REPORT FOR CONSULTATION ON THE
METROPOLITAN CINCINNATI INTERSTATE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service
National Air Pollution Control Administration
January 1969
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
PREFACE 3
INTRODUCTION 4
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS 12
EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING FACTORS 25
PROPOSAL 47
-------
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 Cincinnati Area, the 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 revisions suggested during consultation with
State and local authorities. Formal designation of a Region will follow
the consultation meeting. This report is intended to serve as background
material for the consultation.
The Administration appreciates assistance received either directly
during the course of this study or indirectly during previous activities
in the Cincinnati Metropolitan lArea from official air pollution agencies
at the State and local level, and the OKI Regional Planning Authority.
*For the purposes of this report, the word region, when capitalized,
will refer to the Metropolitan Cincinnati 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 imple-
mentation 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)(2), Air Quality Act of 1967
THE AIR QUALITY ACT
Air Pollution in most of the Nation's urban areas is a regional
problem. This regional problem demands a regional solution, consisting of
coordinated planning, data gathering, standard setting, and enforcement.
Yet-, with few exceptions, such coordinated efforts are notably absent among
the Nation's urban complexes.
Beginning with the Section quoted above, in which the Secretary is
required to designate air quality control regions, the Air Quality Act
presents an approach to air pollution control involving coordinated efforts
by Federal, State, and local governments, as shown in Figure 1. After the
Secretary has (1) designated regions, (2) published air quality criteria,
and (3) published corresponding documents on control technology and
associated costs, the Governor(s) of the State(s) must file with the
Secretary within 90 days a letter of intent, indicating that the State(s)
will adopt within 180 days ambient air quality standards for the pollutants
-------
HEW designates
air quality
control regions.
HEW develops and
publishes ajr
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, iocal, 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.
-------
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 retains approval authority, the
State(s) involved in a designated region assumes the responsibility for
developing standards and an implementation plan which includes admini-
strative procedures for abatement and control. Informal cooperative
arrangements with proper safeguards may be adequate in some regions,
whereas in others, more formal arrangements, such as interstate compacts,
may be selected. The objective in each instance will be to provide
effective mechanisms for control on a regional basis.
THE SIZE OF A REGION
Several objectives are important in determining how large an air
quality control region should be. Basically, these objectives can be
divided into three separate categories. First a region should be self-
contained with respect to air pollution sources and receptors. In other
words, a region should include most of the important sources in the area as
well as most of the people and property affected by those sources. In this
way, all the major elements of the regional problem will lie within one
unified administrative jurisdiction. Unfortunately, since air pollutants
can travel long distances, it is impractical if not impossible to delineate
regions which are completely self-contained. The air over a region will
-------
usually have at least trace amounts of pollutants from external sources.
During episodic conditions, such contributions from external sources may
even reach significant levels. Conversely, air pollution generated within
a region and transported out of it can affect external receptors to some
degree. It would be impractical and inefficient to .make all air quality
control regions large enough to encompass these low-level trace effects.
The geographic extent of trace effects overestimates the true problem area
which should be the focus of air pollution control efforts. Thus, the first
objective, that a region be self-contained, becomes a question of relative
magnitude and frequency. The dividing line between "important influence"
and "trace effect" will be a matter of judgment. The judgment should be
based on estimates of the impact a source has upon a region, and the
level of pollution to which receptors are subjected. In this respect,
annual and seasonal data on pollutant emissions and ambient air concentrations
are a better measure of relative influence than short term data on episodic
conditions.
The second general objective requires that region boundaries be
designed to meet not only present conditions but also future conditions.
In other words, the region should include areas where industrial and
l
residential expansion are likely to create air pollution problems in the
foreseeable future. This objective requires careful consideration of
existing metropolitan development plans, expected population growth, and
projected industrial expansion. Such considerations should result in the
designation of regions which will contain the sources and receptors of
regional air pollution for a number of years to come. Of course, region
boundaries need not be permanently fixed, once designated. Boundaries
-------
8
should be reviewed periodically and altered when changing conditions
warrent readjustment.
