
24.50
9.89
1.95
17.10
1977
124.31
24.54
36.80
37.02
7.31
26.00
41.53
8.20
30.60
27.87

5.50
37.20
34.71
6.85
27.90
59.84
11.81
28.70
127.09
25.08
25.30
69.96
13.81
35.80
94.18
18.59
31.20
19.83
3.92
21.40
1980
136.55
26.95
42.00
45.33
8.94
29.60
49.10
9.69
37.40
33.93

6.69
43.60
35.46
7.00
26.90
64.51
12.73
30.20
134.42
26.53
28.70
79.67
15.73
35.90
106.72
21.06
34.10
24.09
4.75
23.20
1985
138.01
27.21
43.00
47.61
9.40
28.90
51.53
10.18
36.60
34.55

6.82
44.20
37.51
7.40
25.80
67.92
13.41
31.40
143.40
28.31
30.50
86.68
17.11
38.30
122.88
22.28
33.50
23.98
4.73
22.20
                               B-4

-------
Table B-l (continued).  VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
          BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
205 LDV(a)
HMDV(b>
SPEED
206 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
207 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
208 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
209 LDV
HMDV
Sl-fctu
210 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
303 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
304 LDV
icrnv
Sl'LED
305 Lnv
HMDV
SPEED
306 LDV
HM1W
SPEKD
1970
83.23
16.43
20.10
60.97
12.03
26.00
10.73
2.12
18.00
32.94
6.50
23.70
29.75
5.87
20.00
35.05
6.92
11.40
8.85
1.75
28.00
12.85
2.54
44.50
8.61
1.71
19.80
19.34
3.82
16.00
1977
85.89
16.95
19.30
89.16
17.60
32.40
14.95
2.95
13.30
44.55
8.80
20.30
33.16
6.54
19.20
40.89
8.07
10.00
15.59
3.08
25.10
17.90
3.53
42.10
10.72
2.72
18.30
41.66
8.22
30.10
1980
87.03
17.18
19.00
101.24
19.99
35.20
16.75
3.31
11.30
49.52
9.78
18.80
34.62
6.84
18.80
43.40
8.56
9.40
18.48
3.65
23.90
20.06
3.96
41.10
11.62
2.29
17.70
51.23
10.13
36.10
1985
116.59
23.01
20.30
119.93
23.67
32.90
18.16
3.59
12.90
52.20
10.31
22.50
38.87
7.67
25.40
68.93
13.61
18.90
20.14
3.98
24.30
21.72
4.29
41.30
11.97
2.36
18.10
55.55
10.97
35.00
                                 R-S

-------
Table B-l (continued).  VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
          BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD 1970
307 LDV(a) 19.61
IIMDV^ 3.87
(c)
srKi-'r ' 37.00
308 LM 48.04
IHUV 9-A8
SFi:'.:n 37>10
309 LDV 13.33
Kl-mV 2.63
SPEED 18.8Q
310 LBV 4.27
WIDV 0>85
spi?a) is.oo
311 LDV 8 .33
1IMDV 1 6S
-L • U _>
M-j-.Lu 19.60
312 LI)V 9.53
I:;-:DV 1.88
SPTf-l-D 17.20
313 UW 96.97
FJUJV 19,14
r.rrj-n 35.80
314 LDV 25.00
1KDV 4.93
S?I:;-:D 35.70
315 LW 75.82
K.iDV 14.97
sri:nn 35.60
316 LDV 43.08
ini'V 8.50
Sl'LlD 33.00
1977
25.56
5.04
33.20
63.16
12.47
36.10
18.65
3.68
18.40
5.89
1.16
17.40
11.83
2.33
15.40
12.90
2.55
16.70
116.94
23.08
33.30
28.42
5.60
32.70
89.74
17.71
33.90
65.56
12.94
28.11
1980
28.11
5.53
38.70
69.63
13*. 7 9
35.70
20.93
4.13
18.30
6.58
1.27
17.10
13.33
2.60
13.60
14.35
2.80
16.50
125.50
24.72
32.20
29.88
5.86
31.40
95.71
18.86
32.80
75.20
14.86
26.00
1985
37.55
7.41
36.50
70.71
13.95
35.70
21.25
4.20
19.20
7.46
1.47
20.80
31.89
6.29
20.90
19.13
3.78
19.70
138.58
27.36
32.00
32.62
6.44
31.30
101.61
20.06
34.10
74.23
14.65
27.90
                               B-6

-------
Table B-l -(continued).   VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE SPEED
          BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
317 LDVU)
1C1DV (c)
SPK1.D c
318 LDV
HMDV
SPEED
319 LDV
M-IDV
SPEED
320 LDV
1E-IDV
SPEED
321 LDV
13-IDV
SP.i'.Ki)
OTO LDV
322
11MDV
SPEED
323 LUV
IS-IDV
snzru
324 UA'
in-i'jv
SP1.UD
325 ''1)V
ir.ov
si'Kui
326 7!'V
IIIUW
SPI:I:;,
1970
40.24
7.94
38.70
22.58
4.46
29.2
74.53
14.71
29.40
26.72
5.27
47.60
22.48
4.43
/. a t p Q
4.51
0.89
26.70
68.83
13.59
41.50
50.81
10.04
34.10
80. OS
15.81
33.30
31.61
6.24
.v>.20
1977
57.80
11.41
33.00
28.92
5.71
24.40
100.46
19.83
23.80
29.35
5.79
37.50
28.43
5.61
AQ 20
6.55
1.29
22.60
107.68
21.25
37.60
64.04
12.64
27.70
133.85
26.42
33.90
56.33
11.12
3:?. 40
19SO
65.33
12.86
30.60
31.65
6.20
22.40
111.58
21.99
21.40
30.47
6.00
33.20
30.97
6.13
36. 00
7.43
1.47
20.80
124.32
24.52
36.00
69.71
13.79
25.00
156.90
30.92
34.10
66.93
13.1'J
32.70
1985
71.57
14.13
34.10
34.99
6.91
27.20
121.51
23.98
22.80
37.56
7.41
33.90
33.39
6.59
40.30
11.28
2.23
27.80
134.66
26.58
34.80
74.88
14.78
24.40
167.20
33.00
33.70
74.69
14.74
32.90
                                B-7

-------
Table B-l (continued).   VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED AND AVERAGE  SPEED
           BY PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
327 LDV'a;
»rov(b)
SPETO(C)
328 LDV
1KDV
SPEED
329 LT)V
HKDV
SPEED
330 LDV
KMDV
SPEED
331 LDV
HKDV
SPiTaD
603 U>V
K-IDV
SPEED
604 LDV
1IMDV
SPEEl)
605 L1>V
11MDV
SPEED
606 LDV
1IMDV
SPEED
607 IAW
1KIDV
Sl'EW)
1970
19.34
3.81
13.90
26.79
5.28
13.60
50.51
9.98
13.40
27.45
5.42
11.60
13.37
2.65
13.50
51.71
10.20
39.50
11.16
2.21
26.40
24.99
4.93
16.30
24.40
4.02
10.20
38.50
7.60
0.80
1977
22.93
4.52
13.10
32.43
6.40
17.10
52.90
10.44
21.20
37.84
7.47
25.20
15.71
3.10
22.30
76.84
15.17
37.50
14.28
2.82
27.40
81.11
16.01
23.80
65.46
12.92
22.10
62.95
12.42
17.40
1980
24.48
4.80
12.70
34.86
6167
19.00
53.93
10.66
24.50
42.28
8.39
31.00
16.71
3.33
26.10
87.61
17.33
36.70
15.61
3.13
27.90
105.16
20.73
27.00
108.20
21.32
27.20
73.43
14.53
20.60
1985
24.22
4.78
19.50
37.23
7.36
21.60
53.38
10.53
25.60
42.17
8.32
31.90
19.23
3.80
.27.60
107 . 93
21.30
35.10
17.34
3.42
29.20
117.94
23.28
32.60
122.68
24.22
28.30
85.81
16.94
24.40
        (a)  LDV:  Light Duty Vehicles
        (b)  HMDV:  Heavy and medium Djty Vehicles
        (c)  SPEED:  in miles per hour
                                  B-8

-------
FREDERICK
 COUNTY
                                                     HARFORD
                                                      COUNTY
CARROLL
 COUNTY
BALTIMORE
  COUNTY
                              BALTIMORE CITY&
                           PRINCE
                           GEORGE
                           COUNTY
                                     ANNE
                                    ARUNDEL
                                    COUNTY
      MONTGOMERY
        COUNTY
                  Figure B-1    BMATS study  area
                                 B-9

-------
                               APPENDIX C
                    AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
     Tables C-l through C-6 are the calculation sheets for determining
total emissions during the peak period (6:00 to 9:00 a.m.) for the two
categories of automotive sources for each of the years 1977, 1980, and
1985 for Light Duty Vehicles and for Heavy Duty Vehicles.
     Exhaust and evaporative emission factors are taken from Appendix A.
Speed factors are taken from "An Interim Report on Motor Vehicle Emission
Estimation" by D. S. Kircher and D. P. Armstrong, EPA, October 1973.
     VMT shown are the total by speed class summed from Appendix B.  The
grand total peak hour emissions are the sum of the exhaust emissions, depen-
dent upon speed and the evaporative emissions, independent of speed.
                                     C-l

-------
       Table C-l.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS - 1977 LDV
Speed
10.45
12.45
13.45
14.45
15 . 45
16.45
17.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
26.45
27.45
28.45
29.45
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
35.45
36.45
37.45
38.45
40.45
42.45
VMT x 10~3
i — •
40.89
24.72
57.83
96.22
114.67
26.49
101.27
29.37
186.39
44.55
72.73
142.79
307.05
28.92
180.52
37.02
143.24
168.56
,34.73
118 . 64
156.53
117.58
454.66
69.96
187.47
241.74
25.56
28.43
17.90
Exhaust Speed
factor factor
2.443 1.36
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.17
1.13
1.10
1.06
1.02
0.99
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.87
0.84
0.83
0.81
0.79
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.69
0.68
0.67
0.66
0.63
0.61
Exhaust
emission
135.86
77.90
175.22
284.43
327.76
73.13
272.14
76.06
464.46
107.75
170.57
324.42
675.11
61.47
370.45
75.07
283.45
325.32
66.18
220.28
286.80
209.69
799.73
117 . 93
311.43
395.68
41.21
43.76
26.68
TOTAL VMT
EVAPORATIVE FACTOR

GRAND TOTAL
3255.90
0.710 g/mile
TOTAL EXHAUST EMISSIONS     6799.94
TOTAL EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS 2311.69
MEAN EXHAUST EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
MEAN TOTAL EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
                                           9111.63 (gxlO  )
                                             10.04 (tons)
                                              2.088
                                              2.798
                                    C-2

-------
Table C-2.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS - 1980 LDV

Speed
9.45
11.45
12.45
13.45
14.45
15.45
16.45
17.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
26.45
27.45
28.45
29.45
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
34.45
35.45
36.45
37.45
38.45
39.45
41.45
42.45
43.45
TOTAL VMT
EVAPORATIVE FACTOR:
GRAND TOTAL


VMT x 10
43.40
16.75
72.73
55.39
53.56
71.29
64.48
18.20
105.07
121.89
80.86
111.58
154.30
42.57
59.95
195.72
127.37
228.97
134.42
154.39
129.84
72.16
288.14
30.47
263.62
248.67
334.98
49.10
28 .11
37.52
20.06
136.55
33.93
3622.04
0.298 g/mile


Exhaust Speed
factor factor
1.324 1.39
1.32
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.17
1.13
1.10
1.06
1.02
0.99
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.87
0.84
0.83
0.81
0.79
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.71
0.69
0.68
0.67
0.66
0.64
0.62
0.61
0.60
TOTAL EXHAUST EMISSIONS
Exhaust
emission
79.87
29.27
124.22
91.67
85.81
110.43
96.47
26.51
147.46
164.61
105.99
141.82
189.99
50.73
69.06
217.67
139.97
245.56
140.60
159.44
130.65
71.65
278.49
29.05
247.81
260.06
301.59
43.56
24.56
31.79
16.47
110.28
26.95
3987.06
TOTAL EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS 1079.37


MEAN EXHAUST EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
MEAN TOTAL EMISSION
FACTOR (g/mile)

5066. 43 (g x 10~3
5. 58 (tons)
1.101
1.399
                              C-3

-------
Table C-3.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS - 1985 LDV

Speed
12.45
13.45
14.45
16.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
27.45
28.45
29.45
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
34.45
35.45
36.45
38.45
40.45
41.45
43.45
44.45
45.45
TOTAL VMT
EVAPORATIVE
GRAND TOTAL

MEAN EXHAUST
_ Exhaust
VMT x 10 factor
43.96 0.616
64.29
54.78
121.81
80.90
64.60
229.37
37.23
247.42
6.48
180.83
256.50
139.73
282.13
17.34
143.40
142.71
487.81
317.64
307.87
234.19
132.00
86.68
33.39
21.72
138.01
34.55
36.31
3943.65 TOTAL
FACTOR: 0.200 g/mile TOTAL


EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
Speed
factor
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.13
1.06
1.02
0.99
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.87
0.84
0.81
0.79
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.71
0.69
0.68
0.66
0.63
0.62
0.60
0.59
0.58
Exhaust
emission
34.93
49.50
40.83
84.79
52.82
40.59
139.88
22.02
141.74
3.59
96.91
132.72
69.72
137.30
8.33
67.13
65.93
219.36
140.88
134.65
99.54
55.29
35.24
12.96
8.30
51.01
12.56
12.97
EXHAUST EMISSIONS 1971.49
EVAPORATIVE



MEAN TOTAL EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
EMISSIONS 788.73
2760. 22(g x 10
3. 04 (tons)
0.500
0.700
                           C-4

-------
            Table C-4.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION -  1977 HDV
Speed
10.45
12.45
13.45
14.45
15.45
16.45
17.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
26.45
27.45
28.45
29.45
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
35.45
36.45
37.45
38.45
40.45
42.45
VMT x 10 3
8.07
4.88
11.32
18.99
22.62
5.23
19.98
5.80
36.78
8.80
14.36
28.17
60.61
5.71
35.63
7.31
28.27
33.27
6.85
23.42
30.89
23.20
89.74
13.81
37.01
47.71
5.04
5.61
3.53
Exhaust Speed
factor factor
14.631 1.36
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.17
1.13
1.10
1.06
1.02
0.99
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.87
0.84
0.83
0.81
0.79
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.69
0.68
0.67
0.66
0.63
0.61
Exhaust
emission
160.58
92.11
207.30
336.19
387.22
86.47
321.56
89.95
548.89
127.47
201.70
383.30
798.11
72.68
437.89
88.77
335.03
384.55
78.17
260.42
338.96
247.79
945.35
139.42
368.22
467.69
48.67
51.71
31.50
IPTAL VMT           642.61             TOTAL EXHAUST  EMISSIONS      8037.40
EVAPORATIVE FACTOR:   4.122 g/mile     TOTAL EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS   2648.84
GRAND TOTAL
    EXHAUST EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
    TOTAL EMISSION FACTOR   (g/mile)
10686.24(g x 10
   11.78(tons)
   12.507
   16.629
               -3,
                                          C-5

-------
Table C-5.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS - 1980 HDV

Speed
9.45
11.45
12.45
13 «*5
14*45
15.45
16.45
17.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
26.45
27.45
28.45
29.45'
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
34.45
35.45
36.45
37.45
38.45
39.45
41 45
~ JL • ™T 
-------
Table C-6.  AUTOMOTIVE HYDROCARBON EMISSION - 1985 HDV


