REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
METROPOLITAN ST. LOUIS INTERSTATE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
(MISSOURI-ILLINOIS)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
-------
REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
METROPOLITAN ST. LOUIS INTERSTATE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
(MISSOURI-ILLINOIS)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
December, 1968
-------
CONTENTS
PREFACE 3
INTRODUCTION 4
EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING FACTORS 12
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS 34
THE PROPOSED REGION 45
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL 45
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
-------
PREFACE
The Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, is
directed by the Air Quality Act of 1967 to designate "air quality
control regions" to provide a basis for the establishment of air
quality standards and the implementation of air quality control
programs. In addition to listing the major factors to be considered
in the development of region boundaries, the Act stipulates that the
designation of a region shall be preceded by consultation with
appropriate State and local authorities.
The National Air Pollution Control Administration, DREW, has
conducted a study of the Metropolitan St. Louis urban area, the
•fc
results of which are presented in this report. The Region boundaries
proposed in this report reflect consideration of all available and
pertinent data; however, the boundaries remain subject to revision
suggested by consultation with State and local authorities. Formal
designation will be withheld pending the outcome of the meeting. This
report is intended to serve as the starting point for the consultation.
The Administration is appreciative of assistance received either
directly during the course of this study or indirectly during previous
I
studies from the official air pollution agencies of the affected states
and counties, the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, and the
Southwestern Illinois Metropolitan Area Planning Commission.
*For the purposes of this report, the word region, when capitalized,
will refer to the Metropolitan St. Louis Interstate Air Quality
Control Region. When not capitalized, unless otherwise noted, it
will refer to air quality control regions in general.
-------
INTRODUCTION
"For the purpose of establishing ambient air
quality standards pursuant to section 108, and for
administrative and other purposes, the Secretary,
after consultation with appropriate State and local
authorities shall, to the extent feasible, within
18 months after the date of enactment of the Air
Quality Act of 1967 designate air quality control
regions based on jurisdictional boundaries, urban-
industrial concentrations, and other factors including
atmospheric areas necessary to provide adequate
implementation of air quality standards. The
Secretary may from time to time thereafter, as he
determines necessary to protect the public health
and welfare and after consultation with appropriate
State and local authorities, revise the designation
of such regions and designate additional air quality
control regions. The Secretary shall immediately
notify the Governor or Governors of the affected
State or States of such designation."
Section 107 (a), Air Quality Act of 1967
Air pollution, because of its direct relationship to people
and their activities, is an urban problem. Urban sprawls often
cover thousands of square miles; they quite often include parts
of more than one state and almost always are made up of several
counties and an even greater number of cities. Air pollution,
therefore, also becomes a regional problem, and the collaboration
of several governmental jurisdictions is prerequisite to the
solution of the problem in any given area. Air quality control
regions called for in the above-quoted section of the Air Quality
Act of 1967 are meant to define the geographical extent of air
pollution problems in different urban areas and the combination
of jurisdictions that must contribute to the solution in each.
-------
The regional approach set up by the Air Quality Act is
illustrated in Figure 1. The approach involves a series of steps
to be taken by Federal, State, and local governments, beginning
with the designation of regions, the publication of air quality
criteria, and the publication of information on available control
techniques by the Federal Government. Following the completion of
these three steps, the Governors of the States affected by a
region must file with the Secretary within 90 days a letter of
intent, indicating that the States will adopt within 180 days
ambient air quality standards for the pollutants covered by the
published criteria and control technology documents and adopt
within an additional 180 days plans for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of those standards in the designated
air quality control regions.
The new Federal legislation provides for a regional attack on
air pollution and, at the same time, allows latitude in the form
which regional efforts may take. While the Secretary reserves
approval authority, the States involved in a designated region
assume the responsibility for developing standards and an
implementation plan which includes administrative procedures for
abatement and control.
The basic objectives in the designation of an air quality
control region is that it be self-contained, i.e. that the transfer
of air pollution out of or into a region is minimized. This objective
recognizes the fact that an air quality control region cannot be
delineated in a way to make it completely independent with respect
to the air pollution problem. Because air pollutants can be carried
-------
0\
HEW designates
air quality
control regions.
HEW develops and
publishes air
quality criteria
based on scientific
evidence of air
pollution effects.
HEW prepares
and publishes
information on
available control
techniques.
States hold
hearings and
set air quality
standards in the
air quality
control regions.
HEW
reviews
State
standards.
States establish plans for implementation,
considering factors such as:
• Existing pollutant levels in the region
• Number, location, and types of sources
• Meteorology
• Control technology
• Air pollution growth trends
Implementation plans would set forth
abatement procedures, outlining factors
such as:
• Emission standards for the categories of
sources in the region.
• How enforcement will be employed to
insure uniform and coordinated control
action involving State, local, and regional
authorities.
• Abatement schedules for the sources to
insure that air quality standards will be
achieved within a reasonable time.
1
HEW reviews
State implementation plans
I
States act to control air
pollution in accordance with
air quality standards and plans
for implementation.
Figure i. Flow diagram for State action to control air pollution on a regional basis.
-------
long distances, the air over a region can be subjected occasionally
or even frequently to trace amounts of pollution from other cities
and individual sources located outside its boundaries. Under specific
and episodic conditions such contributions can even reach significant
quantities. The problem of a boundary designation is further compounded
in that urban areas generally do not end abruptly but are surrounded
by activities that can contribute to the pollution of the urban area
as well as be the recipients of its generated pollution. Consideration
of all these possibilities would result in regions substantially
larger than is practical or even necessary to get to the brunt of
the problem. The primary question, therefore, becomes one of relative
magnitude and frequency.
The boundaries of regions, however, should encompass areas that
contain sources that add significantly to the pollution load of the
air as well as the areas that are significantly and continuously
atrected by it. For this purpose, the delineation of regional
boundaries is based on evaluation of annual and seasonal air
pollutant emissions and resultant ambient concentrations rather than
those based on short-term and specific conditions.
The selection of regionafL boundaries should not be based solely
on today's conditions and needs but, perhaps more importantly, should
give consideration to future development and growth of the area. For
this purpose, extensive consideration should be given to prescribed
metropolitan plans as well as the forecasted growth. Such considerations
should result in the designation of regions that will contain the
sources and receptors of regional air pollution for a number of years
-------
to come. This is not to say that the regional boundaries should
remain stationary and unchanged. Periodic review of boundaries is
desirable, and changes in the boundary should be considered if
conditions warrant.
The delineation of region boundaries solely on the basis of source
locations and distributional patterns of ambient air pollution would
most likely result in regions that do not follow any existing
governmental boundaries, are difficult to define, and, more importantly,
extremely difficult if not impossible to administrate. It is for this
purpose that existing jurisdictional entities are reviewed and wherein
practical the boundary lines of a region should include that combina-
tion of whole jurisdictions that encompasses the problem area. There
can be exceptions to this philosophy, however. The presence of
overly large jurisdictions, marked topographical features (mountains),
or notable differences in development within a given jurisdiction may,
in some cases, make it desirable to include only portions of some
jurisdictions.
A region, then, will represent a balance between the various
objectives discussed so far to the extent that any two of them lead
to different conclusions. The strength of some factors over others
may lead to region boundaries which exclude some sources of pollution
that might affect the air quality of part or all of the nearby region
under certain conditions. Even though the impact of such sources
would probably be minimal, the implementation plan required under the
Air Quality Act for the region should provide a mechanism for the
control of point sources that are located just beyond the region
-------
boundary.-Such a provision would be consistent with the basic
objective of providing desirable air quality within an area being
designated as an air quality control region.