The third objective is that region boundaries should be compatible
with and even foster unified and cooperative governmental administration
of the air resource throughout the region. Air pollution is a regional
problem which often extends across several municipal, county, and even
state boundaries. Clearly, the collaboration of several governmental
jurisdictions is prerequisite to the solution of the problem. Therefore,
the region should be delineated in a way which encourages regional
cooperation among the various governmental bodies involved in air pollution
control. In this regard, the existing pattern of governmental cooperation
on the whole range of urban problems may become an important consideration.
Certainly the pattern of cooperation among existing air pollution control
programs is a relevant factor. In general, administrative considerations
dictate that governmental jurisdictions should not be divided. Although
it would be impractical to preserve State jurisdictions undivided, usually
it is possible to preserve the unity of county governments by including or
excluding them in their entirety. Occasionally, even this would be
impractical due to a county's large size, wide variation in level of
development, or striking topographical features.
To the extent that any two of the above three objectives lead to
incompatible conclusions concerning region boundaries, the region must
represent a reasonable compromise. A region should represent the best
way of satisfying the three objectives simultaneously.
-------
PROCEDURE FOR DESIGNATION OF REGIONS
Figure 2 illustrates the procedures 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 con-
centrations in the ambient air. Pollution sources are located by taking
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 both air quality
sampling data and 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
instruments. Unfortunately, in many cases air quality sampling data is
available for only one or two pollutants measured at an insufficient
number of locations. The theoretical model is used to supplement
inadequate air quality sampling data. As a whole, the engineering study
indicates how large the air quality control region must be in order to
encompass most pollution sources and most people and property affected
by those sources.
The study of "Urban Factors" encompasses non-engineering considerations,
It reviews existing governmental jurisdictions, current air pollution
control programs, present concentrations of population and industry,
-------
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
Input
• Emissions
• Meteorology
• Physical Dim.
Computer
Pollutant
Diffusion
Model
Output
Iso-lntensity
Graphs
Existing Air
Quality
Sampling
Data
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
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 the pollution problem 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 consultation, 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 Cincinnati 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
EVALUATION OF URBAN FACTORS
INTRODUCTION
A number of urban factors are relevant to the problem of defining
air quality control region boundaries. First, the location of population
is an important consideration, since human activity is the ultimate cause
of air pollution, and humans are the ultimate victims. The population
growth pattern is another important consideration, since an air quality
control region should be designed not only for the present but also for
the future. The location of industrial activity and the industrial
growth pattern are relevant considerations for similar reasons. Political
and jurisdictional considerations are important also, since the 1967 Air
Quality Act envisions regional air pollution programs based on cooperative
efforts among many political jurisdictions. An air quality control region
should take note of existing region cooperation among governmental untis
and should avoid a combination of jurisdictions which would ignore local
political relationships. For example, it should consider the strength of
regional cooperation among existing local air pollution programs. The
following discussion of urban factors will present these considerations
as they apply to the Cincinnati area.
Population
Figure 3 displays present population densities in the metropolitan
Cincinnati area. About 500,000 people reside within the City of Cincinnati,
and represent about one third of the population in an eight county area
-------
13
Figure 3: 1968 POPULATION DENSITY
Residents Per Square Mile
p||| more than 500;
j?^ 100 to 500;
["_ J less than 100;
GRANT \PENDLETON
KENTUCKY
Miles
-------
14
including Hamilton, Butler, Warren, Clermont, Campbell, Kenton, Boone,
and Dearborn counties. Nearly an equal number of people reside in
suburban areas outside of the city limits but still within Hamilton
County. In other words, almost two thirds of the total eight-county
population resides within the whole of Hamilton County. As a result,
Hamilton County has by far the heaviest population density of any county
in the area, with approximately 2,260 residents per square mile. The
remaining portion of the eight-county population consists of somewhat
more than 600,000 people. Of these, more than 200,000 live in Kenton and
Campbell counties and account for the next highest population densities,
760 and 600 residents per square mile. Butler County, with the cities of
Hamilton and Middletown, also contains somewhat more than 200,000 residents.
However, since the land area of Butler is about 50 percent larger than
Kenton and Campbell combined, the population density is only 480 residents
per square mile. Warren and Clermont each have about 85,000 residents,
with population densities of about 200 residents per square mile. Boone
and Dearborn have about 30,000 residents each, with population densities
of about 100 residents per square mile.