Speed
12.45
13.45
14.45
16.45
18.45
19.45
20.45
21.45
22.45
23.45
24.45
25.45
27.45
28.45
29.45
30.45
31.45
32.45
33.45
34.45
35.45
36.45
38.45
40.45
41.45
43.45
44.45
45.45
TOTAL VMT
EVAPORATIVE
GRAND TOTAL

_ Exhaust
VMT x 10 factor
8.68 13.183
12.69
26.92
24.04
15.97
12.76
45.26
7.36
48.84
1.28
35.70
50.61
27.59
55.69
3.42
28.31
28.17
96.29
62.69
60.77
46.22
26.06
17.11
6.59
4.29
27.21
6.82
7.16
794.50 TOTAL
FACTOR: 3.000 g/mile TOTAL

,
Speed
factor
1.29
1.25
1.21
1.13
1.06
1.02
0.99
0.96
0.93
0.90
0.87
0.84
0.81
0.79
0.78
0.76
0.75
0.73
0.72
0.71
0.69
0.68
0.66
0.63
0.62
0.60
0.59
0.58
Exhaust
emission
147.61
209.12
429.41
358.12
223.16
171.58
590.70
93.15
598.79
15.19
409.45
560.44
294.61
579.99
35.71
283.64
278.52
926.66
595.04
568.80
420.43
233.61
148.87
54.73
35.06
215.23
53.05
54.75
EXHAUST EMISSIONS 8584 . 88
EVAPORATIVE


MEAN EXHAUST EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)
MEAN TOTAL
EMISSION FACTOR (g/mile)

EMISSIONS 2383.50
10968. 38(g x 10~3)
12.09(tons)
10.805
13.805
                             C-7

-------
                                 APPENDIX D
                          POWER GENERATING DATA

     Table D-l presents a summary of data filed by Baltimore Gas and Electric
Company (BGE)  with the Federal Power Commission.  Only boiler generating
facilities are listed.  Table D-2 is a more complete and recent estimate of
NO  emissions  provided by the company.  The locations of these generating
  .X.
facilities are shown in Figure D-l,  along with that facility operated by
Bethlehem Steel.   Figure D-2 shows the estimated growth in electrical gener-
ating capacity by BGE within the AQMA.  The drop in capacity within the AQMA
between 1973 and  1978 results from the large, nuclear base load plant at
Calvert Cliff, in St. Mary County, Maryland, coming on line during that
period.
                                     D-l

-------
              Table D-l.
EMISSION INVENTORY FOR POWER PLANTS
  IN BALTIMORE AQMA
  (1,000 tons/year)
1973
Plant
Wagner
Gould
Westport
Riverside
Crane
Brandon Shores
Design (MWe)
991
165
259
340
400
600
TSP
2.13
0.15
0.22
0.45
0.46
—
so2
28.95
3.78
3.78
6.58
7.68
—
1978
TSP
1.35
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.28
0.11
so2
13.76
0.10
0.03
0.21
3.78
0.89
1983
TSP
0.96
0.02
0.03
0.05
0.33
0.90
so2
11.28
0.20
0.18
0.44
4.37
7.39
Total
     3.41   50.77   1.80   18.77   2.29   23.86
                                     D-2

-------
             Table D-2.   ESTIMATED NITROGEN OXIDES EMISSIONS
          FROM ELECTRIC  GENERATING FACILITIES IN BALTIMORE ACMA
                           1973 THROUGH 1985(a)
                                (tons/year)
Units
C.P. Crane 1 and 2
C.P. Crane Gas Turbine
Gould Street 1, 2, and 3
Notch Cliff Gas Turbines
Ferryman Gas Turbines
Philadelphia Road Gas Turbines
Riverside 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
Riverside Gas Turbines
H. A. Wagner 1, 2, and 4
H. A. Wagner 3
H. A. Wagner Gas Turbine
Westport 1, 3, and 4
Westport Gas Turbine
Brandon Shores 1 and 2
Future 400 MW GT
Future 500 MW GT
1973
9,152
103
2,688
2,085
1,268
466
5,530
757
11,252
6,966
106
2,613
242
—
—
—
1975
3,150
45
591
97
2,260
237
1,596
320
8,820
6,903
40
525
113
—
—
—
1980
6,525
18
203
45
131
35
377
103
4,265
5,112
13
183
78
3,909
—
—
1985
6,525
18
269
0
131
35
1,017
30
3,698
5,607
' 13
432
78
4,250
262
328
Total
43,228
24,697
20,997
22,693
(a)
   Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, 2nd Edition, U.S. Environ-
   mental Protection Agency,  Research Triangle Park, N.C., April, 1973,
   amended through September  1973, pp. 1.1-3, 1.3-2, 3.3.1-1, 3.3.1-2.
                                     D-3

-------
                                                           HARFORD
                                                           COUNTY
                 CARROLL
                 COUNTY
BALTIMORE
  COUNTY
  FREDERICK
   COUNTY
                                  BALTIMORE CITY-/
                                               Lf
                      HOWARD
                      COUNTY
                                          ANNE
                                        ARUNDEL
                                         COUNTY
         MONTGOMERY
           COUNTY
 LEGEND
 1. FERRYMAN
 2. NOTCHCLIFF
 3. CRANE
 4. PHILADELPHIA
   ROAD
 5. WESTPORT
 6. GOULD
 7  RIVERSIDE
 8. BETHLEHEM
   STEEL
 9. WAGNER
10. BRANDON
   SHORES
1972
P
P
B
P
B
B
B
1
B
-
1978
P
P
B
P
P
P
P
1
B
B
1983
B
P
B
P
P
P
P
1
B
B
P  PEAK LOAD
B  BASE LOAD
I   INDUSTRIAL
            Figure D-1     Power generating  plants  BMAQMA
                                     D-4

-------
 12
 11
 10
           I   I   I  I  I   I  I  I   I   I  I   I   I
           I   I   I  I   i   I  I   I   I  I   I   I   I
          1973   1975
1978  1980
   YEAR
1983   1985
Figure  D-2.   Electric  power generating capacity
              within  Baltimore  AQMA
                    D-5

-------
                                APPENDIX E
                               INTRODUCTION
     The 1970 demographic data listed in Table E-l of this appendix repre-
sent the basic information used in the transportation analyses conducted in
the Baltimore metropolitan area.  The data was collected and analyzed by
the Baltimore Regional Planning Council and reported in "Unified Transpor-
tation Planning Process Technical Memorandum No.  5" (October 1973).  The
data included in this table can be divided into two general categories—
residential and non-residential.
     Residential data include:
             Population;
             Residential acreage;
             Household size; and
             Dwelling units.
     Non-residential data include:
             Total employment;
             Retail employment;
             Service employment;
             Office employment;
             Government employment;
             Intensive employment (manufacturing);
             Extensive employment (all other);
             Total acreage
The data are listed by Regional Planning District (RPD).
     Much of this information was obtained from 1970 Bureau of Census
tabulations.  Those items obtained directly from the housing and population
                                     E-l

-------
tables of the 1970 Census include Population and Household Size.  Employ-
ment data were obtained from a 1970 RFC Small Area Employment File obtained
from the Maryland Department of Employment and Security.
     Forecasts of demographic data for 1973, 1977, 1980, and 1985 are sum-
marized by Regional Planning District (RPD) in Tables E-2 through E-5,
respectively.  These forecasts were made by the Regional Planning Council
Unified Transportation Planning Process and were reported in their Techni-
cal Ilemorandum No. 10.  Residential and non-residential forecast data are
presented for the same categories as for the 1970 data  (Table E-l).
     Development of socio-economic forecasts on a zonal basis for each
dlternative was accomplished by the Regional Planning Council as a two-
stage process.  Population and employment totals were initially allocated
to Regional Planning Districts (RPD's) using an urban development alloca-
tit'll process based on relationships found in the 1970 base year.  The sec-
o.ij stage involved the disaggregation to the zonal level and the generation
 [ forecasts of other socio-economic variables required for travel simula-
tion purposes.  The disaggregated data is not reported here.
     The urban development allocation process used to forecast population
ind employment to RPD's is known as the Urban Systems Model (USM).  This
ter of computer programs predicts the location of activities at one point
in time, in contrast to allocating growth increments, as a function of a
-et of independent variables for that point in time.  Initially, for each
forecast year, the location of employment in firms of over 250 employees
  ;s established in accordance with the development patterns by means of a
  aual allocation process.  Given the location of large employment, the USM
computer model first allocated population to RPD's on the basis of:
        Observed journey-to-work relationships found in 1970.
        The specific transportation network and accessibility patterns
        being considered.
        The attractiveness of each RPD as defined by 1970 calibration
        factors and planned development densities.
 ^ .t.  employment in small firms was allocated by the USM to RPD's by relat-
  t these employment locations to residential and large employment locations.

-------
The process of allocating population and small employment was an iterative
procedure whereby diminishing amounts of population and small employment
were allocated until the control totals for population and small employ-
ment for the region were reached.
                                   E-3

-------
Table E-l.  1970 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
201
202
203
204
205
206
2.07
208
209

Population
19914
8382
23272
28410
38298
51994
59489
44053
19689
17635
53826
2229<.
38658
16403
29453
49198
103407
16449
87165
56704
24248
19645
10175
21702
246 59
19484
28244
2955
44204
11299
17890
29208
25016
9562
16702

Res.
area
^acres)
1352
681
2102
911
1268
2682
2318
862
356
375
649
556
1571
752
487
733
1300
48
856
646
464
560
95
195
560
499
2279
290
2833
819
1259
3219
3802
406
0

HH
size(a>
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.06
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45
3.45

ou(b)
6508
2739
7605
9284
12516
16992
19441
14396
6434
5763
17590
7286
12633
5360
9625
16078
33793
5392
28485
18531
7924
6420
3325
7092
8137
6367
8187
857
12813
3275
5186
8466
7251
2772
4841

Total
employment
(persons)
3282
3536
7720
4286
7386
8013
9887
9297
8702
11302
33548
4766
5986
1344
4201
10187
22891
118350
35113
16592
52454
10261
17902
16884
8586
13677
11719
13009
16786
4339
3113
5158
2388
2300
23137

Retail
employees
820
232
1241
1306
1590
2044
3548
2370
2403
1135
5437
1318
2470
870
668
1476
3039
16772
4214
3805
1809
1772
3966
1497
711
1268
1679
76
7045
856
532
1074
584
223
24

Service
employees
524
1023
956
387
1018
1712
1180
1091
427
935
5528
265
808
105
658
1044
3127
15951
3551
1754
1476
413
510
1514
892
420
784
588
1894
129
369
846
530
202
113

Office
employees
427
311
528
348
129
494
292
207
139
1159
2189
144
363
34
82
65
460
19997
623
433
382
87
138
104
34
76
209
49
597
'40
6
168
79
0
43

Cov't
employ-
ees
1110
1358
2876
1164
3509
1496
2215
4046
2974
1450
10679
676
672
159
1232
2799
10979
31563
13419
1987
8266
2278
1041
1451
2333
1122
6752
328
3454
1450
884
1911
619
1575
22847

Intensive
0
174
1208
27
70
384
619
637
1467
4872
4335
1417
73
5
1075
2279
2206
12310
5746 .
5385
28955
2687
8468
6985
3134
8016
544
9744
1322
1425
627
113
33
0
0

Extensive
401
438
911
1154
1070
1883
2033
946
1292
1311
5430
946
1600
171
486
2524
4080
21756
7560
3228
11566
3074
3779
5333
1422
2775
1751
2223
2474
439
695
1046
540
300
110

Total
area
(acres)
1570
1630
2800
1430
1950
3640
4230
1240
1430
970
1660
1300
2790
1340
1430
1370
1890
910
1820
1290
4300
1810
970
1250
1620
3790
8080
7310
7110
7370
14811
10930
18990
5324
14040


-------
   Table E-l  Ccontinued) .   1970 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR BALTIMORE REGION
R?D
10
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
03
04
05
06
07

Population
10286
3234
22'43
5647
26433
3174
21979
16047
5379
4463
19310
24466
6062
70815
31118
16914
4198
48917
16892
2715
10577
28164
32097
39880
12958
15332
45773
51022
34731
11340
17445
4519
13460
9243
9086

Res.
area
^acresj^
2022
355
126
1063
1932
1142
2172
1802
1415
587
1616
3073
1730
4545
3120
126
689
4120
1242
578
2356
2212
2359
2216
1119
975
3492
1972
1366
1179
3068
680
2199
710
824
HH
slze(a
3.45
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.28
3.59
3.59
3.59
3.59
3.59
DUO>)
2982
986
664
1722
8059
968
6701
4892
1640
1361
5887
7459
1848
21590
9487
5157
1280
14914
5150
828
3225
8587
9786
12158
3951
4735
13955
15556
10589
3457
4859
i259
3749
2575
2531
••Total
employment
(persons)
4427
1005
1095
1036
6339
944
7345
14993
1698
1111
3101
12699
3374
42120
6256
3617
927
7338
1857
2151
1874
27016
9946
12473
5435
6530
6861
10655
8690
34366
7645
4396
7850
3291
3420
Retail
employees
976
183
100
114
1183
22
1465
1508
35
19
864
2329
141
9300
2559
1039
147
1654
535
91
270
5514
2079
1253
948
833
2087
2839
3125
605
1244
64
554
337
373

Service
employees
258
151
138
203.
632
244
1034
2189
203
198
458
2493
230
5555
926
292
70
1134
322
142
244
1352
1357
875
286
314
686
825
797
168
2943
67
754
382
209
Office
employees
46
0
31
0
85
6
215
730
18
0
103
495
11
'4850
389
68
10
137
78
0
47
661
221
270
87
96
264
348
304
93
231
9
1147
63
0
Gov't
crop 1 oy-
ees
495
157
59
138
2348
290
681
1523
67
312
1025
1847
2462
9182
1195
662
134
2086
427
1290
134
16512
4005
1149
331
1185
1846
2100
1155
950
1090
3980
1626
219
671
Intensive
1778
8
273
4
722
1
1287
5560
890
46
82
3350
198
5888
72
252
285
454
27
228
357
918
287
4668
1514
3107
420
2328
1903
30779
864
0
2736
798
506
Extensive
874
506
494
577
1369
381
2663
3483
485
456
569
2185
332
7345
1115
1304
281
1873
468
400
772
1859
1997
4258
2269
995
1558
2215
1412
1771
1273
276
763
1492
1659
Total
aren
(acres)
12810
21620
18270
31760
13010
16940
6740
10590
17770
16230
5970
14250
2820
10260
5080
14370
11810
8470
2240
4170
12560
7270
7710
6730
3300
4680
8360
4480
5140
6170
18330
9960
18800
12410
13820