Information on current industrial, commercial, and residential
land use, transportation system, and population density is of direct
value in that it illustrates generally the location of industry and
people in an urban area. Furthermore, it is through an evaluation of
estimated patterns of urbanization that the air quality control region
can be designed to provide for future growth and expansion of the
urban area.
Figure 2 summarizes the procedure used by the National Air
Pollution Control Administration for designating air quality control
regions.
A preliminary delineation of the region is developed by bringing
together two essentially separate studies—the "Evaluation of
Engineering Factors," and the "Evaluation of Urban Factors."
The study of "Engineering Factors" indicates the location of
pollution sources and the geographic extent of serious pollutant
concentrations in the ambient air. Pollution sources are located by
an inventory of emissions from automobiles, industrial activities,
space heating, waste disposal, and other pollution generators.. Pollution
concentrations in the ambient air are estimated from air quality sampling
data and from a theoretical diffusion model. When it exists, air quality
sampling data is more reliable than the theoretical diffusion model
results since the data is directly recorded by pollution measuring
-------
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
• EMISSIONS INVENTORY
• METEOROLOGY
• AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
EXISTING AIR QUALITY DATA
DIFFUSION MODEL OUTPUT
URBAN FACTORS
• Jurisdictional Boundaries
• Urban-Industrial Concentrations
• Cooperative Regional Arrangements
• Pattern and Rate of Growth
• Existing State and Local Air
Pollution Control Legislation & Programs
Preliminary
Delineation
of
Regions
Consultation
with State
and Local
Officials
Formal
Designation
by
Secretary-HEW
Figure 2. Flow diagram for the designation of air quality control regions.
-------
11
instruments. Unfortunately, in many cases extensive air quality
sampling data is available for only one or two pollutants.
The study of "Urban Factors" encompasses all non-engineering
considerations. It reviews existing governmental jurisdictions,
current air pollution control programs, present concentrations of
population and industry, and expected patterns of urban growth.
Other non-engineering factors are discussed when they are relevant.
As a whole, the study of urban factors indicates how large an air
quality control region must be in order to encompass expected growth
of pollution sources in the future. It also considers which group of
governmental jurisdictions will most effectively administer a strong
regional air quality control program.
The conclusions of the engineering study are combined with the
results of the urban factors study to form the basis of an initial
proposal for an air quality control region. As shown in Figure 2, the
proposal is then submitted for consultation with State and local
officials. After reviewing the suggestions raised during the consulta-
tion, the Secretary formally designates the region with a notice in the
Federal Register and notifies the governors of the States affected by
the designation.
The body of this report contains a proposal for the boundaries of
the Metropolitan St. Louis Air Quality Control Region and supporting
studies on engineering and urban factors. The report itself is intended
to serve as the background document for the formal consultation with
appropriate State and local authorities.
-------
12
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
INTERSTATE AIR POLLUTION STUDY
In February 1962, simultaneous but independent requests were
made by St. Louis City and the city of East St. Louis to the
U.S. Public Health Service, Division of Air Pollution, for assistance
in assessing and combating the air pollution problem in the St. Louis
area. The result was the "Interstate Air Pollution Study." The study
consisted of two phases. Phase I was conducted to assess the overall
air pollution problem in the St. Louis area and to determine which
activities should receive detailed analysis in Phase II. Numerous
papers and brochures resulted from Phase II and the Phase II project
report itself consisted of the following eight volumes:
I. Introduction
II. Air Pollutant Emission Inventory
III. Air Quality Measurements
IV. Odors—Results of Surveys
V. Meteorology and Topography
VI. Effects of Air Pollution
VII. Opinion Surveys and Air Quality
Statistical Relationships.
VIII. Proposal for an Air Resources
Management Program.
The area under study consisted of six counties plus St. Louis
City. The counties were St. Louis, St. Charles, and Jefferson in
Missouri, and Madison, St. Clair, and Monroe in Illinois.
Several volumes prepared during the Interstate Study were drawn
upon in preparing this report. Some parts, however, have been
updated in order to present current air pollution emission data and
air quality data.
-------
13
EMISSION INVENTORY
The emission inventory used in this study resulted from a rapid
emission inventory of air pollutant sources in the St. Louis
Metropolitan area. The objectives of the inventory were to
determine the total quantities of various air pollutants emitted
o
using appropriate emission factors, to estimate the geographical
and seasonal variation in air pollutant emissions, and to determine
any overall change in emissions from those determined during the
Insterstate Study, 1963. Accordingly, the study area was divided into
a grid coordinate system and the emission quantities were reported in
terms of tons of pollutant per grid on an average summer day, average
winter day, and average annual day.
*
The pollutants considered in this survey are sulfur oxides,
particulates and carbon monoxide. The patterns of emissions and
concentrations of these three pollutants provide some measure of the
general geographical extent of the overall problem. Sulfur oxides
pollution levels illustrate the impact of fuel burning activities at
stationary sources. Levels of carbon monoxide provide the best indication
of the impact of gasoline-powered motor vehicles on the regional air
pollution pattern. The particulate emission densities indicate primarily
i
the extent of industrial, power, incineration, and heating sources.
Data presented herein are representative of 1967 and were
gathered mainly by state and local agencies. The area covered by the
*Sulfur dioxide constitutes the majority of sulfur oxide pollution.
In this evaluation, sulfur oxide emissions and concentrations are
assumed to be composed entirely of sulfur dioxide.
-------
14
emission inventory consists of St. Louis City and the counties of
St. Louis, St. Charles, Franklin, and Jefferson in Missouri, and the
counties of Madison, St. Glair, and Monroe in Illinois. (Franklin
County was not included in the Interstate Study.)
For the purposes of this survey, the study area was divided into
two separate grid systems, both based on latitude and longitude—one
for the reporting of SOX and particulates and other for the reporting
of CO. Four grid sizes of 2, 4, 8, and 16 minutes were utilized for
delineating emissions of SOX and particulates and one grid size of
15 minutes was used for emissions of CO. The smaller grids were used
on the densest areas of population and industry. Figures A-l and A-2
in Appendix A illustrate the grid system used for SOx and particulates
and for CO respectively. Pollutant emissions are considered negligible
in those areas outside of the grid patterns. Tables A-l through A-3
in Appendix A give the emission inventory, by grid, for average
annual, summer, and winter days. Figure 3 illustrates the location
of major point sources. Figures 4 through 6 show winter emission
densities of the three pollutants. Concentrations of point sources and
pollutant emissions are highest in the St. Louis-East St. Louis area
and in the north-west corner of Madison County in the vicinity of
Alton.
Table 1 presents a summary of the three pollutants by source
category. The 1967 emissions inventory was essentially an updating
of the 1963 study.•* Major differences can be explained in terms of
new or controlled sources, or sources which were omitted in the
Interstate Study.
-------
15
x \
/
I
PIKE
UJ " " ll
l*\
GREENE
—T
ri
I i
MACOUPIN
JERSEY
_
^•^•"
I
I
_
I *"*»—>. i
*~ v./ £>
^
L_
I
MONTGOMERY
Lr I
ST. CHARLES
MADISON
BOND
|
T
CUNTON
FRANKLIN
.
\
ST.CLA.R
\
\s
'
,-/~——j
j ____ ____ j
JEFFERSON
V
MONROE
WASHINGTON
I
\»
---- "
RANDOLPH •
PERRY
CRAWFORD WASHINGTON
«•
S
y
< STEGENEVIEVE
S
T
.
i — r -
j
FRANCOIS
X
.