Population growth Curing the next two decades is represented in
Figure 4. The largest amount of absolute growth will probably take place
in Hamilton County, with about 640 additional residents per square mile.
Kenton, Butler and Warren are also likely to experience significant
population growth, approximately 235 additional residents per square mile.
It is interesting to note that when population growth is expressed in
percentage terms, Warren County ranks first among the counties considered
*Population growth and employment growth figures are based on a
recent study by the OKI Regional Planning Authority.
-------
15
Figure 4: POPULATION GROWTH, 1968 TO 1990
Additional Residents Per Square Mile
more than 200;
100 to 200;
[Hj less than 100;
irxytfxTKfcx*: 168 x
INDIANA
~^
KENTUCKY
20
KENTUCKY
Miles
-------
16
with more than 50% increase in population expected during the next decade.
Clermont, and Campbell are expected to grow only about two thirds as
rapidly as Kenton, and Boone less than one half as rapidly. Thus, by 1990,
Hamilton, Kenton, Campbell, and Butler are all expected to have population
densities over 700 residents per square mile. Warren and Clermont will
probably have around 400 residents per square mile while Boone and
Dearborn remain around 200 or less.
Industry
Two methods can be used to determine the location of manufacturing
activity. First, the land use map,* Figure 5, displays industrial areas.
It demonstrates a concentration of industrial activity in Hamilton County.
It also reveals major industrial locations in Butler County. Boone, Campbell
and Kenton, in comparison, do not contain large industrialized areas, if the
airport is ignored. A second method for determining the location of manu-
factoring activity can be based on the density of people employed in
manufacturing firas. Figure 6 shows that Hamilton County has by far the
highest density of manufacturing employees with 340 per square mile in 1963.
Butler County ranks second, with 55 per square mile, and Kenton and Campbell
follow with 24 and 22.
Expected growth of total employment is shown in Figure 7. By far the
heaviest growth is expected in Hamilton County. Butler, Kenton and Campbell
will experience a large amount of growth. However, Warren, Clermont, Boone
and Dearborn will probably retain a non-industrialized status.
When broken down into industrial categories, the employment projections
show that almost all heavy industry will be located in Hamilton and Butler
* Based on the 1965 OKI Regional Planning Authority survey.
-------
Figure 5: INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL
LAND USE
17
GRANT PENDLETON
INDIANA
-*+
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
18
Figure 6: MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT DENSITY, 1963
Manufacturing Employees Per Square Mile
more than 100;
50 to 100;
less than 50;
Miles
-------
19
Figure 7: EXPECTED GROWTH OF EMPLOYMENT, 1965 to 1990
Additional Employees Per Square Mile
jjj more than 100;
30 to 100;
less than 30;
KENTUCKY
-------
20
Counties, even two decades from now. The manufacture of primary metals
will be centered in Butler, with smaller contributions from Hamilton and
Campbell. Manufacture of fabricated metals and machinery will be centered
in Hamilton, with a contribution from Butler and Kenton. The manufacture
of chemicals, petroleum products, rubber and plastics will all be located
principally in Hamilton, and to a lesser extent Butler.
The projected growth pattern for employment, combined with that for
residential population, reflects the expectation that present suburban
trends will continue to shape the regional area. People are expected to
continue moving to outlying suburban areas for residence, while using
transportation arteries to commute to centrally-located work sites.
In sum, residential population is presently concentrated in Hamilton,
Kenton, Campbell, and Butler Counties. Manufacturing employment and
industry are concentrated in the same four counties. Residential population
is expected to grow most rapidly in Hamilton, Butler, and Kenton, and Warren.
But growth of employment will probably be most rapid in Hamilton and Butler,
and to a lesser degree in Kenton and Campbell.
Existing Air Pollution Programs;
In the State of Ohio, responsibility for air pollution control rests
upon an Air Pollution Control Board located within the State Department of
Health. In order to meet its responsibility, the Board is authorized to
prescribe ambient air quality standards for various sections of the State,
to enforce emission standards designed to meet the air quality standards
in those sections, and to issue variance permits for exceptional
circumstances. The State program has an annual budget of approximately
$250,000.