(a)
(b)
Household size
Dwelling unit

-------
              Table E-2.  1973 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
R?D
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
201
202
203
204
205'
206
207
208
209
Population
20421
9474
23130
27972
38021
52166
60944
44202
20546
18594
52269
22179
38425
16810
29880
49300
99326
18910
81960
52919
23332
19711
9924
21950
25474
19524
30214
3180
45845
14689
20872
32451
27983
11358
16862
Res.
area
Cacres)
1375
736
2102
991
1268
2692
2391
870
363
412
649
556
1586
772
508
739
1300
49
856
646
464
564
95
200
589
501
2477
312
2980
1060
1557
3543
4099
586
16
HH , .
\ 3j
8 1 ZG
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
2.81
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
3.17
DUOO
7267
3372
8231
9954
13531
18564
21688
15730
7312
6617
18601
7893
13674
5982
10633
17544
35347
6730
29167
18832
8303
7015
3532
7811
9065
6948
9531
1003
14462
4634
6584
10237
8827
3583
5319
Total
employment
(persons)
3227
3504
7758
4323
7319
7799
9790
9196
8731
11133
33754
4660
5909
1556
4047
10153
29862
120933
34363
16221
53116'
11021
18241
18938
8522
13624
10410
14919
17179
5313
3998
5417
2517
2341
23536
Retail
employees
804
220
1202
1279
1557
1950
3474
2321
2312
1153
5322
1286
2434
948
635
1450
3641
16313 '
3998
3648
1758
1904
4176
1882
731
1278
1270
229
7241
1153
531
1147
617
225
40
Service
employees
510
1016
1077
367
993
1667
1142
1059
452
958
5394
243
789
122
633
1024
3767
16176
3292
1620
1846
492
770
2247
855
442
562
619
1905
191
364
873
541
202
121
Office
employees
425
310
523
346
128
486
281
214
147
1613
2148
139
359
38
76
13
627
20609
588
414
370
103
170
136
30
78
149
62
602
56
6
178
83
3
45
Cov't
employ-
"ees
1088
1344
2845
1139
3493
1439
2218
4036
3022
1467
11221
650
644
213
1169
2797
15120
33960
13315
1918
7446
2287
1030
1553
2306
1126
6423
2356
3483
1526
888
1988
654
1602
23204
Intensive
0
172
1197
24
66
366
630
628
1475
4608
4254
1402
67
16
1063
2269
2497
12072
5972
5432
29945
2853
8250
7288
3170
7919
163
9620
1330
1883
627
130
40
.3
3.6
Extensive
i
401
442
914
1166
1085
1891
2044
951
1324
1333
5416
940
1616
219
470
2550
4210
21802
7650
3188
11751
3382
3845
5832
1417
2811
1625
2033
2619
504
722
1102
582
311
123
Total
.iren
(acres)
1570
1630
2800
1430
1950
3640
4230
1240
1430
970
1660
1300
2740
1340
1430
1370
1890
910
1820
1290
4300
1810
970
1250
1620
3790
8080
7310
7110
7370
4811
0930
8990
5324
14040
ra
i

-------
   Table E-2 Ccontinued) .   1973 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
R?D
210
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
!318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
603
604
605
606
607
Population
11678
3699
2492
5829
30881
3667
24339
17928
5512
4910
21295
28925
6271
71212
31699
20821
i4266
50457
17402
3889
12894
30984
35215
40095
12505
17120
45667
49861
34133
11357
20684
5154
36206
10682,
11298
Res.
area
acres)
2162
386
143
1076
2229
1174
2329
1928
1424
617
1748
3460
1744
4572
3143
386
694
4208
1257
656
2511
2409
2563
2287
1119
1081
3541
1972
1366
1180
3313
744
4466
854
1045
HH , .
size(a>
3.17
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02
3.02 .
3.02
3.31
3.31
3.31
3.31
3.31
DUO)
3684
1225
825
1930
10225
1214
8059
5936
1825
1626
7051
9578
2076
23580
10496
6894
1412
16707
5762
1288
4269
10280
11661
13276
4141
5669
15121
16510
11302
3761
6249
1557
10938
3227
3413
••Total
employment
(persons)
4320
1014
1116
1037
6660
960
7430
15891
1703
1149
3145
12739
3432
43133
6245
4080
913
7594
1857
2491
1904
32432
10744
12845
5336
7036
6841
10318
8426
3391
8727
4505
16233
3837
3363
Retail
employees
956
182
94
112
1149
22
1489
1554
31
23
870
2236
145
8945
2546
1100
145
1642
532
120
284
6639
2168
1287
917
877
2066
2775
3026
536
1405
82
1651
420
341
Service
smployees
233
147
136
213
636
242
1039
2352
190
197
458
2400
230
5558
915
3J8
62
1121
316
155
252
1815
1445
879
260
311
667
765
739
137
3099
75
2190
429
187
Office
employees
42
0
29
0
90
6
217
757
16
0
103
475
12
4663
387
75
10
136
78
,4
49
918
280
274
77
101
263
333
291
85
289
12
1229
70
0
Gov't
employ-
ees
461
154
57
128
2695
291
696
1516
59
400
1037
1805
2497
10197
1184
710
132
2087
422
1356
152
20202
4485
1166
311
1231
1832
1993
1059
913
1275
4046
. 3017
274
734
Intensive
1760
8
293
4
705
1
1288
5985
926
47
83
3631
199
6497
70
509
281
450
26
414
362
1100
318
4922
1505
3099
417
2288
10277
30490
880
4
6754
980
472
Extensive
865
570
506
596
1385
398
2700
3727
480
482
593
2195
348
7272
1144
1367
283
2158
483
442
804
1956
2049
4346
2266
1398
1591
2195
1492
1743
1780
286
1202
1670
1627
Total
area
>cres)
12510
21620
15270
31760
13010
16940
6740
10590
17770
16230
5970
14250
2820
10260
5080
14370
11810
8470
2240
4170
12560
7270
7710
6730
3300
4680
8360
4480
5140
6170
18830
9960
18800
12410
13820
(a)   Household size
(b)   Dwelling unit

-------
            Table E-3.  1973 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
R?D
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
Population
21097
10929
22941
27389
37653
52397
62883
44400
22359
21270
50193
22026
38116
17352
30451
49436
93886
22124
75021
47873
22110
19799
9590
22281
26242
19576
32840
3480
45845
13706
24847
36775
31940
13753
17076
Res.
area
acres)
1407
809
2102
991
1268
2705
2489
880
372
517
649
556
1644
800
535
746
1300
50
856
646
464
568
95
206
627
857
2739
343
2980
1060
1954
3975
4495
825
37
< 	
HH , .
size(a>
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
2.69
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
3.04
DUO>)
7843
4062
8528
10182
13997
19478
23376
16506
8312
8439
18659
8188
14170
6451
11320
18378
34902
8225
27889
17797
8219
7360
3565
8283
9755
7277
10803
1145
15081
4509
8173
12097
10507
4524
5617
• • Total -
employment
(persons)
3153
3460
3153
4240
7230
7513
9662
9060
8770
10908
33948
4519
5805
1840
3421
10109
37822
124378
33362
15725
54000
12033
18694
21678
8436
13553
8665
17467
17179
5313
3181
5763
2693
2395
24069
Retail
smployees
782
203
194
1244
1520
1825
3377
2255
2190
1178
5168
1244
2385
1053
590
1414
4444
15702
3710
3440
1689
2080
4455
2395
679
1291
726
434
7241
668
530
1245
661
228
59
Service
employees
490
1006
1238
345
959
1606
1093
1017
485
988
5214
214
764
146
601
998
4620
16476
2946
1443
2340
597
1117
3224
807
470
267
661
1905
191
358
909
557
202
131
Office
employees
422
308
515
342
114
474
265
191
159
1633
2092
131
354
45
69
60
850
21425
6152
389
354
124
214
178
24
80
68
79
602
56
6
190
87
1
49
Gov't
employ-
ees
1059
1325
2803
1106
3471
1364
2222
4022
3085
1490
11943
616
607
285
1085
2794
20640
37157
13175
1826
6352
2365
1015
1689
2269
1131
5985
5058
3483
1526
894
2089
700
1637
23681
Intensive
0
166
1183
21
60
345
646
617
1485
4257
4146
1382
66
30
1048
2257
2885
11754
5218
5495
31266
3073
7961
7692
3217
7791
163
9456
1330
1883
627
152
50
1
8
Extensive
400
448
919
1182
1157
1901
2060
957
1366
1362
5399
932
1636
282
449
2586
4383
21865
7771
3134
11999
3794
3932
6499
1409
2859
1456
1780
2619
592
759
1178
638
326
140
Total
area
(acres)
1570
1630
2800
1430
1950
3640
4230
1240
1430
970
1660
1300
2740
1340
1430
1370
1890
910
1820
1290
4300
1810
970
1250
1620
3790
8080
7310
7110
7370
14811
10930
18990
5324
14090
00

-------
       Table E-3 (continued).   1977 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
210
303
304
305
306
307
303
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
603
604
605
606
607
Population
13533
4320
2824'
6072
36811
4311
27303
20435
5689
5506
23941
34870
6550
71742
32473
26030
4356
52509
18082
5454
15983
34744
39394
42379
11900
19237
47624
48314
33336
11380
25009
5999
66743
12599
14246
Res.
area
[acres)
2348
427
164
1092
2624
1218
2539
2096
1435
656
1924
3768
1762
4607
3174
734
699
4325
1278
761
2717
2661
2836
2383
1119
1222
3607
1972
1366
1181
3461
828
7363
1045
1340
HH , .
siZe(a'
3.04
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
2.09
3.16
3.16
3.16
3.16
3.16
DUO>)
4452
1495
977
2101
12737
1492
9447
7071
1969
1905
8284
12066
2266
24824
11236
9007
1507
18169
6257
1887
5530
12022
13631
14664
4118
6656
16479
16718
11535
3938
7914
1898
21121
3987
4508
Total
employment
(persons)
4177
1027
1143
1038
7087'
981
7544
17089
1709
1199
3203
12793
3509
44483
6229
4697
895
7935
1857
2943
2010
39652
11809
13340
5204
7710
6815
9942
8066
33295
10171
4649
27409
4566
3286
Retail
employees
932
182
86
110
1103
23
1522
1615
25
28
879
2113
151
8472
2528
1180
143
1626
528
159
302
8140
2288
1332
877
936
2037
2689
2894
445
1620
106
3113
520
297
Service
employees
201
141
134
190
640
238
1047
2570
174
197
458
2276
231
5562
900
353
51
1103
307
171
264
1966
1563
883
225
349
641
685
663
102
3308
84
4106
491
159
Office
employees
38
0
27
0
97
6
"221
798
14
1
104
446
13
4413 :
384
85
9
134
77
8
51
995
388
278
63
108
260
313
275
75
365
17
1338
79
0
Gov't
employ-
ees
417
149
55
114
3158
293
717
1507
48
411
1053
1749
2545
11551
1169
773
130
2089
415
1445
177
25123
5125
1188
285
1293
1814
1850
930
864
1521
4134
4872
346
819
Intensive
1737
8
321
3
682
1
1289
6551
975
47
84
4000
201
7309
66
853
777
446
26
663
370
1343
358
5260
1493
3089
413
2236
1889
30104
900
8
12112
1222
427
Extensive
854
547
522
621
1406
420
2749
4052
474
516
625
2207
370
7174
1182
1452
285
2537
504
497
848
2086
2117
4399
2261
1935
1649
2169
1415
1705
2456
300
1788
1907
1585
Total
area
(acres)
12510
21620
15270
31760
13010
16940
6740
10590
17770
16230
5970
14250
2820
10260
5080
14370
11810
8470
2240
4170
12560
7270
7710
6730
3300
4680
8360
4480
5140
6170
18830
9960
18800
12410
13820
>£>
        (a)  Household size
        (b)  Dwelling unit

-------
            Table E-4.   1980 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
113
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
Population
21604
12021
22799
26951
37376
52509
b4338
44549
22545
20831
48636
21911
37883
17759
30878
49538
89805
24534
69816
4 40 38
21194
19865
9339
22529
26817
19616
34810
3705
•49673
19321
27829
40018
34907
15549
17236
Res.
area
(acres)
1430
864
2102
991
1268
2715
2562
887
379
500
649
556
1621
820
556
752
1300
51
856
646
464
572
95
210
656
505
2936
365
3323
1622
2252
4299
4792
1005
53
HH , .
slze(a)
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.60
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
2.93
DUO>)
8309
4624
8769
10366
14375
20219
24745
17134
8671
8012
18706
8427
14570
6830
11876
19053
34540
9436
26852
16957
8152
7640
3592
8665
10314
7545
11880
1265
16953
6594
9498
13658
11637
5307
5883
Total
employment
(persons)
3098
3428
7847
4177
7163
7299
9565
8959
8799
10739
34119
4413
5728
2052
3687
10075
43793
126961
32612
15354
54662
12793
19033
23732
8372
13500
7336
19377
18097
7586
3201
6022
2825
2435
24468
Retail
employees
765
191
1112
1217
1490
1731
3303
2206
2098
1196
5053
.1212
2349
1131
557
1388
5046
15243
3495
3283
3638
2212
4665
2780
639
1302
317
587
7698
1846
529
1318
694
230
76
Service
smployees
476
999
1339
327
934
1561
1055
:985
510
1011
5080
192
745
163
576
978
5260
16701
2687
1309
2710
676
1377
3957
770
492
45
692
1932
377
353
936
568
202
138
Office
employees
420
307
510
340
108
466
254
184
167
1648
2051
126
330
49
63
58
1017
22037
507
370
342
146
246
211
19
82
8
92
614
94
6
200
91
1
51
Gov't
employ-
ees
1037
1311
2772
1081
3455
1307
2225
4012
3133
1507
12485
590
579
339
1022
2792
24781
39554
13071
1757
5532
2424
1004
1791
2242
1135
5656
7084
3549
1702
898
2165
735
1664
24038
Intensive
0
168
1172
18
55
325
657
608
1493
3993
4065
1367
53
40
1036
2247
3176
11515
4991
5542
32256
3239
7743
7995
3253
7694
0
9332
1347
2950
627
169
57
1
12
Extensive
400
452
922
1194
1121
1909
2071
964
•1398
1384
5385
926
1652
330
433
2612
4513
21911
7861
3093
12184
4102
3998
6998
1404
2895
1330
1590
2957
657
786
1234
680
337
153
Total
area
(acres)
IS 70
•i J f\J
1610
.LU J\J
2800
£. \J\J\J
1410
J-*T J\J
i Q in
JL3 J\J
lAAn
JDHU
A? If)
H£ j\J
1 240
iiH \J
1410
JLH -J\J
970
7 / \J
^ &f*r\
J.OOU
i inn
J. JUV
7 7An
£ / *TU
1 140
JL JH U
i A in
J.*4 j\J
1 170
JL J / U
i con
J. QJ \J
QI n
y L\J
1820
J.OZ. \J
1 9Qn
ii. 7U
A inn
*4 JUU
i sin
JLO J_w
970
s 1 \J
1 7 sn
JLZ. J\J
1 620
JL\J £, \J
17QD
J / j U
flnan
ouou
7nn
/ JX«J
71 1 (1
/ J.J.U
717O
/ J / U
t / Q 1 1
L4olJ_
L0930
i QO (lf\
.8990
5324
14090
tn
i

-------
Table E-4 (continued).  1980 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
210
303
304
305
306
307
303
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
.JJ*s
•po
J — «J
321