\ ^
\/^>. /
S ^J
\
PERRY x
N
o 10 20 » 40 so
SCALE
Emission Rate ~ Tons/Day
* 10 - 1001 °f
A\lnn f single
A S IOU J pollutant
Rgure 3. Major Point Sources
-------
16
I .}
MONTGOMERY
, I
BOND
I L.
CLINTON
'1
WASHINGTON
CRAWFORD
J
L
PERRY S
)
I
^ STE GENEVIEVE V/^S /
\ "A
, j FRANCOIS \ / \
1—r" ^ "1 *^S PERRY
JACKSON
-. ;^-
10 20 30 40 50
SCALE
SO Density ~ (Ton/Day)/Mi
N X
.2
Figure 4. Sulfur Oxides Emission Density by Study Area Zone, Winter Average
-------
17
\ N
CRAWFORD
L.J— ]
Particulate Density~ (Ton/Day)/Mi
I—I—I
10 20 30 40 SO
SCALE -N,KM
1.01 - .099
.1 - 1
Figure 5. Particulate Emission Density by Study Area Zone, Winter Average
-------
18
L_J"' "
«H—I—I—I—I
10 20 30 40 50
SCALE
2
CO Density- (Ton/Day )/Mi
• O ^ • 77
Figure 6. Carbon Monoxide Emission Density by Study Area Zone, Winter Average
-------
TABLE I. SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
IN THE ST. LOUIS AIR
POLLUTION STUDY AREA, 1967 (TONS/YEAR)
19
Source
Category
Transportation
Road Vehicles
Other
Combustion of Fuels
(stationary sources)
Indus try
Steam-Elec. Util.
Residential
Other
Refuse Disposal
Incineration
Open Burning
Industrial Process
Emissions
TOTALS*
Sulfur
Oxides
1967
5,100
4,100
1,000
538,800
110,600
368,592
49 , 201
10,385
634
306
328
117,781
662,300
Particulates
1967
8,800
5,400
3,400
123,210
46,300
50,411
22,058
4,441
4,918
2,294
2,624
38,700
175,600
Carbon
Monoxide
1967
1,271,000
1,245,000
26,000
28,197
3,258
1,402
20,744
2,793
16,500
2,052
14,500
327,600
1,643,300
^Rounded to nearest 100 tons/year
-------
20
The increase in emissions under transportation sources,
especially carbon monoxide, is due to a growth in motor vehicle
activity. Increase in particulate and sulfur oxides emissions
since 1963 by steam-electric utilities is due primarily to the
addition of a major power plant which was not on line in 1963.
AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
The geographical distribution of pollutant sources illustrates
the core of the problem area. It does not, however, elucidate the
extent of the influence of pollution sources on the people and
property located outside the highly urbanized portion of the St. Louis
metropolitan area. A study of air quality levels known or estimated
to occur is useful in determining the area affected by the pollution
sources and thus subject to inclusion in the air quality control
region. Such analysis can be based directly on air sampling data in
those instances where the sampling program covers a large enough area
and has been in existence long enough to provide reliable patterns of
air quality throughout the region under study.
The Interstate Air Pollution Study provided a wealth of air
quality data from the core area for two of the three pollutants
considered in this report. Contour lines based on sampling station
data were presented for both S02 and particulates.
Carbon monoxide levels, however, are more difficult to analyze
and predict. Motor vehicles are the prime emitters of CO; consequently,
the concentrations of both emissions and air quality are closely
related to the traffic patterns. The CAMP station in St. Louis City
-------
21
was the only CO sampling station during the Interstate Study. CO
levels in the general metropolitan area can hardly be predicted
from the CO concentration values at only one station. It becomes
necessary, therefore, to develop estimates of relative air
quality. Diffusion modeling is a technique by which such estimates
can be made based on the location and quantity of pollutant emissions
and on meteorological conditions. The influence of topography on
ambient air quality levels is reflected in the results of the model,
but only to the extent that it influences meteorological conditions.
The diffusion model used in this study is treated in detail in
Appendix B.
The diffusion model was applied for SOX and particulates as well
as for CO for average annual, winter, and summer days. Figure 7 and
Table B-l show the meteorological data required to apply the model.
Figure 7 shows the per cent frequency of occurence of wind direction
from 1951 through 1960 at Lambert Field, 12 miles from downtown.
St. Louis. The wind speed and direction data used in the diffusion
model were considered representative of the prevailing wind patterns
4
throughout the general St. Louis area. Since the Martin-Tikvart model
used in this study attempts to show long-term rather than episodic
air-quality conditions, only average emissions and long-term average
meteorology are considered. If episodic data (i.e., data with a
very low frequency of occurence) were used to aid in delineating
a region boundary, the region would be unnecessarily large. Even
the "smaller" region defined on the basis of mean conditions would
-------
22
.4.6
8.2
S>.2
H.6
SUMMER
(June, July, August)
Figure 7. Percent frequency
of wind direction
for various averaging
times, based on
1951-1960 data.
12.2
7.2
5.3
12.0,
3.2
5.3
8.2
WINTER
(December, January February")
4.4
3.6
3.8
-------
23
undoubtedly encompass the area of maximum concentration upon which
a reduction plan is to be developed.
The mixing depths for the time periods are an average of the
mean morning and afternoon values, as shown in Table B-l in
Appendix B; these data were obtained from tabulations prepared
by the National Weather Records Center (ESSA). Combined with wind
data, these data are used in the diffusion model to assess the spatial
distribution of concentrations of suspended particulates, sulfur
oxides, and carbon monoxide.
Suspended Particulates
In previous reports proposing air quality control regions for
New York City, Chicago, and Denver, the area within the assumed
background level contour line for suspended particulates was considered
for inclusion in the region. Background is assumed to be approximately
40 ttg/m^ in the area surrounding St. Louis. The area within this
contour, then, is considered the area most affected by emissions
in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area.
Figure 8 shows the contour lines for suspended particulates based
!
on sampling results from July 1, 1963, to July 1, 1964. The lines are
the same as those published in the Interstate Study, Volumes III and
VIII.* Incorporated on the same figure are values of sampling stations
for the period July 1, 1967, to July 1, 1968, in Missouri and for the
*Isopleths were redrawn on a map of smaller scale to show the
relationship of the contour lines to the surrounding counties.
-------
Station
(Missouri)
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
(Illinois)
k
1
m
n
0
P
q
Concentration,* ppm
Geometric Mean
July 1, 1967-
July 1, 1968
61
67
89
116
93
86
127
167
150
112
1967
116
182
197
126
n.a.
154
133
Jan. 1, 1968-
July 1, 1968
123
201
208
79
118
149
148
B
L.
Madison Co.
* Values on the Missouri side were
derived from data obtained from the
Divisions of Air Pollution Control,
St. Louis City and St. Louis County
the Illinois side, data was obtained from
the Illinois Air Pollution Control Board.
J
\
On
_\ |
Lines of equal value
i___ _Lines of probable
I equal value
^.* © Sampling location
Figure 8. Annual geometric means
of particulate matter measured
with high-volume sampler;
-------
25
period Jan. 1, 1967, to July 1, 1968, in Illinois. The recent emission
inventory showed a slight increase in particulate emissions from
1963 to 1967. This fact, coupled with the 1967-1968 sampling data
plotted on Figure 8, indicates a slight increase in suspended
particulate levels from 1963. Assuming, however, that this trend
is very gradual and that the change from 1963-1968 is insignificant
as far as the location of the background level (40 //g/m^) contour
line, Figure 8 might be used to assess the spatial distribution of
suspended particulate concentrations.