-------
21
Under existing law in Ohio, county governments can develop air
pollution control programs only as part of their health program. County
regulations concerning air pollution control do not apply within municipal
boundaries if a city or incorporated area has its own regulations. Due to
this limitation on county jurisdiction, municipal government has become
the most usual unit in Ohio for administration of local air pollution
control programs. For example, in the Cincinnati Metropolitan Area the
City of Cincinnati conducts the largest air pollution control program, with
an annual budget of about $105,000. County governments in the area have
only a modest involvement in air pollution control. Hamilton County health
officials are limited to operating on a complaint basis only. Clermont
County health officials are even less involved in air pollution control
activities. Similarly, in Butler County the cities of Hamilton and
Middletown conduct more extensive air pollution control activities, limited
as they are, than the county government. A few suburban communities have
joined Cincinnati in an agreement for the sharing of technical services.
This program is the Intercommunity Air Pollution Control Program.
In Kentucky, responsibility for air pollution control rests with the
Air Pollution Control Commission. The Commission has authority to set
statewide ambient air quality standards and emission standards. The
Commission also has authority to prescribe local standards more stringent
than the statewide standards in various areas of the state when conditions
warrant such control. Kentucky statutes specifically allow the Commission
to cede its jurisdiction to a county air pollution control program if, after
review, the Commission finds the county program to be satisfactory. The
Commission may recover its jurisdiction at any time it believes the county
-------
22
program is failing to meet the State standards. At the present time,
the State program has a budget of approximately $320,000. So far, none
of the Kentucky counties in the Cincinnati area have established extensive
air pollution control programs.
In areas of Indiana which are not covered by local air pollution
control regulation, the Air Pollution Control Board of the State has
responsibility to investigate complaints and to initiate abatement action
against air contaminant sources. The budget of the State program was
approximately $90,000 during 1968. Plans for 1969 call for a budget
increase of 50 to 100 percent.
In sum, at the present time there is no regional program in the
Cincinnati area for the management of the regional air resource. The only
local air pollution control program of substantial strength is the one run
by the city of Cincinnati. The Intercommunity Air Pollution Control
Program, linking Cincinnati with several suburban communities, does not
presently fill the need for regional planning of air pollution control,
regional collection of air quality data, regional setting of ambient air
quality standards or emission standards, and regional enforcement./
From 1965 to 1967 the United States Public Health Service cooperated
with several local governmental units in the Cincinnati metropolitan area
in a study of the regional air pollution control program. The resulting
report, "Air Resource Management for Southwestern Ohio and Northern
Kentucky", advocated a regional approach towards air pollution control
and proposed a number of actions to implement that approach. So far,
those action proposals have not been carried out.
-------
23
Regional Planning in the Cincinnati Metropolitan Area
Although no institution presently conducts regional planning of air
pollution control in the Cincinnati area, other regional planning functions
are being carried out by two agencies. The first, the OKI Regional
Planning Authority, contains nine counties in its planning jurisdiction
(Hamilton, Butler, Warren, Clermont, Campbell, Kenton, Boone, Ohio, and
Dearborn). Originally, it was established in order to satisfy the planning
requirements of the Bureau of Public Roads program. Now OKI has an annual
budget of approximately $500,000 and has planning activities in the areas
of transportation, water supply and sewage, solid waste disposal, and
review of HUD grant proposals. OKI is exploring opportunities to extend
its regional planning activities into additional problem areas.
The second regional planning commission, The Northern Kentucky Area
Planning Commission (NKAPC), has jurisdiction in two counties, Kenton and
Campbell. The functions of NKAPC are similar to those of OKI. NKAPC is
currently conducting a feasibility study for unified administration of
schools, solid waste disposal and other urban services for the two-county
area.
Recently a proposal was made for the establishment of the Health
Planning Association of the Central Ohio River Valley. If funded, the
association would perform various planning activities related to modern-
ization of hospital and other medical facilities, identification and
alleviation of medical manpower shortages, special health projects for
center city poverty areas, and environmental health control. The
jurisdiction of the Association would include eight counties: all of
those in OKI except Ohio County in Indiana.
-------
24
The increasing scope of regional planning activities in the
Metropolitan Cincinnati area suggests that regional problems are more
and more likely to receive regional planning attention. Nevertheless,
planning attention is no substitute for regional operational authority,
which is currently lacking in air pollution control efforts in the
Cincinnati region.