12 3
jf-j
**9A
JiH
T> ^
Ji. J
T>/C
J-D
•*?7
J/ /
070
Ji O
o?Q
J-L 7
-i-JA
J J\J
AH**
OU J
AHA
QU-4
AfK
OU.P
AHA
OvJD
607
Population
14925.
4785
3073
6254
41259
4799
29845
22316
5822
5954
25928
39329
6759
72140
33054
29937
4424
54049
18593
6628
18300
37564
42522
43450
11447
20825
48418
47154
32738
11397
28251
6634
89279
14038
16458
Res.
area
[acres)
2487
458
181
1105
2921
1250
2696
2222
1444
686
2056
4066
1776
4634
3197
994
704
4413
1293
839
2872
2849
3040
2454
1119
1328
3656
1972
1366
1182
3886
892
9577
1189
1561
HH ; .
(a
slzev \
2.93
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79 .
2.79
2.79
, 2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
2.79
3.05
3.05
3.05
3.05
3.05
DuCb)
5094
1715
1101
2242
14788
1720
10697
7999
2087
2134
9292
14096
2422
25857
11847
10730
1586
19372 .
6664
2376
6559
13464
17033
15573
4103
7464
17354
16901
11605
4085
9263
2175
29272
4603
5396
Total
employment
(persons)
4070
1036
1164
1039
7408.
997
7629
17987
1714
1237
3247
12833
O C £. "J
3567
45495
6218
5160
881
8191
1857
3283
2091
45068
12607
13712
5105
8215
6795
9636
7796
32836
11253
4758
38792
5112
3229
Retail
employees
913
181
' 80
107
1069
23
1546
1661
21
32
885
2020
155
8117
2514
1241
141
1614
525
188
316
9265
7377
1366
846
980
2016
2625
2795
376
1781
124
4210
598
265
Service
employees
176
137
132
185
644
236
1052
2733
161
196
458
2183
231
5566
889
379
43
1090
301
184
272
2229
1651
887
199
304
622
625
605
. 74
3464
92
5542
538
136
Office
employees
34
0
24
0
1102
6
-223
821
12.
1
104
428
13
i 4227
382
92
9
133
77
12
53
'1052
416
282
53
113
259
298
262
67
423
20
1420
80
0
Gov't
employ-
ees
383
146
53
104
3505
294
732
1500
40
419
1065
1707
2880
12566
1158
823.1
128
2090
410
1511
195
28813
5605
1204
265
1339
1800
1743
834
827
1706
4200
6263
401
882
Intensive
1719
8
341
3
665
1
1290
6976
1011
48
86
4278
202
7918
64
1110
273
442
25
849
375
• 1826
389
5513
•1484
3081
410
2196
1883
29815
916
12
16130
1404
393
Extensive
845
564
534
640
1423
437
2786
4296
469
•541
649
2217
386
7101
1211
1515
287
2822
519
539
880
2183
2169
4460
2258
2338
1688
2149
1417
1677
2963
310
2227
2085
1557
Total
area
(acres)
L2510
21620
15270
31760
13010
16940
6740
10590
17770
16230
5970
14250
2820
10260
5080
14370
11810
8470
2240
4170
12500
7250
7710
6730
3300
4680
8360
4480
5140
6170
18830
9960
18800
12410
13820
(a)   Household size
(b)   Dwelling unit

-------
               Table E-5.  1985 DEMOGRAPHIC  DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE BALTIMORE REGION
RPD
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
103
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
116
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
203
209
Population
22117
12057
23144
27654
38092
53013
65599
45197
23084
20768
50348
23589
38439
18269
30823
49445
88471
26112
70337
44186
20622
19567
9280
21698
27191
19519
36350
3898
52399
22705
36660
50403
39310
17846
18488
Res.
area
acres)
1426
866
2105
1002
1288
2735
2618
886
379
500
649
588
1663
845
554
746
1300
52
856
641
464
568
95
205
675
503
3089
385
3519
1960
3136
5340
5252
1235
178
HH
size'3'
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.54
2.86.
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
2.86
DuCb)
8707
4747
9112
10887
14997
20872
25826
17794
9088
8176
19822
9287
15133
7193
12135
19467
34831
10280
27692
17396
8119
7703
3654
8543
10705
7685
12710
1363
18321
7939
12818
17633
13815
6240
6464
Total
employment
(persons)
3239
3584
8033
4273
7251
7527
11846
9154
9034
10725
35945
4530
5957
2184
3829
10436
51203
138581
33981
15495
57582
15414
18664
24355
8654
14493
7890
21221
20705
8228
3840
8446
3108
3298
26838
Retail
employees
798
234
1158
1239
1508
1788
3817
2270
2185
1217
5340
1234
2411
1169
579
1503
6027
15255
3730
3309
1644
2725
4742
2912
689
1440
385
893
8565
1981
724
1914
775
414
91
Service
employees
492
1013
1384
335
944
1573
1222
1016
540
1024
5869
202
759
175
589
1030
6642
17235
2939
1346
3326
1131
1338
4176
829
752
114
1022
2511
446
427
1517
594
284
145
Office
employees
424
312
516
341
112
470
335
194
182
1644
2513
130
357
57
67
71
1930
29112
545
376
344
202
252
222
28
101
10
145
801
11*
30
299
100
26
53
Gov't
employ-
ees
1085
1351
2810
1102
3456
1343
3462
4032
3382
1510
12721
610
625
372
1071
2842
28307
43485
13642
1700
5481
2503
1025
1808
2264
1174
5814
7848
4096
1733
1067
3003
803
2096
26365
Intensive
3
176
1185
20
58
326
769
620
1301
3910
4018
1379
64
47
1046
2284
3627
kk563
5142
5504
34375
4141
7292
8143
3310
7886
50
9562
1721
3017
669
308
74
43
15
Extensive
435
499
980
1237
1174
2017
2241
1022
.1444
1345
5484
974
1741
366
477
2704
4669
21930
7984
3191
12410
4717
4015
7095
1473
3206
1517
1752
3011
916
924
1404
763
436
168
Total
area
(acres)
1570
1630
2800
1430
1950
3640
4230
1240
1430
970
1660
1300
2740
1340
1430
1370
1890
910
1820
1290
4300
1810
970
1250
1620
3790
8080
7310
7110
7370
14811
10930
18990
5324
14040
m

h-1
to

-------
 Table E-5 (continued;) .  1985 DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT FOR THE  BALTIMORE REGION
R?D

210
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
313
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
JJ(>
327
328
329
330
331
603
604
605
606
607
Population

17481
5857
4077
6321
50165 '
6924
31048
23459
7233
10407
32700
42121
6963
73929
32757
34060
4489
57568
19571
7081
20828
40270
44543
45197
lLOt.9
22J07
54830
47492
33274
11569
34840
12780
95520
25198
25350
Res.
area
[acres)

2752
530
248
1109
3514
1391
2776
2298
1538
983
2508
4228
1790
4753
3191
1269
708
4606
1340
869
3041
3020
3158
2570
1119
1427
4074
1972
1366
1219
4406
1506
10094
2305
2450
HH , .
size(a}

2.86
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.72
2.98
2.98.
2.98
2.98
2.98
DUO>)

6112
2153
1449
2324
18443
2546
11415
8625
2659
3826
12022
15486
2560
27180
12043
12522
1650
21165
7195
2603
7657
14807
16376
16616
4286
8201
20158
17460
12233
4253
11691
4288
32054
8456
8507
Total
employment
(persons)

5365
1131
1396
1071.
10225
1364
8015
19408
1749
1637
3922
14629
3632
47931
6543
5915
882
9498
1937
4644
3258
46544
13392
15323
5612
8866
7173
9876
8032
33007
12849
5739
38240
7801
5055
Retail
employees

1148
192
103
106
2054
72
1677
2155
22
132
1190
2389
175
8696
2604
1392
140
2071
536
491
477
9601
2526
187ft
926
1365
2127
2678
2848
362
2205
1213
4223
1336
691
Service
imployees

372
137
137
177
953
254
1089
2849
156
234
519
2471
236
6084
914
440
35
1215
302
238
393
2300
1844
1021
243
427
657
635
621
62
3501
228
5750
976
382

Office
employees

64
1
29
0
221
12
237
858
12
12
123
146
646
15
4434
393
109
9
173
78
35
95
1093
617
485
69
132
273
299
258
69
310
82
1541
141
53
Gov't
employ-
ees

540
173
93
101
4269
500
806
1903
41
536
1195
2278
2574
13209
1226
916
128
2508
425
2233
365
29621
5683
1401
317
1450
1874
1787
902
822
2510
4478
6241
628
1106

Intensive

1984
10
347
3
'1122
10
1323
7225
1017
69
123
4408
206
8209
83
1153
276
564
27
1014
668
1607
438
6034
1508
3420
431
2218
1891
30049
958
85
18245
2047
918

Extensive
Total
area
Kacres)
	 1 	
1258
618
687
685
1606
516
2884
4417
•501
655
773
2451
426
7242
1315
1904
301
2924
569
634
1?60
2292
2264
46SO
2550
2251
1811
2258
1512
1644
3166
386
2249
2671
1905

12510
21620
15270
31760
13010
16940
6740
10590
17770
16230
5970
14250
2820
10260
5080
14370
11810
8470
2240
4170
12360
7270
7710
67 JO
3300
4680
8360
4460
5140
6170
18830
9960
18800
12410
13820

(a)
(b)
Household size
Dwelling unit

-------
                                   APPENDIX F
                                CONTROL MEASURES

POTENTIAL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Domestic and Commercial Heating
Improve Domestic and Commercial Building Insulation - Improving the build-
ing code specifications for insulation of domestic and commercial structures
would bring about a substantial saving in B.T.U.'s.
Control Room Temperature for Air Conditioning and Heating - Central Air
Conditioning represents over 25 percent of the annual residential elec-
trical power consumption.
     Realizable savings from reduction of the thermostat set-point is  about
one to two percent for each degree of reduction.  Hittman cites a Honeywell
study showing that setting the thermostat back from 75° to 68° for eight
hours each night would result in an 11 percent savings in heat requirements
in the Baltimore region.
Concentrate New Development at Densities Which Allow for Measures to Reduce
Emissions Per Capita or Per Unit of Production - Increasing multi-family
housing  (as  opposed  to detached  units),  operating fewer larger industrial
and  power  generation facilities  (instead of  many small ones),  and carefully
locating new sources may  result  in reduced emissions per capita through
economies  of scale providing increased feasibility for new control equipment,
as well  as increased operating efficiencies.
Reduce Window Area - Infiltration of air around windows and doors and through
gaps in  walls,  floors, and ceilings insulation constitutes 55 percent of the
total "load  factor"  that  can be  counteracted by the heating system and 42
percent  of the -load  factor for the cooling system.
Increase Fuel Costs  - Higher cost of fuel would force consumers to conserve
but  the  regressive nature of such costs to individuals with low incomes
should be  considered.
Pjlurnal  Room Temperature  - A substantial savings in fuel demand could be
gained by  introduction of diurnal room temperature.

                                     F-l

-------
Reduce Ash Content of Fuel - Processing of fuel to reduce the amount of ash
content would reduce the amount emitted during ignition.
Improve Furnace Design - Increasing the efficiency of furnace combustion by
improving design specification could have an overall effectiveness of from
5 to 10 percent.
Improve Maintenance of Heating System - Building codes if amended to include
more frequent inspections of heating systems to enforce a higher degree of
efficiency could realize a 5 to 10 percent effectiveness.
Modify Pilot Light - Pilot lights in gas appliances annually use eight percent
total gas consumed.  Substituting electrical igniters for pilot lights,  to-
gether with better oven insulation, could save 20 to 30 percent of the energy
consumption of a gas kitchen range.
Design Home Heating and Air Conditioning System as a Unit - A greater per-
centage of efficiency is obtained by use of a bi-modal climate control unit
as a means of home temperature control.  A 2 percent range of effectiveness
is possible with such systems.
Orientation of Buildings and Windows - A modification of the designed build-
ing and window orientation can effectively reduce heating and air condi-
tioning demand from 2 to 5 percent.
Install Control Devices on Small Combustion Units - The effectiveness of
implementing this program ranges from 50 to 100 percent depending on the
degree to which it is enforced.  Changing the design specifications to modify
units with control equipment would be the most effective method of imple-
mentation.  An alternate approach is the addition of a "black box" such as a
high efficiency cyclone or main baghouse.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Industrial Process and Heating
Reduce Demand for Industrial Products - By far, the most significant sources
of particulates in the Baltimore AQMA are the industrial process emissions.
Furthermore, additional industrial sources are not easy  to  identify., quanti-
ate, or control.  As discussed, the background levels of particulates ranged
around 40 ug/m3; therefore, only about 20 yg/m  of air quality are available
to disperse and dilute particulate emissions in the Baltimore metropolitan area.
                                     F-2

-------
Assuming that the emission inventory missed some of the sources, or assuming
that the pollution sources discharged more than is credited, the control mea-
sures may or may not achieve the goal of maintaining the NAAQS.
     Industrial sources accounted for 55 percent of the total particulate
emissions in the Baltimore AQMA in 1973.  In the study reported on herein, it
was projected that in 1985 industrial sources would still account for 50 per-
cent of the total.  To further reduce these process emissions will require
application of more stringent emission standards.  The Environmental Protection
Agency is developing New Source Performance Standards for various classes of
industry which will require application of the best available control tech-
nology.
     To carry out a more thorough analysis of the potential control for in-
dustrial process emissions would require an analysis specific by industry
class.  In this AQMA, it also would be possible to look carefully at the major
industrial sources when the final AQMP is prepared.
Exclude High Pollutant Sources from AQMA - See Particulates, Stationary Sources.
Modify Production Hours - A decrease in the production hours per week through
local ordinances would force an industry to shorten work shifts to match out-
put.  The loss of income for the workers would probably outweigh the bene-
fits derived through possible 2 percent effectiveness range.
Modify Raw Material Inputs - Improving raw material specifications in in-
dustrial processing would have a potential range of effectiveness of from 2
to 5 percent.  Selection of raw materials of high grade which will produce
less residuals during process should be used.
Recycle Residuals Back Into Production Process - Residuals which are a by-
product of the industrial process in many cases with the aid of control
equipment can be recycled back into the industrial process for reuse.  In
some instances this represents a savings to the industry to raw materials
that without recycling are lost in the process.
     An emission charge is one form of incentive for industry to recycle
residuals.
Improve Product Efficiencies - See particulates, Power Plants
Modify Production Output - See modify Production hours

                                    F-3

-------
Improve Collection Efficiency - See Particulates, Power Plants
Predict Alerts - The capability to predict alerts would in effect allow
emergency measures to be put into action before the level of pollution
reached a dangerous level.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Power Plants
Utilize Daylight Savings Time - Congress passed legislation this past winter
which made daylight savings time mandatory year round until 1975.  The per-
cent range of effectiveness ranges from 1 to 2 percent.
     Congress recently passed legislation that will reinstate standard time
on a limited basis.  This action was taken due to the hazards to school
children traveling in early morning darkness.
Increase Electric Rates for Large Users - Restructuring the rate scale for
large users could have an effectiveness rate of from 2 to 5 percent.
Improve Domestic and Commercial Building Insulation - See Particulates,
Domestic and Commercial Heating
Improve Efficiency of Electrical Appliances - Appliances are becoming more
energy consumptive.  For example, "Frostless" refrigerators consume 30 per-
cent more energy than do manual models.  Surely the energy crisis has shown
the need for energy efficient appliances.
Control Room Temperature for Heating and Air Conditioning - See Particulates,
Domestic and Commercial Heating.
Ration Electricity - Growth plans for Baltimore Gas & Electric Company
(BG&E) , as filed with the FPC, show a substantial decline between 1973 and
1975 in electricity to be generated in the AQCR.  After 1975, however, energy
consumption for satisfying generation requirements is projected to increase
from about 3 to over 10 x 103 BTU by the 1985 date.
     As a last recourse, rationing of electricity could be employed on a
scheduled diurnal basis or in periods of usage such as during the summer air
conditioning season.
Move Power Plants Outside of Region - The resulting decline of emissions from
such a drastic course of action in cases other than those involving marginal
operations makes this measure cost prohibitive.