Sampling stations for the Interstate Study were mainly situated
towards the center of the urban complex, so there were not enough
points to draw a contour line for 40 /xg/nr. By extrapolation, however,
one can see that this isopleth would probably pass through the
following counties: St. Charles, St. Louis, and Jefferson in
Missouri, and Monroe, St. Clair, Madison, Jersey, and Macoupin
in Illinois.
Theoretical suspended particulate contour lines were produced
by the diffusion model. The results are shown in Figure 9. The
contours of Figure 9 were produced independent of sampling data
I „
and were based solely on emissions and meteorology. The 40 ug/mj
isopleth crosses the same jurisdictions as were mentioned above.
Sulfur Oxides
Figure 10 is a reproduction of SC>2 contour lines from the
Interstate Study. ^ The isopleths are based on 24- hour S02 samples
of geometric means for winter, 1964-65. On the basis that SOX
-------
26
CRAWFORD
~L._r
A N
Y.-X"
WASHINGTON /
< STE
FRANCOIS \
1 X
^J 1
V .^^ PERRY
^-v. RANDOLPH !
--L i '•
( /
GENEVIEVE \^*'» /
/ S JACKSON
. .A X PERRY "\.
3 \
10 20 30 40 50
SCALE
Part i cu late ~/jg/mv
Figure 9. Theoretical Participate Concentration - Annual Average
-------
27
Figure 10. 24-hour sulfur dioxide geometric means (ppm) for 40-station network
during winter of 1964-65.
-------
28
emissions have not changed significantly in the core of the St. Louis
Study area, the contours present a good picture of the situation in
the St. Louis-East St. Louis area. The map is less adequate, however,
for aid in delineating a region boundary, since there are no
concentration contours in the Alton area. As was pointed out
previously, the increase in SC^ emissions in the whole study area
in 1967 is due primarily to a power plant in St. Charles County
which was not on line in 1963-64. Also, a cluster of important
SOx point sources are located in or near Alton.
The theoretical diffusion model iso-intensity contours of SOx
give a better coverage of the general study area. Figure 11 shows
contours based on average winter meteorology and winter emissions
for 1967. A three-hour half-life was incorporated into the model
to allow for atmospheric reaction of SOx into other sulfur compounds.
*
The values of the contour lines were adjusted to conform with air
quality measurements.
A concentration of 0.01 ppm SOx has been used as a guide in
previous air quality control region proposals as an appropriate
level for outlining general problem areas. The adjusted theoretical
0.01 ppm isopleth encompasses or extends into the following
jurisdictions: St. Louis City and the counties of St. Charles,
St. Louis, and Jefferson in Missouri, Jersey, Madison, St. Clair,
and Monroe in Illinois.
*Adjustment was done as follows: a diffusion model contour line
which corresponded closely in geographical extent to the 0.02 ppm
closed contour of Figure 10 was assigned a value of 0.02 ppm.
Remaining contours were adjusted in the same proportion.
-------
29
CRAWFORD I WASHINGTON
H—I—I—I—I
10 20 30 40 50
SCALE ~KM
SOy - ppm
Figure 11. Adjusted theoretical SOX concentration, winter average.
-------
30
Carbon Monoxide
Contour lines showing theoretical relative CO concentrations are
presented in Figure 12. Though winter CO emissions are slightly
greater than summer emissions, meteorological factors (see wind
roses in Figure 7) are responsible for higher CO concentrations
in the summer months in the St. Louis and Alton areas. The diffusion
model output, shown in Figure 12, indicates that the highest.relative
CO concentrations appear in the Alton area and in St. Louis City
where traffic Volume is greatest. High CO concentrations around
Alton are caused by the transport of the pollutant from St. Louis
by predominate south to south-west winds and by a cluster of point
sources in and around Alton.
*
Figure 13 shows main traffic arteries (highways) in the St. Louis
Study Area. Highways may be viewed as line sources of CO emissions.
The highest concentrations of traffic arteries are in St. Louis
City and County, Madison and St. Glair Counties. Jefferson, Franklin,
St. Charles, Monroe, Jersey, and Macoupin Counties are much less
affected by CO emissions from high traffic volumes.
Redrawn and produced in this report by permission of the East-West
Gateway Coordinating Council.
-------
31
i r
N
10 20 30 40 30
SCALE
Figure 12 . Theoretical CO Concentration - Summer Average
-------
10
1
Interstate, U.S., or State \
Highway
Anticipated Highway
Figure 13. Regional Existir
and Anticipated Highways.
(Redrawn and reproduced by permission of
the East-West Gateway Coordinating
Council^
-------
33
REFERENCES
1. "Rapid Survey Technique for Estimating Community Air Pollution
Emissions," PHS, Publication No. 999-AP-29, Environmental
Health Series, USDHEW, NCAPC, Cincinnati, Ohio, October, 1966.
2. "A Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors," Duprey, R.L.,
USDHEW, PHS, BDPEC, NCAPC, Durham, North Carolina, 1968.
3. "Interstate Air Pollution Study," Phase II Project Report,
Vol. II, Air Pollutant Emission Inventory, R. Venezia and
G. Ozolins, USDHEW, PHS, NCAPC, Cincinnati, Ohio, Revised
December, 1966.
4. "General Atmospheric Diffusion Model for Estimating the Effects
on Air Quality of One or More Sources," Martin, D.O., and
Tikvart, J.A. , Paper No. 68-148, 61 Annual Meeting, APCA,
St. Paul, Minnesota, June, 1968.
5. "Interstate Air Pollution Study," Phase II Project Report,
Volume III, Air Quality Measurements, R. Venezia and
G. Ozolins, USDHEW, PHS, NCAPC, Cincinnati, Ohio, December, 1966.
6. "Population Projections for the East-West Gateway Study Area,"
prepared by Hubert Williams, East-West Gateway Coordinating
Council, September 3, 1968.
-------
34
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS
In designing a workable air quality control region, factors
other than pollutant emissions and air quality levels must be
considered. Present population and population growth patterns
are important, since the region should encompass most of the people
in the vicinity of the urban complex. The pattern of industry and
projected industrial development is equally important. Existing
governmental structures must also receive consideration since
the Air Quality Act specifically notes that regions must be based
on jurisdictional boundaries. Only a combination of several
jurisdictions or parts thereof can provide a genuine regional
approach to the overall problem. Coordinated efforts such as councils'
of governments and planning agencies should receive consideration.
Consideration is also given to existing local air pollution control
agencies in the St. Louis Area.
Population
*
Figure 14 shows the 1960 and the projected 1990 pattern of
urbanization in the metropolitan St. Louis area. The 1960 general
urbanized area centers on St. Louis City, East St. Louis, and
St. Louis County with arms extending into St. Charles, Madison, and
St. Clair Counties. According to Figure 14, urbanization in Franklin,
*Redrawn and produced in this report by permission of the East-West
Gateway Coordinating Council.
-------
Modi son Co.
Sl.CTair Co.
I .'•.'•:•:•:•.
nklin Co. / :::x-:':--
\
\
x ••••»•
1960 General Urbanized Area \ ••:•.•:•>•
*^k
1990 Anticipated Urbanized Area ~1
\
Figure 14. Present and
Future Urbanization
(reproduced by permission of
/ the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council)
-------
36
Jefferson, and Monroe Counties is, at present, noncontiguous with the
central core area. The possibility, therefore, that by 1990 parts of
these counties may become engulfed by the expanding St. Louis
metropolitan complex is significant.*
The 1960 population density in the St. Louis metropolitan area is
shown in Figure 15. Table II shows population growth by jurisdiction
from 1960 to 1990 by five-year increments.1 In 1960, St. Louis City
had a higher population than any of the surrounding counties. But,
as Table II points out, St. Louis City population has begun to
decrease as the populace leaves the inner city to the surrounding
counties. St. Louis County is and will remain the highest populated
jurisdiction in the area.