-------
25
EVALUATION OF ENGINEERING FACTOR
INTRODUCTION
The engineering evaluation for the Cincinnati area was based on
a study of topography, pollutant emissions, estimated air quality levels
and available ambient air quality data. The emission inventory indicated
the location of point and area sources, the quantity of pollutants emitted
from these sources, and the resulting emission densities. This information
was combined with meteorological data and used in a diffusion model to
estimate air quality levels in the Cincinnati area. The estimated air
quality information was supplemented by measured air quality data whenever
available.
TOPOGRAPHY
The Cincinnati area consists of an upland plain about 900 feet above
sea level which is cut by the flood plain of the Ohio River, about 300 feet
lower. Downtown Cincinnati is located in the basin formed by the flood
plain of the Ohio River, the Mill Creek, and the Licking River. The basin
area is surrounded by steep bluffs rising 200 to 400 feet to the general
upland plain level. These bluffs are cut frequently by the valleys of
small tributary streams which produce a setting of promontories and steep
I
hills.
EMISSION INVENTORY
The National Air Pollution Control Administration* conducted an
inventory of air pollutant emissions for the Cincinnati area. Three major
pollutants—sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulates—were
considered since they would provide a general measure of the extent of the
air pollution problem around Cincinnati. Sulfur oxides are a reliable
-------
26
measure of the impact of fossil fuel burning in power plants and space
heating equipment. These sources contribute more than 90% of the sulfur
oxide emissions in the area. Carbon monoxide pollutant levels provide
the best indication of the impact of gasoline-powered motor vehicles,
since these sources are responsible for more than 90% of the carbon
monoxide emissions. Particulate emission data provide an indication of
the combined effect of all source categories since emissions of this
pollutant are more evenly distributed among the possible source categories
(no single source category accounts for more than one third of the total).
Results of the emission inventory are tabulated by source category in
Table 1.
The Cincinnati emissions inventory encompasses the counties of
Hamilton, Butler, Warren, Clermont, Campbell, Kenton, Boone, Dearborn,
Ohio, and parts of surrounding counties. This area was divided into the
grid coordinate system shown in Figure 8. The estimated emissions of
each of the three pollutants by grid zone were expressed as average daily
emissions for three different time periods—annual, winter, and summer.
Average annual emission densities for each of the three pollutants
in tons per square mile per day were determined by relating the total
quantity of pollutants emitted in each of the grid zones to the land
area of each zone. Table 2 lists the resulting emission densities by
grid zone, and figures 12, 13, and 14 show them graphically. Where
identified point sources are responsible for more than 50% of the emissiqns
in a grid zone, this fact is indicated in both the table and the figures.
Point sources in the Cincinnati area are responsible for about 90% of sulfur
oxide emissions, 65% of particulate emissions, and about 8% of carbon
monoxide emissions.
-------
Table 1 SUMMARY OF AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS IN THE
CINCINNATI-HAMILTON-MIDDLETOWN STUDY AREA, 1967 (Tons/Year)
Source
1. Transportation
Auto
Trucks & Buses
Trains
Planes
Total
2. Stationary Fuel Combustion
Industry
Steam-Electric
Residential
Commercial & Institutional
Total
3. Solid Waste
Incineration
Open Burning
Total
4. Industrial Process
Total All Sources
Neg. = Negligible
so
X
1,720
1,240
440
Neg.
3,400
34,500
332,000
6,950
19,000
392,450
470
Neg.
470
31,000
427,520
Part.
2,290
3,400
' i
1,220
780
7,690
35,300
18,500
6,780
21,800
82,380
1,790
2,610
4,400
28,000
122,470
CO
472,800
1,860
670
7,130
482,460
3,500
1,500
7,710
23,000
35,710
240
12,000
12,240
6,600
537,000
-------
28
Figure 8: EMISSION INVENTORY GRID MAP
10 20
Ml LES
30
-------
CINCINNATI AIll QUALITY CONTROL REGION REPORT
Errata Sheet
1. Table 1, Page 27., should be replaced by the attached Table (changes
in figures are underlined).