                                    F-4

-------
Surround Power Plants With Land Use Buffers - Providing land use buffer zones
around power plants would prevent sensitive receptors such as hospitals,
schools, convalescent homes, etc. from locating too close.
Utilize Storage or Peak Shaving With Clean Fuel - Having the potential to use a
clean fuel during demand peaks would significantly alter emission rates.  Using
hydro electric power from pump storage facilities is one method that could be
utilized.
Limit Use in Areas or Time to Even Out Demand - See Ration Electricity.
Reduce Ash Content of Fuel - See Particulate Control, Domestic and Commercial
Heating.
Convert to Clean Fuel - The simplistic approach is to convert all generation
from coal and heavy oil to natural gas.  However, because of the energy crises,
there is not enough gas or oil to meet today's energy requirements and utili-
ties are requesting a change back to coal.
Generate More Power In Larger Facilities - Concentrating particulate emissions
would result from operating fewer but larger generating facilities.
Use Total Energy Systems - Utilization of individual electric power producing
units for facilities such as shopping centers and utilize by-products such as
waste heat for space heating.
Reduce Transmission Losses - By improving transmission insulation and using
higher voltage levels a greater percentage of generated electrical power
would not be lost through transmission.  This -in turn would cause less demand
on power generation.
Improve Control Equipment - The EPA has promulgated "New Source Performance
Standards for Power Plants" above a certain size.  In establishing the emission
limits, EPA utilizes the best available control technology which can be
demonstrated to the industry.  Because any new plant of BG&E will have  to
comply with the NSPS, it would not appear that this control measure offers
much hope of reducing emissions from power plant stacks below the limits  now
specified by EPA.  The technology might be promoted to increase collector
efficiencies even further; however, its application in the 1975-1985 time
frame is doubtful.
Improve Collection - See Improve Control Equipment.
Increase Actual Stack Height - Use of tall stacks tends to decrease ground
level concentrations of suspended particulates.  The effective height of  the
effluent plume from a power plant depends on physical stack height as well as

                                    F-5

-------
the temperature and velocity of the exhaust gases.  Generally not much im-
provement will be made to an existing plant to change stacks or stack condi-
tions; however, design specifications on new plants can be useful in achiev-
ing the desired end result.
Increase Effective Stack Height - See Increase Actual Stack Height
Utilize Intermittent Control with Weather Conditions - Depending upon weather
conditions further controls will be used when probable alerts are predicted
or increasing concentrations are monitored.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Transportation
Light Duty Vehicles, Heavy Duty Vehicles - Refer  to measures to reduce
emissions from light duty vehicles and heavy duty vehicles.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Fugitive Dust
Reduce Demand for Transportation, Construction, Agriculture and Other
Activities - The fugitive dust problem in the Baltimore AQMA is complex.
Several outlying counties have a quarry dust, agricultural and unpaved road
generation whereas Baltimore Center City has construction and transportation
generation sources.
Limit Agricultural Activities During Dry Weather  - Control of agricultural
Activities by local ordinances during dry weather would eliminate a signifi-
cant amount of fugitive dust during dry warm weather months.  The reduction
in crop output during extended period of dry weather must be considered.
Limit Activity on Unvegetated Lots - Telling the  local sand lot team they can-
not use the ball field would be unrealistic and unpopular, but restriction of
lots to off road vehicles should be considered if a 2 to 5 percent effective-
ness is to be gained.
Modify Tire and Brake Design Wear - This measure  requires the implementation
of basic and applied research and development programs and should probably be
sponsored by the Federal Government.
                                    F-6

-------
Eliminate Unpaved Parking Lots - Tax incentives would be the more effective
program to eliminate unpaved parking lots as fugitive dust generation sites.
Control Unpaved Streets - Limiting access as well as speed would be an effec-
tive means of controlling unpaved streets which represent a major source of
fugitive dust.  By implementing a street control program a 25 to 50 percent
rate of effectiveness could be obtained.  Studies show that dust emissions
increase at a rate approximately proportional to increase in vehicle speed
and directly proportional  to the number of vehicles.
Plant Cover on Vacant Lots - See limit activity on unvegetated lots.
Control Construction Sites - Several methods have been employed to reduce the
emission of dust from construction sites including watering, chemical stabili-
zation of cuts and fills, treatment of temporary access roads to main thorough-
fares, and minimizing the period during which cleared and regraded lands are
exposed.  Watering of construction sites has produced a wide variation in
apparent control efficiencies of 30 to 60 percent reductions due mainly  to  the
highly variable nature of the emission sources.
Limit Speed on Unpaved Roads - See Control Unpaved Streets
Control Open Body Vehicles - Large open body vehicles (e.g., dump trucks) carry-
ing full loads of dirt from pick up site to unloading, generate considerable
amounts of fugitive dust while in transit.  A simple method of curtailing
this emission source is to cover the load with a heavy cloth material such as
canvas.  Many states already require this by law.  This simple inexpensive
procedure can have an effectiveness range of 10 to 25 percent.
Control Deposition on Roads - Material collected on construction vehicles from
project sites usually cause deposits to build up on streets as the traffic
moves in and out.  Automotive vehicles in turn cause a further dispersion of
the material and the cycle continues until the deposited material washed away
by rain or the construction is complete.  If ordinances were passed that would
require these vehicles to be washed down upon leaving the sites a 10 to  25
percent range of effectiveness could be realized.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MONITORING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
^articulate Land Use Measures
                                    F-7

-------
Exclude New Sources  from Selected Hot Spots - Areas which have been designated
as high areas of pollution should be excluded from any consideration of new
development that might  further degrade the ambient air quality of the region.
Concentrate new development at densities which allow for measures to Reduce
Emissions per Capita or per Unit -  See Particulates, Domestic and Commercial
Heating.
Control Existing Uses - Control of  particulate emissions from individual sources
can still leave "hot spots" resulting from accumulated emissions from current
activities.  Zoning  and land  use controls afford only limited opportunity for
removing such residuals.
Regulate Timing of New  Development  - A group of controls can be utilized to
regulate this timing of new development.  This becomes significant in its
relationship to the  scheduling of transportation and other public improvements
and of the predicted time of  effectiveness of other air quality maintenance
measures.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
HYDROCARBONS
Non-Automotive Sources
Reduce Demand for Reactive Hydrocarbon Solvents - Through taxes and fees, a
reduction in reactive hydrocarbon solvents could be initiated to reduce
emissions from these sources  from 25 to 50 percent.
Improve Methods of Bulk Storage - It should be noted that the measures dis-
cussed elsewhere which  might  be used to reduce automobile hydrocarbon emission
through reduced travel  and more efficient engines would directly affect
the emissions from bulk storage.  If less gasoline is used, less bulk storage
requirements and a reduction  in gasoline handling would result; therefore,
fewer emissions would result.  It will be assumed that the reduction in
emissions attributable  to bulk storage will decrease in proportion to the
decrease in utilization of gasoline which results from other measures.
     One additional  measure available to further reduce emissions from
bulk storage sources comprises the  reduction of gaseous leakage.  New regu-
lations for bulk storage coupled with frequent inspections could reduce the
emissions.  A floating  roof or a vapor recovery system could be required on
bulk storage facilities to accomplish this goal.  All new bulk storage units

                                   F-8

-------
of 65,000 gallons or greater capacity, in accordance with new source per-
formance standards, are required to have such systems.
Improve Service Station Storage - As in the reduction of hydrocarbon emissions
from bulk storage, the emissions from service station pumps and terminal load-
ing would be reduced proportionately to the reduction in usage.
     Measures to reduce the number of fuel-handling operations can also be
taken to further reduce emissions attributable to this source.  The provision
of larger gasoline tanks,  tank trucks, and service station storage tanks
would reduce the number of operations at the pumps and terminals.  Coupled
with this would be a requirement to produce a method of pressure feed or
vacuum feed for the transfer of gasoline.  This method would serve two pur-
poses in that it would reduce the time of operation and would require a closed
system which would reduce  evaporation and spillages.
     As with other gasoline storage and handling operations, the reduction
in gasoline consumption will reduce the emissions from service station storage
by way of the reduced number of storage facilities.  Also, the introduction of
vapor recovery devices and floating roof would reduce emissions from storage
tanks.  This could be accomplished through new state and local regulations
coupled with frequent inspections.
Control Power Plant Emissions - See Particulates, Power Plants
Industrial Process Heating - Three other sources of hydrocarbon emissions will,
in 1985, produce 5.6 percent of the total hydrocarbon emissions inventory,
i.e., industrial process heating (3.4 percent), miscellaneous gasoline engines
(1.8 percent) and refuse incineration (0.4 percent).  The first of these is
most difficult to control; significant reduction would entail process changes
for individual industrial  operations, which could entail a long and difficult
procedure with questionable effectiveness.
Miscellaneous Gasoline Engines - Several measures can be applied to reduce
the hydrocarbon emissions  from miscellaneous gasoline engines.  These include
the banning of gasoline powered mowers through implementation of a sub-
stantial fee, or the application of emissions control regulations to all
gasoline engines.  The periodic banning of gasoline-powered engines to attain
episodic control is a feasible procedure.
                                     F-9

-------
Refuse Incineration - In the development of the 1985 projections, it was
assumed that no new sources of incineration would be permitted in the region.
The reduction in emissions resulting from incineration of solid waste can be
achieved by more complete incineration, however, this will produce only
marginal improvements in what is already a minor source.
POTENTIAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR MAINTAINING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
NON-AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES
Mobile Sources
Controls on Diesel and Shipping  - See Heavy Duty Vehicles
Reduce Demand on Diesel and Shipping - The growth of the trucking and shipping
industries and the lack of controls on diesel engines accounts for the in-
creased share of hydrocarbons emissions attributable to these sources (1.9
percent in 1972 to 5.5 percent in 1985) even though the increase in tons per
three hour a.m. peak increases at a lesser rate (1.01 in 1972 to 1.35 tons in
1985).  Any policy which would reduce the requirement for the transportation
of goods to the region or within the region would in turn reduce the demand
for the operation of diesel-powered engines and thereby reduce the hydrocarbon
emissions.
     One means of furthering this objective is through land use controls
which keep transportation terminals and industrial/commercial users of diesel
transportation in proximity to each other.  There are, of course, basic
economic factors acting to bring this about—the concentration of industry
and warehousing in the harbor area is an example—but proper provision in the
land use plan can ensure that the market has no problems in finding optimum
locations which will reduce diesel vehicle miles travelled.  This measure
can be expected to reduce hydrocarbon emissions by a small amount.
Reduce Emissions from Diesel Engines - During the past decade, diesel engines
have not been subject to emission control devices in the same way as gasoline
powered engines because of their rather small share of the total emissions.
As seen in Table 22, that share  will become significant by 1985, as emissions
from other sources are reduced.  It is estimated that the introduction of new
emission standards on all new diesel-powered trucks, and on other diesel
engines in the Baltimore region  (or any urban area), could reduce hydrocarbon
emissions from those sources by  up to 50 percent.
                                   F-10

-------
Relocate Truck Traffic from Region - Diesel truck and bus movements through
the region, while producing only a small part of the diesel and shipping
emissions, could be reduced by the construction of a circumferential highway
around the region.  This factor is addressed under the transportation policies
described for "automotive11 sources.  It is estimated that this measure, which
could have significant side effects in terms of inducing more travel in areas
adjacent to the region and which obviously presents some critical planning and
cost questions, would have small impact on diesel VMT and it would not be
justified on the basis of this scale of impact.  This approach was, therefore,
not considered in assessing the degree to which this category of emissions can
be reduced.
Episodic Controls - While not considered viable as a strategy to reduce total
emissions, episodic ban on non-essential truck travel has the potential to
reduce the hydrocarbon emissions from diesel trucks by an estimated 80 percent
during critical periods.  A ban of this kind would exclude emergency and
"essential" vehicles and would allow for travel through the region.
Control Aircraft Emissions - Measures for the reduction of hydrocarbon emissions
from aircraft beyond the emission reductions proposed by EPA for 1979 and 1981
are limited.  The most significant measures involve:
     (1)  Reduction of flights,
     (2)  Use of larger, cleaner aircraft,
     (3)  Reduction of ground maneuvers, and
     (4)  Control of non-aircraft ground sources.
Reduce Low Speed Running of Engines - Changes in procedures to limit emissions
resulting from ground maneuvers are currently being introduced in airports
around the country.  These changes involve such measures as taxiing on  two
or less engines, towing of aircraft by ground vehicles, reduction in engine
"run-ups," elimination of non-essential taxiing operations and introduction
of mobile lounges.  It is estimated that these measures could result in a
reduction of 10 percent in hydrocarbons emitted by aircraft on the ground,
which is approximately 15 percent of the total emitted by aircraft at BWI.
Reduction in Emissions Due to Ground Equipment - The ground equipment and
airport-generated vehicular traffic together generate approximately 30 percent

                                   F-ll

-------
 of  all pollutants at the airport;  this can be reduced by the following
 methods:
      (1)   Installation of control devices on fuel-handling equipment at
           the airport to prevent spills and evaporation,
      (2)   Limitation on movements of ground support vehicles, and
      (3)   Limitation on access to the airport by automobiles.
 Of  these  methods, the last could be substantially improved when the proposed
 rail transit connection to the airport comes on line.  The effectiveness of
 these measures .is estimated at 20 percent for this category.
 MEASURES  TO REDUCE EMISSIONS FROM AUTOMOTIVE SOURCES OF HYDROCARBONS
 Light Duty Vehicles (LDV)
      The  probable emission reduction for each measure is determined by
 multiplying the midpoint of the range of effectiveness, shown in the matrices
 in  the body of the report, by the percentage of emissions attributable to
 that source.   In the case of LDV,  17 percent of the hydrocarbon emissions
 are projected from that source in 1985.
 Measures  to Reduce Automobile Ownership - Second and third car ownership is a
 variable  in the determination of modal split and travel demand.  If second and
 third car ownership can be curtailed, total VMT can also be reduced.  Auto owner-
 ship could be made more expensive  by applying additional tax on new vehicles,
 either in the form of an excise tax on purchases,  a tax on registration through
 registration fees, or a tax directly on the ownership through personal property
 tax increases.   Each of these methods, if on the order of $500 to $1000 per
 vehicle per year would discourage  second car ownership and marginal car owner-
 ship.  Assuming that this expense  would induce a response similar to that fore-
 cast in the 1-66 study in suburban Washington,  D.C.  through a $2.00 per day park-
 ing tax (a comparable additional annual levy on the  automobile owner),  a five to
 ten percent reduction in VMT could be expected.
 Measures  to Reduce Total AutomobilesTravel - A prime means of reducing hydro-
 carbon emissions  is  to reduce the  total amount  of  automobile travel occurring
 daily  in  the  region.   There is a range of measures and policy instruments
 available  to  contribute  to such a  reduction,  some  of which,  it will be  noted,
 result in  a decrease  in  all vehicle  travel,  including heavy duty and diesel
vehicle travel.   Such measures  include:

                                      F-12

-------
Divert Auto Passengers to Public Transportation -
     (a)  Major improvements in level of transit service - Improvements to
          the level of transit service have been shown to be effective in
          increasing ridership.  By improving the reliability of the service,
          by increasing the frequency of operation,  and by improving comfort
          and safety, increases in transit ridership may be attained.  New
          lines (bus and rail), more vehicles and drivers, more comfortable
          vehicles, scheduling more responsive to the needs of the riding
          public, innovative scheduling techniques (such as Dial-a-Bus), new
          technologies, and other additions to the service provided can make
          the transit system more attractive than the automobile for certain
          types of travel.   Busways and exclusive bus lanes can also help to
          make bus transit  as fast as automobile travel.

          Many cities have  improved transit facilities by expanding service
          or by providing better facilities for that service.  Washington's
          Shirley Highway busway has resulted in substantially more fre-
          quent, more rapid service which has resulted in increased rider-
          ship and reduced  traffic in the Shirley Highway corridor.  Bus-
          ways in use in other cities have similarly helped to speed transit
          routes and increase ridership.  The recent 1-66 study, previously
          referred to, suggested a five to six percent increase in modal
          split in favor of transit.  Baltimore has  already programmed a
          large public investment in improved transit.  The Phase I, 28-
          mile Metro system will begin operation some time during the
          period under study.   A Phase II expansion  tripling the size of
          the initial system is also under consideration.  Plans are under
          study to orient the bus system around the  rail  lines to act as
          feeder collector-distributor lines.   These improvements should
          increase regional transit usage.  Other improvements are possible,
          including additional rapid rail lines and  particularly, an exten-
          sive additional system of bus routes.   New technologies may also
          be explored.  Local  distribution systems could be integrated with
          the rail rapid system in existing centers  and in the new centers
          of activity which are proposed for the transit corridors.