The rank of each jurisdiction based on present and future
population and expected population growth is presented in Table III.
Based on absolute growth, the counties of St. Louis, Jefferson, and
Madison, respectively, will be the fastest growing areas. By percentage
rate of growth, however, Jefferson, St. Charles, and Monroe,
respectively, will experience the most rapid growth.
Industry
Q«jU*£'
Figure 16 shows present industrial land use in the core of
the Metropolitan St. Louis Area. Industry is dense in St. Louis City
*The 1990 urbanization pattern is based on present random growth
trends and reflects neither a desired urban form endorsed by the
East-West Gateway Coordinating Council nor county-wide zoning.
**Redrawn and produced in this report by permission of the East-
West Gateway Coordinating Council.
-------
37
MADISON | CO
ST.S{ CLAIFtTco
<499
500-1399
2,000-4,999
5,000-9,999
10,000-20,000
20,000
620
400"°' 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500""' 510 520 530 540 550
Figure 15. Population from I960 census by 5, 000-foot grid squares.
-------
TABLE II.*1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
00
Jurisdiction
St. Louis City
St. Louis Co.
Jefferson Co.
St. Charles Co.
Franklin Co.
Madison Co.
St. Glair Co.
Monroe Co.
Population
1960
750,000
703,500
66,400
53,000
44,600
224,700
262,500
15,500
1965
707,100
869,300
89,800
75,000
49,900
248,400
285,600
17,000
1970
668,700
1,055,000
120,200
105,000
55,200
276,800
307", 200
18,500
1975
63,700
1,275,100
159,400
145,700
70,700
308,900
331,600
23,600
1980
614,300
1,370,400
210,200
202,500
91,800
344,800
358,000
30,600
1985
603,400
1,456,700
276,600
225,000
101,800
383,200
384,300
40,000
1990
600,200
1,525,500
362,200
245,000
111,100
422,300
408,400
52,200
Population
Change
1960-1990
-149,800
+822,000
+295,800
+192,000
+66,400
+197,600
+145,900
+36,700
%
Change
1960-1990
-207.
+117%
+445%
+362%
+149%
+88%
+56%
+237%
Figures from "Population Projections for the East-West Gateway Study Area,' East-West Gateway Coordinating Council.
-------
TABLE III. POPULATION RANKS OF MISSOURI AND ILLINOIS
JURISDICTIONS IN THE ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
39
Jurisdiction
•rl
01
•rl
SI
CO
0
•H
i—l
M
St. Louis Co.
St. Louis City
St. Charles Co.
Jefferson Co.
Franklin Co. \
Madison Co.
St. Glair Co.
Monroe Co.
1965 Pop.
1
2
6
5
7
4
3
8
1990 Pop.
1
2
6
5
7
3
4
8
Growth 1960-1990
projected absolute
1
8
4
2
6
3
5
7
Growth 1960-1990
5
8
2
1
4
6
7
3
-------
Figure 16. Present Industrial Land Use
^Reproduced by permission
of the East-West Gateway
Coordinating Council")
-------
41
and in portions of Madison and St. Clair Counties. St. Louis
County, too, shows extensive industrial activity but is less
concentrated than in the aforementioned jurisdictions. Figure 16
shows some industry in Monroe, St. Charles and Jefferson Counties.
Franklin County and most of Jefferson and Monroe Counties are
not shown in Figure 16. Coal deposits in Monroe County indicate a
potential for some industrial growth in the future. A power plant
is being built in Monroe County and a new bridge at Harrisonville
is planned. These plus the Kaskaskia River project indicate
industrial and commercial growth in the future. Jefferson County
at present has two large industrial concerns located near the
Mississippi River. Plans for two new bridges and the completion
of Interstate 95 will improve accessibility. The rural environment
of Franklin County is expected to remain for some time. A power
plant is presently being built there, but no great industrial growth
is predicted for Franklin County in the near future.
Regional Agencies
The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council serves the Metropolitan
St. Louis Area as both a planning agency and as the St. Louis Council
of Governments. The jurisdictions included in the Council are
St. Louis City, the counties of St. Charles, St. Louis, Jefferson,
and Franklin in Missouri, and the counties of Madison, St. Clair, and
Monroe in Illinois. The primary functions of the Council include the
following: transportation planning, development of regional plans
and programs, collection of data, reyiew of proposals by governmental
-------
42
units, and the fostering of metropolitan cooperation between local
governments in the Metropolitan St. Louis Area.
The Southwestern Illinois Metropolitan Area Planning Commission
handles planning efforts on the Illinois side of the Metropolitan
Area. The Commission deals with transportation, land-use, and
other planning programs for its three county jurisdiction comprised
of Madison, St. Clair, and Monroe Counties. These efforts are then
coordinated with the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council.
Existing Air Pollution Programs
Four air pollution control agencies have authority to control
air pollution problems in the Metropolitan St. Louis Area. In
Missouri, the Missouri Air Conservation Commission, formed under
the Missouri Air Conservation Law, has state-wide jurisdiction
for administering air pollution control. The Commission may designate
a certificate of exemption to a local agency when the agency adopts
regulations at least as stringent as those set by the Commission. The
Commission has issued such certificates to St. Louis City and to
St. Louis County. In Illinois, control of air pollution is vested
in the Air Pollution Control Board by virtue of the Illinois Air
Pollution Control Act. The Illinois Board was also given the
authority under the Act to award certificates of exemption to
effective local agencies. To date, no certificates have been
issued to air pollution programs in the Illinois portion of the
Metropolitan St. Louis Area.
The Missouri Air Conservation Commission has adopted regulations
-------
43
and standards for Jefferson, St. Louis, and St. Charles Counties,
and St. Louis City. These standards became effective on March 24, 1967,
and pertain to open burning, SO- and particulate emissions, coal
washing, control of odors, etc.
Regional cooperation is fostered by the Air Pollution Technical
Coordinating Committee for the St. Louis Area (APTCC). This Committee,
formed in early 1968, is composed of officials from the State of
Illinois, the City of St. Louis, St. Louis County, and the State of
Missouri. In the rules adopted April 9, 1968, the purpose of the
Committee was outlined:
"To strive for compatability and uniformity
in the technical management of air pollution
control among the four political entities
(States of Illinois and Missouri, St. Louis
City and St. Louis County); to designate
appropriate staff or services to eliminate
or reduce duplication of effort among the
four agencies; to provide a means for sharing
and evaluating surveillance, emission, and
other associated data necessary to conduct
program operations; and to provide a forum
for exchange of useful information."
-------
44
REFERENCES
1. "Population Projections for the East-West Gateway Study Area,"
prepared by Hubert Williams, East-West Gateway Coordinating
Council, September 3, 1968.
2. "Interstate Air Pollution Study," Phase II Project Report,
Volume I, Introduction, N.G. Edmisten, J.W. Sadler, F. Partee,
and J.D. Williams, USDHEW, PHS, Cincinnati, Ohio, May, 1966.
3. "Industrial Land Use," April 30, 1968, Exhibit No. 7, East-West
Gateway Coordinating Council.
4. "East-West Gateway Coordinating Council Report, 1968."
5. "An Inventory and Analysis of Existing Data, Characteristics
and Facilities in the Illinois Portion of the St. Louis
Metropolitan Area," Volume IV, Southwestern Illinois Metropolitan
Area Planning Commission, Collinsville, Illinois, December, 1965.