?,, Table 2, Page 30, Grid Number 46 should be changed from "2.85*" to
"?,24A" for Density of Sulfur Oxide Emissions,
and from !I0.11*" to "0.44*" for Density of
Particulate Emissions.
3. Page 34, Line 13, should read "a smaller influence in the case
of particulates. They emit only about 25%.''
4. Page 52, Line 7, should read "for approximately 32% of the sulfur
oxide emissions in the T/hole."
-------
Table 1 SU11KARY OF AIR POLLUTAITT EIISSIOMS IN THE
CINCINNATI-tAl-IILTOil-iilDDLETOWH STUDY AREA, 1?67 (Tons/Year)
Source
1. Transportation
Auto
Trucks & Buses
Trains
Planes
Total
2. Stationary Fuel Combustion
Industry
Steam-Electric
Residential
Commercial & Institutional
Total
3. Solid Waste
Incineration
Open Burning
Total
4. Industrial Process
Total All Sources
SO
x
Part.
CO
1,720
1,240
440
"Neg.
.3,400
34,500
298,000
6,950
19,000
358,450
470
Keg .
470
31,000
393,320
?.,290
3,400
1,220
780
7,690
35,300
36,000
6S730
21,800
99,800
1,790
2>610
4,400
23,000
139,970
472,800
1,860
670
7,130
482,460
3,500
1,500
7,710
23,000
35,710
240
12,000
12,240
6,600
537,010
Neg. = Negligible
-------
Table 2: TOTAL EMISSION DENSITY BY GRID ZONE
(Tons Per Day Per Square Mile)
29
Grid
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Density of
Sulfur Oxide
Emissions
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.00
2.42*
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.08
0.96*
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.28*
0.09
0.01
0.01
0.95*
0.04
0.10
0.42*
1.04*
0.10
0.46
1.90*
0.44*
0.10
0.40
0.10
0.12
0.41
1.77*
0.89*
Density of
Particulate
Emissions
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.02
0.01
2.38*
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.09
0.46*
0.03
0.03
0.07*
0.05
0.25*
0.10
0.01
0.01
0.14*
0.10
0.11
0.46*
0.76*
0.13
0.49
2.24*
0.29
0.10
0.05
0.08
0.23
0.60
1.31*
0.75
Density of
Carbon Monoxide
Emis s ions
0.06
0.09
0.10
0.50
0.11
1.41
0.51
0.02
0.03
0.83
0.85
0.47
0.33
0.33*
1.23
0.98
0.49
0.12
0.04
0.22
0.96
1.23
1.34
2.67
1.68
3.14
6.54
2.34
1.92
1.49
1.20
3.30
6.26
6.91
4.34
-------
30
Grid
Number
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Density of
Sulfur Oxide
Emissions
0.16
0.08
0.11
0.80
0.74
0.48*
0.09
0.02
0.01
0.01
2.85*
0.14
0.10
0.28
0.06
0.08
0.09
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.03
8.03*
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
Density of
Particulate
Emissions
0.24
0.09
0.13
0.92
0.79
0.54*
0.16
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.11*
0.21
0.19
0097*
0.08
0.13
0.10
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.04
0.54*
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
Density of
Carbon Monoxide
Emissions
1.74
0.54
2.86
9.38
8.51
5.14
1.91
0.55
0.10
0.07
0.08
1.23
4.76
3.10
0.58
0.60
0.56
0.27
0.38
0.22
0.14
0.16
0.10
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.05
* Indicates that more than 50% of the emissions are from point sources.
-------
31
Figure 9: SULFUR OXIDES EMISSION DENSITY MAP
Tons Per Day
Per Square Mile:
111 more than 1.0
Mi 0.5 to 1.0
E3 0.1 to 0.5
CD less than 0.1
+ Indicates location of major
coal-fired power plant.
* Indicates that more than 50% of
the emissions within the associated
;. grid are from point sources.