                                    F-13

-------
     Experiences in other cities indicate that improvements to bus
     systems of the type discussed above may result in increases in
     ridership of 10 to 25 percent.   This reflects possible reductions
     in automobile VMT of five to ten percent.  In order to determine
     more accurately the results of  any massive changes in the Balti-
     more region transit system, existing BREIS-related transportation
     models should be used.  By establishing a specific improved trans-
     it system in combination with other policies discussed in this re-
     port, an application of the BREIS models could determine the re-
     sulting increase in transit usage.  Several alternative levels of
     improvement might be tested to  determine the most effective pro-
     gram of improvements.  For the present study, the five to ten per-
     cent reduction in VMT will be used as a measure of effectiveness.
(b)   Reduce public transportation fares - Another method of attracting
     additional ridership to mass transit and hence away from the
     automobile is the reduction in the cost of the transit trip.  By
     reducing the fare to some lower level, perhaps to zero, persons
     planning trips may be induced to made them by public transporta-
     tion rather than by automobile.
     The relationship between lower transit fares and ridership has not
     been well tested.  In the past, information on fare increases was
     generally the only type of data available; thus studies of fare
     level drops were generally not possible.  Few cities have reduced
     fares.  Atlanta dropped fare levels from 35 to 15 cents and ex-
     perienced a 19% increase in ridership.  (A 30% increase in rider-
     ship was forecast for reduction to free fares).  Seattle has a-
     chieved large increases in ridership within the area served by
     its free downtown bus service.   A further verification of these
     studies can be noted in the "1-66 Corridor Transportation Alter-
     nates Study" which suggested a six to ten percent increase in the
     forecast transit modal split with a fifty percent reduction in
     transit fares.  It should be noted that new riders attracted by
                             F-14

-------
     fare reductions will not all be former  automobile  riders, but may
     to some degree include youths,  senior citizens,  and  others who
     did not previously travel by automobile.
     In Baltimore,  transit ridership in the  peak hour is  forecast in
     the BREIS report at 20% of total travel.   Thus,  potential increases
     are conceivable in transit ridership.   However,  because  of  this  low
     level,  the reliance upon the automobile is fairly  strong and large
     inducements would be necessary  to change these  conditions.
     This measure would have its maximum effect in reducing VMT  if
     transit fares  were reduced to zero and  if all new  ridership rep-
     resented individuals who formerly drove an automobile.   Under
     these extreme  conditions, if the 30% ridership  increase  forecast
     for Atlanta with free transit could be  achieved  in Baltimore, the
     percentage using transit during the peak hour would  increase from
     20% to  approximately 26%.  This would represent  a  six percent re-
     duction in VMT if all new riders were former auto  drivers.  If
     fares were not eliminated totally, or if some of the new rider-
     ship were not  auto drivers, the reduction in VMT would be smaller.
     While this represents a reasonable estimate of  the maximum  poten-
     tial effect of reducing transit fares to zero,  this  measure would
     be better tested through the application of more sophisticated
     transportation models.  By applying the mode choice  models  devel-
     oped for use in the BREIS study, the effect of  this  measure could
     be measured using data based on travel  behavior  in the Baltimore
     area.  Further, other fare reduction policies could  be tested and
     the specific effect of these policies could be better determined.
     For the purpose of this study,  a two to five percent effectiveness
     will be used.
(c)   Increase downtown parking costs - Any increase  in  the cost  of down-
     town parking will increase the  out-of-pocket cost  of automobile
     operation.  This cost must be made sufficiently  high if  it  is to
     have a  large measure of effectiveness.   Parking  charges  in  down-
     town Baltimore today may reach  $500 per year and,  while  this may

                                F-15

-------
          deter many, there continues to be a large residual demand from
          those who consider this tolerable.  It is estimated that taxes
          which increase the cost to around $1,000 per year would be re-
          quired  to bring about an appreciable reduction in VMT.
          In  the  1-66 study forecast modal split increase of six to ten per-
          cent in favor of transit with the theoretical imposition of park-
          ing costs by $2.00 per day.  Raising the cost above $1,200-$!,500
          per year would be expected to eliminate all but the truly auto-
          captive person.

 Measures to .Reduce the Number  of  Eligible Drivers -  Reducing  the number of
 eligible drivers  by one  or  a combination  of  the methods described  in the
 following paragraphs  offers an additional opportunity  to reduce auto travel.
 A policy of instituting more stringent  and periodic  driving tests  would work
 in a number of ways.  Periodic testing  would  have a  nuisance  factor which
 would discourage  casual  and occasional  drivers from  renewing  their licenses.
 More stringent tests  would  reduce  the number  of persons able  to drive.
 These methods have secondary safety  implications, though it must be stated
 that the effectiveness of the  measure in  reducing automobile  travel will be
 small,  certainly  in the zero to two  percent  category in the evaluation
 matrix.
      A more liberal use of  license revocation for multiple violations or
 selected types of violations,  would  reduce the number  of licensed  drivers
 on the road.  This would result in an additional minor reduction in auto-
 mobiles  on  the road,  though it is more  likely to be  justified on the basis
 of safety than of air quality.
      The current  allowable age for drivers license is  16 years  of'age in
 Maryland.   If the age limit were raised to 18, as in many states,  the num-
 ber  of licensed drivers would  be reduced  in proportion to the number of
 16  to 18 year old drivers, thus reducing  the  total VMT by a proportional
 amount.   Estimates of the proportion of drivers in this age group  is 6.2%
 assuming the  drivers in the 16 to 18 to 62 age groups  are equal to the
 total population  on those age  groups.
Measures  to Make  Highway Travel More Expensive - Introduction of new fees
and  taxes on  travel and fuel can make highway travel more expensive.  Any
                                   F-16

-------
increase in costs associated with auto travel will tend to  decrease  the
amount of auto travel.  These charges can take the form of  tolls  and of  taxes
on fuel.  The impact will be limited to a 2 to 5  percent increase in transit
modal split resulting from a fifty percent increase in out  of  pocket ex-
penses.
Measures to Reduce Peak Period Automobile Travel  - The a.m.  peak  period  is
the most critical to the production of photo-chemical smog  because hydro-
carbons produced during those hours are subject to maximum  exposure  to sun-
light.  Furthermore, meteorological changes occurring at night tend  to bring
about air mixing and the introduction of clean air.  Measures  which  result
in the reduction of hydrocarbon emissions during  this part  of  the day are
critical to the maintenance of standards.  These  include:
     (a)  Keep a Proportion of Vehicles off the Road Each Day  - Institution
          of a 40-hour/four-day work week will result in a  reduction in  total
          VMT by reducing the total number of work trips per employee per
          week.  Instead of the ten trips per week required under conventional
          scheduling, only eight per week would be necessary.   If the program
          were implemented fully on a regionwide  basis with full staggering
          of employee working days (the work week for each  group being Monday  -
          Thursday, Tuesday - Friday, Wednesday - Saturday, etc.) a  reduction
          of 20% in work trips would occur each day.  Because  40% of total
          peak hour VMT is accounted for by work  trips, full implementation
          would result in a maximum VMT reduction of eight  percent.   However,
          it is unrealistic to expect that this maximum can be achieved.
          Some employers would be unwilling or unable to adopt such  a sched-
          ule.  Further, for those who did, there would be an increase in
          leisure and other non-work trips by employees such that the net
          reduction in VMT would be significantly less than 8%.  For Balti-
          more, the government activities in Towson and the Social Security
          Center are potential candidates for a four day work week.
     (b)  Sjaread the Peak Period Travel by Staggering Work Hours - While the
          staggering of work hours itself will not result in a reduction in
          total daily VMT, changing of starting times such that  employees
          would be making their working trip outside of  the peak period

                                    F-17

-------
     could result in a substantial reduction in VMT during the 6:00-
     9:00 am.m period.  Presently, approximately equal amounts of
     traffic occur in each hour of the existing three hour period.
     Thus, about 30% of the work trip traffic could be shifted out  of
     that period without resulting in a mere shifting of the peak per-
     iod to a different period (7:00-10:00 a.m., for example).  Be-
     cause many of the trips will still occur in the 6:00-9:00 a.m.
     period, the reduction in work trip VMT would be at best about
     25% during the peak period for the largest possible staggering.
     Because work trip VMT is approximately 40% of total peak period
     travel, a reduction of approximately 10% in peak period VMT could
     occur, assuming full implementation.
     This strategy has not to date been implemented for the express
     purpose of improving air quality, although, on a limited basis,
     it has been tried by large employers, most notably government
     agencies, to achieve some relief in peak hour traffic congestion.
     As in the case of the four day/40 hour work week, major govern-
     ment employers in Baltimore, accounting for about 10% of the re-
     gional labor force, would be the most likely leaders in under-
     taking staggered working hours.  If this proportion of the labor
     force were involved, the maximum reduction in VMT would be approx-
     imately 1%, providing that no new non-work trips were undertaken
     in the peak period, and providing that any resultant relief in
     peak hour traffic congestion did not induce new automobile work
     trips to tak place.
(c)   Initiate Centralized Carpooling Information System - During the
     winter of 1973-74, energy crisis centralized carpooling systems
     were instituted in most major cities.  These systems matched po-
     tential drivers and riders via computer.  Although this in and of
     itself is of small incentive to increase auto occupancy, when
     couupled with other incentives (parking and fast-leave incentives)
     and with disincentives, this facilitates carpooling and increases
     the probability that carpooling will occur.  The estimates of
     effectiveness assume that these instruments are jointly applied.
                              F-18

-------
Measures to Restrict Travel in Summer Months -
     (a)  Coordinated Vacations - It is a recorded fact that a.m. peak VMT
          drops slightly during the summer months as a result of the con-
          centration of vacation time into this period of the year.  If va-
          cations could be restricted so that even more occurred in the 16
          week summer period of maximum risk of air quality deterioration,
          an appreciable improvement can be achieved.  Assuming a 40% work,
          60% non-work split during peak period; two-week vacation; and 1/4
          of the vacationers leave town then a 6% reduction in a.m. peak
          VMT could be achieved (12.5% x 40% = 5%; 25% x 12.5% = 1,875%;
          5% + 1.875% = 6.875%).
     (b)  Seasonal Rationing Programs Could be Instituted to Reduce Hydro-
          carbon Emissions during the summer months when the photo-chemical
          reaction is most likely to occur.  All three types of rationing
          discussed above with the listed could be qualifications as to
          feasibility and effectiveness, applied as part of the program.
          Transit service should be improved in the summer if a rationing
          program were instituted.  Currently, during the summer months,
          public transportation service is cut back because schools are
          closed, passengers are on vacation and because it is the transit
          employee vacation period.  However, this is the period of the year
          when it is most critical that automobile utilization be reduced
          to a minimum.  A method to encourage maximum use of public trans-
          portation would be to maintain and, if possible, enhance levels
          of service at this time of year.
Measures to Restrict Travel Year Round - Year-round fuel rationing may take
different forms.  Limitation of the amount purchased in a specific period by
individual automobile owners is of questionable feasibility on a regional
basis because it raises matters of equity with regard to other regions.
Other forms of rationing may be more effective.  The rationing of fuel to
the retailer or wholesaler, similar to the 1973-74 winter allocation program,
can do much to reduce travel.  The third form of rationing, economic ration-
ing could also reduce travel.  This method is, of course, highly regressive
because it would be in the form of major gasoline tax increases.  Each of
these rationing forms would require improvements in alternative modes of
                                   F-19

-------
transportation if economic disruptions are to avoided.  Rationing will be
relatively ineffective unless the rationed area is sufficiently large to
discourage driving out of the region to obtain gasoline.
Measures to Relocate Travel Outside of the Region - Some of the travel in the
region is due to traffic originating from and destined for places outside of
the region; a decrease in regional hydrocarbon emissions could be achieved
by diverting this traffic around the region.  Much of this traffic uses 1-95.
Significant diversion of this through traffic could be accomplished only by
the construction of a major interstate roadway to allow total bypass of the
AQM region.  Although intercepting long trips and therefore, having a rel-
atively large impact on VMT reduction per trip, the percent of through travel
is so small during the a.m. peak that this measure would be expected to have
minimal impact on total VMT reduction.  In fact, it must be stated that the
additional accessibility provided to parts of the outlying areas of the re-
gion could well result in additional development and additional travel above
and beyond that which would otherwise occur.  The extent of changes, both in
reducing through traffic and in inducing additional travel must remain spec-
ulative without systematic testing.
Measures to Make Highway Travel Less Convenient and Less Comfortable - By
restricting highway construction and improvement, travel would become less
convenient and less comfortable.  The demand for travel generally would be
lower by restricting the supply of highways within the region, and the amount
of travel would be reduced.  The traffic projections on which the calcula-
tions of air quality were based reflect large increases in the highway net-
work.  By reducing the amount of new highway from this level, less travel
would result.  While there are no data on the effect on travel of closing
existing highways, other studies have indicated that the construction of
new facilities leads to an increase in traffic over that which would occur
without those facilities.
     Plans in the Baltimore region call for the construction of an extensive
network of new freeways and major arterials.  The "3A System" of Interstate
Highways within Baltimore City and the General Development Plan system pro-
posed by the Regional Planning Council represent a major increase in the
supply of highways in the region.  The effect on travel of nonconstructing
                                    F-20

-------
either the 3A or GDP systems within the Baltimore Region has been measured
as part of the travel simulations performed for the BREIS study.  In 1995,
4% less traffic is forecast to occur in the peak hour if the 3A system is
not constructed.  Alternative 8—the 3A system but not the GDP system—has
12% less peak hour travel that the full network while Alternative 9, neither
the 3A nor GDP systems, has 17.8% less travel in the peak period than the
full network.  Similar percentage decreases in travel would occur in 1985
for each Alternative if the systems are not constructed.
     In order to better measure the effect of a given highway system on re-
gional travel in 1985 for the purposes of this study, the various models run
as part of the BREIS study for 1980 and 1995 would have to be run for 1985
given the conditions in effect at that time.  The level of transit service
available, land use and population considerations, and other policies ex-
pected to be in effect at that time would have be included.  The scope and
scheduling of the trial maintenance plan do not permit use of this preferred
methodology; for the purposes of the current study, it has been assumed that
similar percentage decreases in VMT will be attained in 1985 as in 1995.
The shortcomings of this assumption are recognized; it may be a liberal es-
timate of the effectiveness of the measure.
Measures to Reduce Gasoline Consumption - The amount of fuel burned and the
efficiency with which it is burned are both factors in hydrocarbon production.
Measures to reduce gasoline consumption and increased efficiency will result
in reduced emissions.
     (a)  Decrease non-essential accessories - The institution of a heavy tax
          on accessories would reduce the number of auto accessories and in-
          crease the mileage of auto engines.  Of prime importance is air
          conditioning.  However, power brakes, power steering, and other
          secondary users of energy contribute to less effective gasoline
          use.  Many of these luxuries have become regarded as essentials
          and, again, heavy taxes, perhaps of the order of $500 to $1000
          per vehicle would be required to bring about any significant re-
          duction in demand.
     (b)  Modify engine type - When electric engined automobiles become a
          production reality less energy will be used than gasoline powered