6. "Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations
for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area," eff. date, March 24, 1967,
Missouri Air Conservation Commission, Jefferson City, Missouri.
-------
45
THE PROPOSED REGION
Subject to the scheduled consultation, the Secretary, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, proposes to designate an air
quality control region for the St. Louis metropolitan area,
consisting of the following jurisdictions:
In the State of Illinois
Madison County
St. Glair County
Monroe County
In the State of Missouri
St. Louis City
St. Louis County
St. Charles County
Jefferson County
As so proposed, the Metropolitan St. Louis Interstate Air
Quality Control Region would consist of the territorial area
encompassed by the outermost boundaries of the above counties.
The proposed region is illustrated in Figure 17. Figure 18 locates
the region in relation to the rest of Missouri and Illinois and
surrounding states.
Discussion of Proposal
To be successful, an air quality control region should meet
three basic conditions. First, its boundaries should encompass most
pollution sources as well as most people and property affected by
-------
46
iji^ijijxjxjxyxx'xoixix:;-?^
y::x:x:x:x:::x:::x:x&
frx&x&x#x£^
i'>x*>X'!'Xi^i«i«^X'X*rKi*^i'^i'KfS'X^'X*''^'rV'iii'i^^ * * *x\'Xi
Ij!
. r~' ? A. ST.
JEFFERSON i MONROE
N
0 10 20 30 40 50
SCALE ~KM
i
Figure 17. Proposed Metropolitan St. Louis Interstate Air
Quality Control Region
-------
Lake
Michigan
•>
Iowa
Nebraska
7
V.
Missouri
I
Kansas
Proposed Metropolitan
iSt. Louis Interstate
Air Quality Control Region ($
Oklahoma
Arkansas
1
Figure 18. Relationship of Proposed Metropolitan
St. Louis Interstate Air Quality Control ,
Region to surrounding areas.
Mississippi
-------
48
those sources. Second, the boundaries should encompass those locations
where industrial and residential development will create significant
air pollution problems in the future. Third, the boundaries should
be chosen in a way which is compatible with and even fosters unified
and cooperative governmental administration of the air resources
throughout the region. The "Evaluation of Engineering Factors"
(discussion beginning with Page 12 ) discussed the first of these
conditions, and the "Evaluation of Urban Factors" (Page 34 ), the
second and third.
The core area of an urban complex with respect to the engineering
and urban factors can usually be defined with ease. The core area
usually has the maximum population density, maximum pollutant
emissions, and maximum pollution concentrations. No exact boundary
can be drawn around the core, but figures 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15,
and 16 illustrate that the approximate area is comprised of St. Louis
City, eastern St. Louis County, northwestern St. Clair County (East
St. Louis) and south-western and western Madison County. Since this
area represents the core of the metropolitan area, clearly it
should be included in the Metropolitan St. Louis Air Quality
Control Region.
Inclusion of whole county jurisdictions as implied by the Air
Quality Act of 1967 should be considered when feasible. Exceptions
to this rule have been made in previous region designations for
three reasons: first, in some areas of the United States, counties
are not utilized as administrative units (especially New England);
second, topographical features such as a mountain range cutting
through a county affect the meteorology in the jurisdiction,
-------
49
producing, in effect, more than one "air shed"; and third, the
size of some counties has obviated the desirability of including
j^
the whole county. These exceptions are not the rule in the St.
Louis area, so whole counties which have portions in the core area
are recommended for inclusion in the Region.
A region, however, should provide ample area for expansion,
both industrial and residential. A buffer zone should circumscribe
the core area so that the region boundary need not be altered in
the near future. This peripheral area would also include more
people and property subjected to adverse air quality levels caused
from emissions in the core area.
The northern tip of Monroe County lies less than five miles
from the city limits of St. Louis City. Though sparsely populated
at present, its proximity to St. Louis provides an ideal direction
for expansion from the St. Louis area. It is anticipated that
Monroe County will be included in the SMSA** following the 1970
census. Diffusion model analysis and air sampling data (from
St. Louis City and County) indicate that the northern part of
!
Monroe County is affected by above-background levels of
particulates and adverse levels of SO^
Jefferson County, like Monroe County, provides a buffer for
expansion to the south of St. Louis City. Percentage rate of
* For example, Arapahoe and Adams Counties in the Denver AQCR are
both approximately 70 miles long (East-West) with urbanization
and growth prospects only in the western 10-15 miles of the
counties.
** Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the Bureau
of the Census.
-------
50
population growth in the next 30 years is anticipated to be the
greatest of all jurisdictions in the metropolitan area. Adverse
air quality levels caused by emissions from the core area are
prevalent in the north-east corner of the county. And, two major
point sources close to the Mississippi River add to the air
pollution problem.
Parts of St. Charles County are very definitely affected by
pollution emissions in Madison County. All three pollutants
discussed in this report show adverse levels in eastern St. Charles
County. This, coupled with its projected population figures
(expected to be the 2nd most rapidly growing area by per cent in
the metropolitan area) indicate a potential problem area which
should be included in the Air Quality Control Region.
The last county in the Study Area, Franklin, and the two other
counties mentioned in this report, Jersey and Macoupin, are not
recommended for inclusion at the present time. Franklin, though
part of the SMSA and the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council,
has and will retain its rural character in the near future. Its
distance from St. Louis City makes commuting time a disadvantage.
It is not included in the Missouri Air Conservation Commission's
St. Louis Metropolitan Area which has adopted regulations and
standards for Jefferson, St. Louis, and St. Charles Counties and
St. Louis City; and, at present, it is not adversely affected by
emissions from the core area. However, close observation
-------
51
for possible inclusion at a later date should be made on Franklin
County as it develops in the future.
Both Jersey and Macoupin Counties in Illinois do not contribute
to the problem but are affected by emissions in the east St. Charles-
west Madison County area. These two counties are not at present, nor
expected to become in the near future, an integral part of the
St. Louis Metropolitan complex.
As is true of most efforts to draw boundaries around an area to
differentiate it from its surroundings, there is always a likelihood
of boundary conditions existing or developing. In the case of Air
Quality Control Regions, such a boundary condition would exist
where sources of pollution on one side of the region boundary affect
in some real way air quality on the other side of the boundary.
Relocating the boundary would only rarely provide relief from this
condition. The solution is to be found in the way in which control
efforts are implemented following the designation of an Air Quality
Control Region. Consonant with the basic objective of providing
desirable air quality within the problem area being designated as
an Air Quality Control Region, the implementation plan that follows
the designation should have provisions for the control of sources
located close to but beyond the region boundaries. The level of
coatrol for such sources would be a function of, among other factors,
the degree to which emissions from sources cause air quality levels
to exceed the standards chosen for application within the Air Quality
Control Region.
In summary, the Region proposed is considered on the whole to be
-------
52
the most cohesive and yet inclusive area within which an effective
regional effort can be mounted to prevent and control air
pollution in the two-state urban area surrounding St. Louis.
-------
53
APPENDIX A. EMISSION INVENTORY
-------
54
r
mmmmm
I
WARREN
s
1
(
.
FRANKLIN
2
r*
/
"16
ST. CHARl
X
L
52;
i
-J
ES /
TT' 67
e°S1. LOU
4;L.w
53
EFFERSON
-f
'7
/ \
/ ST. r- "• - ^^
(cm/ |
F&
!7 ^,
/ 54
MONRi
v
6,1
80
"tr
79
^
>5?_^
3E \
!
- za
51
IR
T
56
CRAWFORD
WASHINGTON
i r- — 1
FRANCOIS
T
-<' X.
*
STE GENEVIEVE
\
BOND
I L
CLINTON
~1
WASHINGTON
______ J
\
RANDOLPH
Ky
PERRY
— H
JACKSON
PERRY
\
N
I I I 1 1—I
0 10 20 30 40 50
SCALE ~KM
Figure A-l. Sulfur Oxides and Particulate Emission Inventory Zones
-------
55
N
0 10 20 » 40 50
SCALE
Figure A-2. Carbon Monoxide Emission Inventory Zones
-------
56
Table A-l
Summary of SO and Particulate Emissions from Area Sources, Ton/Day
X
Grid
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Area
Sq.Km.
707.4
707.4
44.2
44.2
44.2
176.8
44.2
44.2
44.2
44.2
44.2
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
707.4
707.4
44.2
44.2
11.1
11.1
11.1
b
.01
.01
.01
.03
.43
.03
.02
.04
.46
.01
.02
.01
.03
.01
.01
.03
.09
.05
.06
.05
.55
.01
sox
w
.01
.01
.60
2.88
5.58
.33
.47
1.03
1.22
.45
.46
.51
.28
.14
.01
.96
1.87
5.07
2.94
2.27
1.05
.68
Particulate
A
.01
.01
.27
1.28
2.80
.21
.18
.48
.77
.20
.21
.23
.14
.07
.01
.44
.88
2.29
1.12
1.43
.77
.67
£>
.04
.04
.03
.08
.47
.16
.17
.05
.20
.06
.04
.03
.04
.10
.07
.13
1.39
.49
.05
.18
.38
.07
w
.04
.04
.27
1.17
2.61
.31
.33
.42
1.03
.21
.19
.24
.14
.15
.07
.49
2.02
2.47
1.09
1.06
.57
.33
A
.04
.04
.13
.50
1.41
.23
.24
.21
.23
.13
.10
.13
.09
.12
.07
.28
1.67
1.38
.52
.73
.46
.33
-------
(Continuation of Table A-l)
57
VJJ- -kU.
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
fi.L ca
Sq.Rn.
11.1
176.8
707.4
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
77.2
44.2
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
44.2
44.2
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
707.4
S
.24
.03
.02
1.04
.22
.03
.96
.35
.18
.07
1.18
.43
.44
.29
.08
.03
.01
.08
.11
.76
.05
.13
:02
.06
sox
w
3.74
1.91
2.42
7.04
2.56
2.70
5.60
5.99
42.56
26.32
16.96
8.60
1.70
19.20
13.58
6.17 ,
5.12
5.48
11.92
6.14
11.65
2.60
.50
3.19
Particulate
A
1.78
.85
1.07
3.74
1.17
1.21
3.00
2.82
19.28
11.61
6.95
4.35
.86
8.66
6.02
2.76
2.26
2.89
5.31
2.83
5.15
1.21
.23
1.90
S
.40
.15
.07
2.50
.50
.50
2.20
1.08
.17
.17
.56
2.20
2.18
.74
.27
.18
.07
.40
2.72
.19
1.05
.24
.07
3.46
W
1.87
.88
1.01
4.47
1.72
1.57
4.03
3.35
17.2
10.73
6.41
5.30
2.56
7.76
5.69
2.43
2.10'
2.59
7.46
2.30
5.57
1.23
.25
1.88
A
1.02
.48
.49
3.38
.84
.97
3.02
2.11
7.68
4.83
3.15
3.75
2.35
3.84
2.66
1.20
.96
1.97
4.90
1.16
3.05
.67
.15
1.85
-------
58
(Continuation of Table A-l)
Grid
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
Area
Sq.Km.
176.8
44.2
44.2
176.8
707.4
707.4
707.7
707.4
707.4
707.4
44.2
44.2
44.2
11.1
11.1
11.1
11.1
44.2
176.8
176.8
176.8
44.2
44.2
44.2
S
.15
.05
.01
.03
.03
.12
.07
.05
.01
.03
.00
.01
.02
.01
.09
.01
.02
.04
.02
.02
.06
.05
.31
.07
SO
X
W
1.13
1.02
.30
4.96
3.22
3.05
2.32
2.22
.91
1.54
.11
.91
3.03
1.34
1.89
.27
.20
3.72
.71
1.10
1.85
12.71
3.82
7.01
Particulate
A
.58
.48
.14
2.20
1.43
1.41
1.16
1.00
.43
.70
.05
.41
1.34
.68
.88
.13
.09
1.66
.32
.42
.84
5.62
1.57
3.12
S
1.09
.16
.05
.33
.07
.11
.20
.22
.02
.07
.00
.07
.08
.14
.58
.05
.03
.19
.14
.03
.04
.30
.12
1.11
W
1.44
.50
.16
2.26
1.28
1.18
1.01
1.06
.40
.61
.04
.43
1.27
1.66
1.29
.14
.19
1.65
.41
.44
.63
5.36
1.50
4.91
A
.34
.18
.11
.89
.65
.69
.58
.39
.24
.24
.15
.24
.69
.80
.28
.07
.22
.80
.17'
.22
.57
2.49
2.90
7.58
-------
59
(Continuation of Table A-l)
Grid
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Area
Sq. Km.
44.2
44.2
176.8
176.8
44.2
44.2
44.2
44.2
176.8
176.8
S
,11
.01
.03
.04
.02
.07
.01
.02
1.23
.03
SO
X
w
18.34
1.10
5.06
1.36
.97
.87
.76
.77
10.29
3.05
Particulate
A
8.12
.49
2.24
.62
.44
.43
.33
.35
5.21
1.36
S
.30
.07
.07
.10
.04
.12
.07
.07
.57
.15
W
7.55
.49
2.04
.55
.36
.42
1.94
.31
4.16
1.34
A
3.43
.26
.92
.26
.12
.37
.68
.16
2.09
.53
-------
60
Table A-2
Summary of SO and Particulate Emissions from Point Sources, Ton/Day
X
Grid
5
5
5
7
7
13
17
24
23
24
24
25
27
21
28
28
29
29
32
26
33
70
S
15.57
9.84
60.76
0
0
0
0
18.79
5.14
1.46
0
3.59
1.91
1.28
0
.30
6,19
6.02
0
0
1.84
6.25
SO
X
W
15.57
9.84
60.76
0
0
0
0
18.79
5.14
1.46
0
3.59
3.01
2.02
0
.30
6.19
6.02
7.65
3.90
2.9
9.88
Particulate
A"
15.57
9.84
60.76
0
0
0
0
18.79
5.14
1.46
0
3.59
2.38
1.6
0
.30
6.19
6.02
3.29
1.68
2.30
7.82
S
7.06
1.09
5.51
19.18
8.22
2.79
3.04
10.80
7.98
.15
2.98
4.58
.61
.98
2.28
2.55
.59
.56
0
0
1.64
4.77
W
7.06
1.09
5.51
19.18
8.22
2.79
3.04
10.80
7.98
.15
2.98
4.58
.96
1.54
1.66
2.55
.59
.56
6.84
.50
2.60
7.56
A
7.06
1.09
5.51
19.18
8.22
2.79
3.04
10.80
7.98
.15
2.98
4.58
.76
1.22
2.28
2.55
.59
.56
2.94
.21
2.05
5.99
-------
(Continuation of Table A-2)
61
Grid
SO
X
S W
Particulate
A
S
W
A
34
34
35
35
37
34
38
38
38
39
39
41
41
36
37
43
43
34
43
43
43
44
44
45
74
116.8 116.8
0 0
11.56 11.56
0 0
\
0 0
23.15 78.99
31.7 41.5 '
11.0 11.0
0 0
4.99 7.90
0 0
0 7.32
1.09 1.71
4.87 7.69
0 5.17
1.26 1.99
14.3 22.6
21.4 33.8
.30 .30
0 0
0 0
2.12 2.12
50.8 50.8
19.9 19.9
0 0
116.8
0
11.56
0
0
38.89
31.9
11.0
0
6.95
0
3.15
1.35
6.08
2.22
1.58
17.9
26.7
.30
0
0
2.12
50.8
19.9
0
14.91
2.04
9.05
8.0
2.48
2.95
4.02
.17
2.48
6.96
3.5
0
1.39
4.35
0
1.61
1.83
4.09
2.55
4.96
1.49
4.26
19.8
.32
2.4
14.91
1.49
9.05
8.0
1.81
10.07
5.26
.17
1.81
10.44
3.5
9.34
2.19
6.87
6.60
2.54
2.89
6.47
2.55
3.62
1.09
4.26
19.8
.32
2.4
14.91
2.04
9.05
8.0
2.48
4.98
4.05
.17
2.48
8.70
3.5
4.02
1.73
5.44
2.84
2.01
2.29
5.12
2.55
4.96
1.49
4.26
19.8
.32
2.4
-------
62
(Continuation of Table A-2)
Grid
74
79
54
54
6
60
61
61
68
32
68
76
76
38
76
26
74
18
76
54
54
53
54
SO
X
S W
0 0
3.17 3.17
419.0 382.4
0 0
192.08 192.08
0 0
1.63 1.63
187.5 353.1
12.0 12.0
0 0
16.5 19.9
44.0 44.0
0 0
2.11 3.33
0 0
4.53 7.16
0 11.03
3.70 3.70
0 5.80
2.93 2.93
0 0
0 3.29