                                    F-21

-------
          automobiles by a factor of approximately 50%.  Furthermore, only
          a portion of the electric power used will be generated by fossil
          fuel plants  and this could well occur outside of the region.
          Therefore, less hydrocarbon esissions would be involved in power-
          ing electric automobiles and much less than this amount would occur
          in the Baltimore AWMA.  One further advantage is that emissions
          generated per unit of energy at the stationary power plant are
          easier to control and easier to monitor than are emissions at the
          automobile exhaust pipe.
Measures to Promote Optimum Traffic Flow - Through highway and signalization
improvements, by increasing the average speed, and by reducing the amount of
stop and go travel and other inefficiencies in the highway network, the rate
of emissions per VMT may be reduced.  Program of this type include various
improvements to signalization, intersection design, parking restrictions and
roadway improvements and are especially applicable to arterial routes.  Also
available are various techniques for improving the flow of traffic on free-
ways such as driver information systems, ramp metering to allow only as many
cars on a section of road as can be handled and various projects to improve
the configuration of the highway.  System-wide changes are also possible
such that traffic is assigned to its optimum route by application of these
techniques.  In this way, a network may be modified to operate as efficiently
as possible.
     Programs of this type have been proposed as parts of State Implementation
Plans for various cities in the United States.  Most cities are also under-
taking traffic flow improvements under the TOPICS (Traffic Operations Pro-
gram to Improve Capacity and Safety) Program.  Small scale intersection or
roadway improvements generally fall under this program.  Cities with exten-
sive freeway systems such as Chicago or Los Angeles have also applied free-
way surveillance, driver information systems, and ramp metering in order to
increase the efficiences of these systems.
                                      F-22

-------
     In Baltimore, a large commitment to traffic flow improvements is al-
ready underway.  The EPA-promulgated Transportation Control Plan calls for
a decrease of emissions of hydrocarbons of 4.3% of the base year as a result
of the application of TOPICS and other flow improvement measures.  Consider-
ing the existing TCP, it would appear that no further improvements of this
type are possible in Baltimore.  Thus, the effectiveness of this strategy
would be felt throughout the period under a study although as traffic in-
creased, its effectiveness might be reduced.
     Any improvement during the period under study could best be tested by
a study of any possible areas within the region for improvements.  Because
of the spot nature of projects of this type, a survey of the region's high-
way system would be required to determine possible locations for these im-
provements and a detailed study of each site would be required to determine
the amount of improvement that each project could individually accomplish.
Measures to Increase Auto Occupancy -
     (a)  Parking incentives for car pools - In large employment centers
          with relatively large parking facilities, parking incentives can
          increase carpooling and auto occupancy.  Parking incentives can
          take the form of reduced rates, reserved spaces or lots, late
          arrival or early departures, or a combination of all three.
     (b)  Use of express lanes for carpools - Express lanes, normally re-
          served exclusively for buses, can be opened to carpools.  This
          incentive will greatly decrease the travel time for the carpool,
          thus encouraging higher auto occupancy rates.
     (c)  Tax and insurance incentives for carpools - Monetary incentives,
          such as tax redctions and insurance premium reductions act to in-
          crease auto occupancy.
     Each of these measures can be expected to only have only minimal effect
on auto occupancy.  Each taken separately would likely have an effectiveness
of 0-2% reduction in VMT; collectively, they might reach as high as 2% re-
duction in LDV VMT.  When combined with other measures to reduce VMT, a 1%
effectiveness could be expected.
                                   F-23

-------
Measures to Reduce Emissions Per Mile - Episodic control on automobile travel,
Enforcement of periodic bans on auto travel would reduce automobile travel
during episodes of high pollution.  This measure would be very effective al-
though there are obvious economic problems and enforcement questions.  Like
other episodic measures, this is regarded as an available supplementary tool
to be applied in the event that tother measures are not adequate to solve
the problem.
     A system of auto stickers which indicate the essential nature of travel
based on occupation, family size, and other factors would assist in the en-
forcement of partial bans on driving.  A truly arbitrary odd-even ban on
driving could also be instituted during air pollution episodes.
     Emergency holidays for public employees.  The use of emergency holidays
for public employees would reduce the a.m. peak travel in direct proportion
to the government employment.  In areas of major public employment, such as
Baltimore, this would be extremely effective.  (There were an estimated
156,000 public employees in the region of a total employment of 869,800, or
about 18% in 1970).
     As with the public employees, provision of emergency holidays for pri-
vate employees would directly decrease emissions during episodes.
                                    F-24

-------
Heavy Duty Vehicles (HDV) - The emission reduction for each measure is deter-
mined by multiplying the midpoint of the range of effectiveness times the per-
centage emissions from that source.  In the case of HDV, 42% of the hydro-
carbon emissions will come from heavy duty vehicles in 1985.
Measuresto Reduce Total Truck Travel - As with light duty vehicles, engine
running time (therefore, total truck travel), is the prime determinant of
hydrocarbon emissions.
Measures to Reduce Truck Ownership - Private and corporate truck ownership can
be restricted through the following measures:
     (a)  Make truck ownership more expensive by applying additional tax on
          new vehicles.  This may take the form of an excise tax on purchases,
          a tax on registration through registration fees, or a tax directly
          on the ownership through personal property tax increases.  The level
          of taxation in mind is $500-$1000 per vehicle.  Such charges could
          result in a small decrease in truck ownership as vehicles are used
          more efficiently by keeping them on the road for longer hours.  The
          impact on VMT would be even less since most trips involve distribution
          of goods which must be moved anyway.  The savings would be in elimina-
          tion of less-than-essential trips, but would be marginal since the
          additional costs, as business expenses would be passed on to the
          consumer.
     (b)  Reduce the number of eligible trucks by instituting a strict vehicle
          inspection system.  This policy instrument would reduce the number
          of trucks which would be allowed to operate and it would also tend
          to eliminate older heavy duty vehicles from the inventory.
Measures to Reduce Gasoline Truck Ownership - The application of fees and taxes
to HDV would, as with light duty vehicles, increase the cost of owning and
operating such vehicles.  The impact of this measure would be limited, but it
would certainly result in the elimination of some non-essential trips.  Al-
though the tendency would be to use trucks more intensively, there would not
necessarily be eL resulting reduction in VMT.  The effect of this policy instru-
ment could be minimal.
     If the taxes and fees imposed were applied to gasoline vehicles only,
other'types of engines (diesel and electric) would become more attractive.  The
                                     F-25

-------
amount of reduction  in hydrocarbon emissions would depend on the type of
replacement vehicle  used.
     Reduce total HDV VMT  - Although  relatively  localized, the prohibition of
truck movements  in certain areas  of the  region will produce "truck-free" zones
and result in  small  decreases  in  VMT  and emissions.
     Public transit  vehicles  for  the  carriage and movement of goods could also
be utilized in off-peak hours.  Because  buses and rapid  transit carriers are
not as fully occupied in the  off-hours of  the day, they  could serve to trans-
fer intracity  or intracounty  parcels,  such as mail moving from one substation
to another. This, could reduce  the number of truck trips  made during the day in
the region.  This idea has been suggested  in other cities; however, there is no
record of its  use as a technique  to improve air  quality.  For Baltimore this
measure  could  be applied to the intraregional movement of mail, government
correspondence,  and  bulk newspaper delivery.  Mail movement would, of course,
require  the use  of a secure container or compartment  on  MTA vehicles.
     This measure is limited  in its potential effectiveness in reducing a.m.
peak hour VMT  for several  reasons.  Firstly, it  deals with trips in the off-
peak hours.  Secondly, it  deals only  with  a small part of all truck movements
within the region. These measures can be expected to  have only minimal effect
on total HDV VMT.
     Optimize  routes and schedules -  Care  in the selection of truck routes and
schedules for  deliveries could eliminate wasted  mileage  and avoid congested,
stop-and-go traffic.  The  responsibility for implementation of this measure
lies chiefly on  private business, but they could be assisted by better defini-
tion of  truck  routes on the part  of local  and regional agencies.
Measures to Reduce Peak Period Truck  Travel - Hydrocarbons produced by truck
movement in the  6:00-9:00  a.m. peak hour are the prime concern, because this
is the period  in which hydrocarbons emitted have the  longest exposure to sun-
light and hence  the  greatest propensity  for production of photo-chemical oxi-
dants.  Means  of controlling  these emissions include  the prohibition of use of
selected streets to  truck  traffic at  selected time's of the day.  This type of
prohibition would not only discourage  a.m.  peak  truck travel, by creating
inconvenience  to the truckers, but if truck traffic were prohibited from con-
gested thoroughfares in general and to delivery  activities in particular, total

                                    F-26

-------
truck VMT would be reduced during the a.m. peak and auto traffic would flow
more easily, thus reducing hydrocarbon emissions.  Baltimore currently has
restricted loading zones.  An attempt to further restrict truck movements
results in considerable public reaction and caused special problems for the
U. S. Postal Service.  Any additional restriction can be expected to be
politically controversial.
     Modify engine type and size - Replacement of gasoline engines by electric
engines, especially feasible in the case of light duty vehicles, could sub-
stantially reduce energy consumption and the emission of hydrocarbons.  As
noted above, however, technology has not advanced to the point of mass produc-
tion of this type engine.  Smaller engine size for many trucks could be im-
plemented more readily and, given the over-powered nature of most heavy duty
vehicles, this could be done without sacrificing the capability and utility
of trucks.  Smaller engined trucks would be encouraged through the use of a
tax by engine displacement, thus replacing HDVs with IDVs.
Measures to Reduce Emissions Per Mile - Installation of pollution control de-
vices will reduce emissions per mile.  Heavy duty vehicles have not been subject
to the same pollution control standards as light duty vehicles, and control of
emissions has, as a result, been minimal.  This is regarded as potentially the
most productive new measure available for reduction of hydrocarbon because
HDV's are a heavy source of pollution.  In 1973, HDV's produced 12.61 tons
(21.9% of the regional total) in the peak 6:00-9:00 a.m. period; by 1985, it is
estimated that this will have decreased to 10.11 tons; however, by that year,
this will represent 41.5%, of the regional total.  Any significant percentage
reduction will be very important in reduction of regional totals.  It is esti-
mated that at least 507o of HDV hydrocarbons could be eliminated by this means,
but only if state implementation of a retrofit program is instituted.
     Federal standards could be made more strict or  Federal law could be
changed  to allow  stricter  state standards.  This approach must  be  coupled with
with the  installation of pollution  control  devices  through  the  provision of
 legal  requirement that such devices  be  installed.
Measures  to Reduce  Truck Travel During  High Pollution Periods  - A ban on non-
essential  truck  travel similar  to  that  suggested  for automobiles during high
pollution  episodes  would result  in  an  effective reduction  in  truck movements
and  hence,  of  hydrocarbon emissions.   In the  evaluation of  the  matrix,  this
measure  has been  rated at around  50% effective.   This is, however, clearly an
                                    F-27

-------
assumption as to the proportion of gasoline trucks which may reasonably be
expected to be kept off the road for the few days in each year when pollution
episodes are likely to occur.  Also, a sticker system, as discussed previously,
would produce proportional results during high pollution episodes.
     Emergency holidays could also be designated for private and public em-
ployees.  Such emergency holidays would not only reduce truck travel by giving
drivers holidays but would reduce deliveries and other HDV activities.
     It must also be noted that many of the measures will be effective only
when parcelled with others.  Perhaps the prime example of this is the combina-
tion of transportation and land use measures.  The following paragraphs present
an example of how the effectiveness of this coupling of measures may be esti-
mated, a coupling which produces a land use pattern which is conducive to
reduction of automotive travel and a transportation system to properly serve
it.
     Land use measures assumed to be available for the purpose include:
     (1)  Zoning,
     (2)  Agricultural/conservation zoning,
     (3)  Planning unit development and cluster zoning,
     (4)  Special use permits,
     (5)  Holding zones,
     (6)  Open space land requisition and landbanking,
     (7)  Floating zones, and
     (8)  Discretionary taxation policies.
Land use and development controls have not been used to date for the exclusive
purpose of achieving better air quality.  However,  many of these controls
have been applied to achieve desired land use patterns which subsequently led
to less traffic congestion and lower emission levels.
     Each of the jurisdictions within the Baltimore region is concerned about
growth.  For example, Baltimore City would like to retain its population and
attract new residents while outside Baltimore City the suburban jurisdictions
are looking for tools to control and channel growth.  Consequently, application
of these development controls to achieve improved air quality in the Baltimore

                                   F-28

-------
region could be received as being generally in accord with existing growth
control proposals.
     Concentration of development in mass transit corridors would tend to
reduce VMT in several ways, as follows:
     (1)  Work trip VMT is reduced because of the availability of mass
          transit.
     (2)  Average work trip length is reduced for auto drivers from what
          it might be given spread development.
     (3)  Intensity of development within corridors affords opportunities
          for multi-purpose centers and PUD building concepts, which can
          further reduce the total number of trips, length of trips, and
          the need for auto use.
     The most important of these factors is the reduction in work trip VMT
which is absolutely critical to reducing auto-generated emissions.  In order
to demonstrate the relationship of VMT and the change in the pattern of
development resulting from application of the strategies discussed above,
population and employment were reallocated among RPD's in the Baltimore
region for the period 1973 to 1985.  This allocation was based on a defini-
tion of mass transit corridors.  The procedure assumes an increased density
of population within the residential acres added between 1973 and 1985 as a
result of these strategies for RPD's served by rapid transit.
     Additional population for these "growth" districts was shifted from areas
not served by rapid transit.  Employment increases projected in "non-growth"
districts were also reallocated to the "growth" RPD's.  It must be emphasized
that this analysis is not intended to suggest a goal for regional growth,
rather it is intended only to demonstrate the general method in which a pro-
gram of centralized development could act to reduce VMT.
     For the purpose of this analysis, six corridors were defined.  These were:
                                              RPD
     (1)  Anne Arundel County           201,202,203,204
     (2)  Social Security               323
     (3)  Ownings Mills                 313
     (4)  Towson                        308,309,315
                                     F-29

-------
     (5)  NE Industrial Corridor         316,317,320
     (6)  Sparrows Point                 328,329,330,331
     In addition, four RPD's within  Baltimore  City were  assumed to grow more
intensely than RPC modeling procedures had  forecast because of the strategies
availability through rapid rail transit.  These districts  are 101, 103, 113,
and 114.
     Reallocation of population from "non-growth" districts to those  identi-
fied above was based on several assumptions.   These assumptions included:
     (1)  New residential acres expected between 1973  and  1985 would  be
          developed at higher densities  than previously  forecast  for
          districts served by transit.   For these incremental acres a
          density of 35 persons per  acre was assumed.  This increased
          density, although three  times  the residential  density typically
          forecast by RPC, is considered a  moderate density, which could
          be attained by garden apartment or townhouse development.
     (2)  The growth rate in Baltimore County  is generally less than  the
          growth rates forecast in the Baltimore-Washington Corridor  and
          the Annapolis (Route 2)  Corridor.  Consequently, proportionately
          less forecast new population was  diverted from the 200  and  600
          series RPD's than from  the 300 series RPD's  (Baltimore  County)
          based on the assumption  that these strong growth trends would be
          more difficult to control.
     (3)  Only new population and  employment growth forecast between  1973
          and 1985 was considered  for reallocation.
     Reallocation of employment from "non-growth" districts to those  in the
transit corridors was based on one primary  assumption, i.e., total new employ-
ment forecast in "non-growth" districts  was assumed to be  distributed among
"growth" districts in proportion to  the  additional growth  in population re-
sulting from the population reallocation described above.
     The results of this analysis  indicated the change in  population  in each
RPD as of 1985 as a result of the  reallocation of population as a result of
                                     F-30