232.3 232.3
Particulate
A
0
3.17
377.2
0
192.08
0
1.63
248.8
12.0
0
18.0
44.0
0
2.63
0
5.66
4.74
3.70
2.50
2.93
0
1.42
232.3
S
1.95
4.0
13.4
21.9
1.97
3.48
2.04
71.82
1.90
3.78
7.44
4.09
5.80
1.89
13.70
.86
0
.71
0
.37
5.98
0
0
W
1.95
4.0
12.2
21.9
1.97
2.54
2.04
135.2
1.90
2.76
11.7
4.09
5.80
2.98
13.70
1.36
14.04
.71
7.40
.37
5.98
.63
0
A
1.95
4.0
12.04
21.9
1.97
3.48
2.04
95.3
1.90
3.78
9.27
4.09
5.80
2.36
13.70
1.08
6.05
.71
3.19
.37
5.98
.27
0
-------
63
Table A-3
Summary of CO Emissions from Point and Area Sources, Ton/Day
Grid
4
4
4
4
8
9
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Area
Sq.Km
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point
Point
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
S
206.1
522.1
82.4
.82
3.08
89.3
1.84
18.55
18.68
62.97
163.65
18.19
19.50
108.82
2407.3
362.0
36.34
2.98
116.39
97.48
25.07
CO
W
206.1
522.1
82.4
1.55
3.08
89.3
1.68
19.46
20.04
69.13
179.5
19.60
21.37
111.09
2481.3
389.25
36.99
4.26
118.21
103.92
28.51
A
206.1
522.1
82.4
1.09
3.08
89.3
1.65
18.95
19.26
65.61
170.44
18.80
20.30
109.85
2438.99
373.67
36.62
3.53
117.17
100.24
26.54
-------
(Continuation of Table A-3)
64
CO
Grid
15
16
17
18
19
Area
(Sq KM)
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
621.38
S
9.21
1.61
9.03
8.79
1.24
W
10.50
2.33
9.99
11.13
1.76
A
9.76
1.92
9.44
9.79
1.46
-------
65
APPENDIX B. DIFFUSION MODEL DESCRIPTION
Title I, Section 10? (a) (2) of the Air Quality Act of 196? (Public Law
90-148, dated November 21, 196?), calls for the designation of air quality
control regions, based on a number of factors, including "atmospheric conditions,"
interpreted to mean that the boundaries of air quality control regions should
reflect the technical aspects of air pollution and its dispersion. Within this
guideline, however, the position has been taken that region boundaries cannot
be based on an extreme set of circumstances which might have a theoretical
chance of occurrence. Hence, the analysis of a region's atmospheric dilution is
largely based on mean annual values, although summer and winter mean values are
analyzed with respect to reviewing seasonal variations in meteorology and
pollutant emissions.
With the realization that the meteorological analysis would help define
tentative boundaries only and that final boundaries would be developed sub-
sequently to reflect local government aspects, it was decided that the meteor-
ological assessment should be as unpretentious as possible. Accordingly, the
widely accepted long-term Gaussian diffusion equation, described by Pasquill
and Turner^, has been applied with a few modifications to accommodate certain
requirements inherent to the delineation of air quality control regions. In
)
summary, the Gaussian diffusion equation is utilized to provide a theoretical
estimate of the geographical distribution of long-period mean ground-level
concentrations of SC^, CO and suspended particulates. The model used has the
necessary flexibility to utilize information on emissions from both point and
area-wide sources.
To maintain simplicity, a 75 meter effective height for all point
sources and a 3 hour half-life for SC^ were assumed;
-------
66
METHODOLOGY
The diffusion model used is based on the Gaussian diffusion equation^-*2, as
modified by Martin-^. Essentially, the model sums the effects (ground-level
concentration) of a number of sources (area and point) for a specified number of
receptors, averaged over a season or a year. For this study, 225 receptor
points were used. Their location was defined by an orthogonal grid system with
mesh points 15 kilometers apart.
The meteorological data input to the model is screened to determine the
representativeness of the data. Appropriate surface wind rose data are selected
from U.S. Weather Bureau records; if necessary, special wind data tabulations
are obtained from the National Weather Records Center (NWRC). The mean mixing
depth for each region, for each respective time period (seasonal and average),
is determined on the basis of computed mixing depths documented by Holzworttr^ ,
and recent tabulations furnished the Meteorology Program by the National Weather
Records Center (ESSA.). Table B-l gives the mixing depth values utilized by the
model for computing theoretical ground level concentrations in the St. Louis
area.
-------
Table B-l
Average Mixing Depths for the St Louis Area by Season
Season
Summer
Winter
Annual**
Morning
294
390
352
Mixing Depth, Meters
Afternoon
1689
797
1340
Average*
992
594
846
*of morning and afternoon
**of all four seasons
-------
68
References for Appendix B
1. Pasquill, P., "The Estimation of the Dispersion of Windborn Material,"
Meteorology Magazine, 90, 1963, pp. 33-49.
•2. Turner, D. B., "Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates," USDHEW.
Cincinnati, Ohio, 196?.
3. Martin, D. 0., and Tikvart, J. A., "General Atmospheric Diffusion Model
for Estimating the Effects on Air Quality of One or More Sources," Paper
No. 68-148, 6lst Annual Meeting, APCA, St. Paul, Minnesota, June 1968
4. Holzworth, G. C., "Mixing Depths, Wind Speeds and Air Pollution Potential
for Selected Locations in the United States," J. Appl. Meteor., No. 6,
December, 196?, pp. 1039-1044.
5. Holzworth, G. C., "Estimates of Mean Maximum Mixing Depths in the Contiguous
United States," Mon. Weather Rev. 92, No. 5, May 1964, pp. 235-242.
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 19GB 3Ui-8U> (5003)
------- |