-------
the strategies of land use and development control.  A total of 133,314 per-
sons were assumed to have been reallocated from districts not served by transit
to those within the transit corridors for 1985.  As a result of the realloca-
tion, 34,450 jobs were reallocated to transit-oriented zones.
     In order to measure the change in regional peak hour VMT which would re-
sult from the implementation of the land use and development control strate-
gies, the following relationship was developed:
     Change in VMT = PwWAKTp - EWAMT  + PwWA'M'Tp + EWA'M'Tp.
     where:
         P = number of persons reallocated to transit related zones;
         w = number of employees per person;
         W = number of work trips per employee;
     A,  A1 = number of auto trips per work trip;
     M,  M1 = length of auto trip;
         T = ratio of total travel to work travel;
         E = number of employees reallocated to transit related zones;
         p = proportion of work trips in the peak hour.
     Of these values,  the following remain constant with the land use change:
         w = 0.40 employees per person;
         W = 1.56 work trips per employee;
         T = 2.5 total travel/work travel;
         p = 0.30 work trips in peak hour/total day work.
     Because the population reallocation to transit related zones will have
a greater propensity to use transit given its greater convenience and proximity
in these zones, the variables relating the number of automobile trips per work
trip will be valued at:
     A = 0.61 auto trips per work trip (1985 regionwide forecast value-
         BREIS report);
     A1  = 0.40 auto trips per work trip.
     Because the zones into which population and employment were reallocated
are much more centrally located than the zones from which they were allocated,
shorter trip lengths will result, as follows:
                                    F-31

-------
     M = 4.2 miles (reflecting one-half of the average trip length
         because it is applied to trips generated by population and
         attracted by employment);
    M1  = 3.0 miles.
     Substituting these values, as well as the amount of population reallo-
cated (P = 133,314) and employment reallocated (E = 38,450), a change in
total regional travel during the peak hour (change in VMT = 146,248) was
the result.
     Based on 1985 total peak hour auto travel of 5,017,330 VMT, this
represents a VMT reduction of 2.9 percent in the peak hour by 1985.
                                     F-32

-------
                                  APPENDIX G
                    DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS FROM LAND USE AND
                      TRANSPORTATION MAINTENANCE MEASURES
LEGAL IMPACTS
     The police power as delegated from the state is the constitutional basis
for many land use controls at the local level, including that of zoning.  It
is similarly the basis for special use permits, planned unit development, and
other techniques involving public control through ownership such as open space
acquisition, all of which can be used to further a development pattern con-
sistent with the objectives of air quality management.   Use of the controls
for air quality management per se has not been attempted in the Baltimore re-
gion nor in the State of Maryland; rather, the jurisdictions have been con-
cerned with the issue of growth as related to the location, intensity and
timing of development, the efficiency of public services, and the preserva-
tion of prime agricultural land.  Land use policy should not, of course, be
based on one criterion.   Yet, as air quality management enters the planning
and regulatory processes, denial of special use permits on the grounds of
potential high emission sources or rezonings to attain higher densities in
transit corridors may lead to court challenges on this  issue.  The use of
land use controls for air quality management will require regional coordina-
tion, local regulation,  and may also require state enabling legislation as
deemed appropriate by the State's Attorney General.  At the state level, in-
tervention in areas of critical state concern and the nature of state inter-
vention as required in recent state land use legislation.
     Legal issues raised by the alternative hydrocarbon strategies are:
     (1)  Is state enabling legislation required for localities to implement
          land use controls for the purpose of air quality maintenance?
     (2)  How will the air quality maintenance plan be enforced if and when
          local land use controls are challenged or where localities them-
          selves wish to deviate from commitments to the plan?  It is assumed
          that agreement will be reached among the jurisdictions in the
          Baltimore region prior to the implementation of the plan, that the
                                     G-l

-------
          legal authority to implement the plan will be adequately delegated
                                                                    •»
          to the localities and that monitoring and enforcement will be vested
          in the appropriate state agency.
     (3)  When revisions to a local comprehensive plan or general zoning plan
          are necessitated by the air quality maintenance plan, will a state
          EIS be required to demonstrate conformance?
     (4)  What state and federal tax revisions are required to provide equity
          to landowners when future development has been precluded in agri-
          culture/conservation zoning?
     (5)  Can state highway funds (saved in the withholding of construction
          funds) be diverted to mass transit programs?  Is legislative action
          required?
     (6)  Does air quality maintenance provide too much discretion for local
          jurisdictions in the exercise of zoning?  Will rigorous criteria be
          required in zoning cases to avoid the appearance, if not the reality,
          of classifications being arbitrary and capricous?  Will the use of
          large lot zoning in agricultural districts be challenged as ex-
          clusionary?
     (7)  If enforcement of air quality maintenance plan means serious adverse
          effects on other elements of the environment how would resolution of
          the conflict take place—administrative or judicial relief?
     The legality of the proposed measures, the administrative procedures used
to enforce them and actions which must be taken by state and federal govern-
ment to permit them to be implemented are raised as questions; resolution of
these issues is certainly complex and, in several instances, more general in
scope than the Baltimore region.  It is believed that they cannot be properly
addressed in the current study but should be given urgent attention by EPA
for the reason that the timing and effectiveness of maintenance actions na-
tionally depends upon their resolution.

ECONOMIC IMPACTS
     Major economic impacts are tied to plan proposals for changes in the
regional transportation system from highways to public transit.  A proposed
                                      G-2

-------
halt in construction of the Interstate system would affect some $1 billion of
capital expenditures, federal, state and local.  Not all of this amount will
be "savings" since additional improvements are proposed for the transit system;
these have not been precisely defined nor costed out, but could be of the
order of $200 million over a 10 year period, substantially less than the cap-
ital expenditure savings from the halt in expressway construction.
     The diversion of travel demand from automobile to public transportation,
would result in less automobile use and less automobile ownership, with re-
sulting decreases in public revenues from automobile taxes, gasoline taxes
and registration fees.
     Acting to increase public revenues would be taxes instituted on auto-
mobile use and on automobile accessories.  Neither of these have been pre-
cisely quantified, but using the same assumptions as were used in developing
probable levels of effectiveness in reducing hydrocarbon emissions, it is
estimated that there would be a net decrease in tax revenues of the order
                       *
of $6 million per year.
     The diversion of travel demand to transit is predicated on fare subsidies,
among other measures.  This will be a major public expense, of the order of
$50 million annually by 1985.  In fact, transit would not be "free"; the net
effect would be one of spreading the costs of the system across the whole
of the regional community rather than requiring users to meet operating costs.
The "redistributional" effect is discussed as a social impact.
     The land use policies which are an integral part of the "diversion of
travel demand" component of the trial plan will themselves produce certain
economic impacts.  These will primarily stem from changes in development po-
tential resulting from accessibility changes and land use controls.  Inevitably,
land values in areas subject to development constraints under the proposed
policies will decline in value, while lands at and adjacent to the "centers
  *  Reduction of $20 million annually in gasoline taxes and of $2 million
     annually in automobile sales taxes, and an increase of $16 million
     annually on accessory taxes.
                                       G-3

-------
and corridors" will have enhanced value resulting from new development oppor-
tunities, greater densities, and improved transportation facilities.  These
changes are dependent on market factors and quantification is beyond the scope
of the present study.

SOCIAL IMPACTS
     The transportation elements with more significant social consequences
are addressed below:
     (1)  Restrict highway construction and improvement by withholding
          highway construction funds. The shift from highway construction to
          transit improvements will have important economic impacts but its
          secondary consequences will include some which properly may be
          termed social.  The highway program is construction oriented and
          the bulk of the expenditures will through the 6 year construction
          period, create local jobs in the construction industry* and
          associated activities; the "multiplier effect" of local wages and
          salaries of these circulate in the community will generate addition-
          al service employment.  The transit improvement program, on the
          other hand, is much more oriented to the acquisition of vehicles
          which are produced outside of the region; these expenditures will
          produce few construction jobs, though operation of an extended sys-
          tem will generate continuing employment for drivers, maintenance
          personnel and administrative staff of the order of 2,000 additional
          permanent employees.  If highway funds are withheld, and subse-
          quently transferred to the rapid rail construction program many of
          the spin offs of local jobs and wages will not be lost from the
          curtailed highway programs.  Indeed, the increased funds for rapid
          rail could speed the construction progress on the committed transit
          system and provide opportunities for use ahead of the present sched-
          ule.
   * Estimated to be of the order of 20,000 man-years of effort on the
     $1 billion program.
                                      G-4

-------
     (2)  Diversion of Auto Passengers  to Rail and Bus

          (a)  Improve transit service,  subsidize fares  and institute user
               taxes.   The importance of these elements  is  that  the auto user,
               in effect,  subsidizes the transit user's  costs.   For the
               "captured"  auto user, this policy will undoubtedly seem in-
               equitable.   The thrust, however, is to attract the user-of-the-
               automobile-by-choice to  the transit alternative.   The improve-
               ment in service and the  lowered fares  will have substantial
               benefits for the traditional captive transit user; the poor,
               the elderly, the young.   For low and moderate income groups,
               the extension of transit  service opens new opportunities for
               job locations and,  at the reduced fares,  their expanded mobil-
               ity will not be costly.   The reduced fares,  in fact, increase
               the proportion of their  disposable income available for other
               basic goods and services.  Increased mobility for the elderly
               and the young potentially means greater use  of public facilities
               such as clinics, libraries, and other  communitity resources.
          (b)  Control of  land use to concentrate development in transportation
               corridors.   The use of selective land  use controls to channel
               development into higher  density transportation corridors will
               have a variety of social  implications. First, an alternative
               to sprawl development will be found in suburban locations. A
               higher density and transit oriented way of life can be generated
               by the mixed use development characteristic  of planned unit de-
               velopment near transit stations.  The  provision of mixed uses
               near residences affords  another change in suburban life style—
               the opportunity to walk  to convenience shopping or combine
               several purposes in a single auto trip.   Higher densities also
               increases the utility of  public facilities and offers the
               potential of daytime and  nighttime use for multiple purposes.
     Open space will be generated by the agricultural/conservation zoning,
holding zones and land banking.  Nonetheless, the availability of usable and
scenic  open space can have important social benefits  in  providing recreation,
                                      G-5

-------
psychological relief and enjoyment.  To the extent that agricultural zoning
helps shape community limits, the perception of the community can be enhanced.

OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
     The measures in the hydrocarbon alternative plans will, as a secondary
effect, reduce other pollutants from transportation sources.  The reduction
                                          3
in participates will reach nearly 2.0 ug/m .  Decreases in LDV VMT and the
HDV retrofit program will each bring about appreciable reductions in S0» and
NOx.
     Two positive effects and one negative effect of the proposed plan on
waste water (sanitary sewers and storm water) collection should be noted.
The concentration of urban activities into centers will increase the poten-
tial efficiency of waste water collection systems; the areas to be served
will be at higher densities and concentrated into more efficiently served
corridors, as compared with the highly dispersed, lower density patterns
typical of incremental growth in recent years.  The decrease in VMT will de-
crease the automobile and truck generated pollution introduced to the storm
water runoff in proportion to the estimated reduction in VMT.  The negative
impact is that the increased concentrations of urban uses may well increase
slightly the total area of impervious surfaces in the region with the result
that storm water runoff is increased.
     The side effects of the plan with regard to urban noise will also have
both positive and negative points.  A reduction in VMT will have a direct
positive effect on automobile-generated component of urban noise.  The con-
centration of urban activities into more: diverse centers will, by contrast,
increase the ambient noise levels of the corridors.  The measure which would
limit growth in the number of aircraft operations at Baltimore-Washington
International Airport would result in less noise for two separate reasons.
Firstly, the actual number of operations may be expected to be less than if
operational levels were unconstrained so that the duration of exposure to
aircraft noise would be less, and secondly, the .airlines can be expected to
utilize larger aircraft in order to meet increasing travel demands within a
static number of operations.  These large jet aircraft (the D.C.//10 and
L. 1011) are quieter than the smaller jet aircraft (B. 727, D.C. #9) which,
                                     G-6

-------
through the 10-year planning period, would otherwise likely constitute the
bulk of the traffic.
     The transporation measures will have both good and bad impact on fuel
conservation.  The direct savings in gasoline resulting from a 30% reduction
in VMT will be partially offset by decreased mileage on HDV's as a result of
the emission control devices proposed in the plan.  This latter effect cannot
be quantified but the balance is clearly on a reduction of overall gasoline
consumption on a regional basis.
     The transportation/land use measures will have a beneficial effect on
fuel conservation.  A proportional savings in gasoline will result from a
30% reduction in VMT.
                                        G-7

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                           (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
      EPA-450/3-74-050
                             2.
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
      Development of  a Trial Air Quality
      Maintenance Plan using the Baltimore
      Air Quality Control Region	
             5. REPORT DATE
                 September 1974
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
      Engineering-Science, Inc.
      7903 West Park Drive
      McLean, Virginia 22101
                                                           10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                  68-02-1380
                  Task No.  2	
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
      U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
      Office of Air and Waste Management
      Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
      Research Triangle Park. N.C. 27713	
             13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                  Final
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
      This report is a Trial Air Quality Maintenance  Plan for the Baltimore  Air
      Quality Maintenance  Study Area, which is coterminous with the Metropolitan
      Baltimore Air Quality  Control Region.  The report contains:  A trial analysis
      of whether the National Ambient Air Quality  Standards for particulate  matter,
      sulfur dioxide, photochemical oxidants, and  nitrogen dioxide will be main-
      tained for the ten year period 1975-1985; a  trial plan to maintain  the standards
      which are not expected to be maintained over that period; and a description
      of the method used to  develop the trial plan.   The plan was prepared using
      draft EPA guidelines concerning air quality  maintenance area analysis  and plan
      development and can be used as an example which states can use in developing
      their analyses and plans pursuant to EPA's requirements contained in 40 CFR
      Part 51.
17.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                           c. COS AT I Field/Group
      Air Pollution
      Atmosphere Contamination  Control
      Urban Planning
      Regional Planning
 Air Quality Maintenance
   Area
 Air Quality Maintenance
   Plan
 Baltimore
 National Ambient Air
   Quality Standards
    13-B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

     Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report}

 Unclassified	
21. NO. OF PAGES
  279.
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
                           22. PRICE
                                               Tin r* 1 a c
        s^ f-f or!
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
                                                           INSTRUCTIONS

    1.   REPORT NUMBER
         Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.

    2.   LEAVE BLANK

    3.   RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
         Reserved for use by each report recipient.

    4.   TITLE  AND SUBTITLE
         Title should indicate  clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently.  Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
         type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
         number and include subtitle for the specific title.

    5.   REPORT DATE
         Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and  year.  Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., date of issue, date of
         approval, date of preparation, etc.).

    6.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
         Leave blank.

    7.   AUTHOR(S)
         Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.).  List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
         zation.

    8.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
         Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

    9.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
         Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.

    10.  PROGRAM ELEMENT  NUMBER
         Use the program element number under which the report was prepared. Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.

    11.  CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
         Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.

    12.  SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
         Include ZIP code.  •

    13.  TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
         Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.

    14.  SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
         Leave blank.

    15.  SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTES
         Enter information not included elsewhere but useful,  such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
         To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.

    16.  ABSTRACT
         Include a brief (200 words or less)  factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
         significant bibliography  or literature survey, mention it here.

    17.  KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
         (a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
         concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.

         (b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code  names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
         ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.

         (c) COSATl FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the  1965 COSATI Subject Category List.  Since the ma-
         jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
         endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
         the primary posting(s).

    18.  DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
         Denote  releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
         the public, with address  and price.

    19. & 20.  SECURITY  CLASSIFICATION
         DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.

    21.  NUMBER OF PAGES
         Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.

    22.  PRICE
         Insert the  price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, it  known.
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (Reverse)

-------