1 ' Miles
10
-------
32
OHIO
KENTUCKY
Figure 10: PARTICULATE EMISSIONS DENSITY MAP
Tons Per Day
Per Square Mile:
•i more than 1.0
H! 0.5 to 1.0
E23 o.i to 0.5
CD less than 0.1
* Indicates that more than 50% of
the emissions within the associated
grid section are from point sources
* Miles
10
-------
33
gHIO
KENTUCKY
Figure 11: CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSION DENSITY MAP
Tons Per Day
Per Square Mile:
more than 1.0
0.5 to 1.0
0.1 to 0.5
less than 0.1
Indicates that more than 50% of
the emissions within the associated
grid section are from point sources,
10
-» Miles
-------
34
Figure 12 clearly demonstrates the tremendous impact which coal-fired
steam electric power plants have upon sulfur oxides emissions in the
Cincinnati area. The power plant located in Dearborn County is responsible
alone for more than one third of the sulfur oxides emissions in the
Cincinnati area. The power plant in Clermont County and the power plant in
southwestern Hamilton County are responsible for more than another third of
all sulfur oxides emissions. The Hamilton power plant and the industrial
sources in Middletown account for a significant portion of the remaining
sulfur oxides emissions. Thus, the bulk of sulfur oxides are emitted from
point sources which circle the City of Cincinnati and which reflect the
location of the major coal-fired power plants.
The power plants, which dominate the sulfur oxides emission map, exert
a much smaller influence in the case of particulates. They emit only 15%
of the total particulates, while industries are responsible for more than
50%. Industrial sources in Middletown and Hamilton alone account for about
30% of the particulate emissions. Industrial and commercial institutions
located in the central Cincinnati area account for a large part of the
remaining particulate emissions.
Automobiles are almost exclusively responsible for carbon monoxide
emissions. Since automobile traffic density is closely correlated to
urbanization, the greatest densities of carbon monoxide emissions are
found in the central areas of Cincinnati, Middletown, Hamilton, Covington,
and Newport. The expressway between Cincinnati and Columbus passes through
Warren County and results in carbon monoxide emissions which would otherwise
be unexpected in that rural county.
In summary, the emissions inventory shows that the most important point
sources of sulfur oxides are located in Dearborn, Clermont, and Butler
-------
35
Counties. The heaviest emissions of particulates are located in Middletown
and Cincinnati. Carbon monoxide emissions are concentrated most densely
in Cincinnati, Covington, Newport, Hamilton, and Middletown.
AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS
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 quality 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. Since such air quality data rarely exists, it becomes necessary to
develop estimates of prevailing 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.
MEASURED AIR QUALITY
Measured air quality data is available for the Cincinnati area from
a considerable number of stations. Dustfall measurements have been
reported from about 60 locations, suspended particulate measurements from
about 25 locations, and lead peroxide candle measurements for sulfur
oxides from about 25 locations. However, at many of those locations,
measurements were taken for only three months or even shorter periods of
time. T^ese data for dustfall, suspended particulates, and sulfur oxides
are of limited value in deciding upon region boundaries. First, much of
-------
36
the data is not statistically reliable on a long term basis since
it was collected over a relatively short period of time. Second, most
of the stations were clustered in the urban centers of Cincinnati,
Covington, Newport, Hamilton, and Middletown. While these stations
provide a measure of the downtown air pollution problems, they do
not indicate how far air pollution extends into rural areas. Despite
these limitations, the measured air quality data has been presented
in Figures 12, 13, and 14.
ESTIMATED AIR QUALITY
In order to supplement the measured air quality data, the
diffusion model was applied for carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides, and
particulates for three different time periods; annual, winter, and
summer. Due to the prevailing southwesterly wind (see Figure 15), it
was clear that pollution sources in Hamilton County would have an
impact upon the air quality of Butler County, whereas sources in
Butler County would have an impact upon air quality in Dayton. It was
necessary to estimate the relative importance of these two effects
in order to decide whether Butler County should be included in the
Cincinnati or Dayton region. Therefore, the diffusion model was applied
to the Dayton emission inventory as well as the Cincinnati emission
invenotry, and the two results were combined to generate an overall
map of estimated air quality for the Cincinnati-Dayton area as a
whole. Carbon monoxide emissions are greatest during the summer
season, while sulfur oxides emissions are greatest during the winter,
and particulate emissions remain fairly constant throughout the
year. Therefore, the corresponding diffusion model results were
-------
Figure 12: MEASURED SULFUR OXIDES CONCENTRATIONS
Parts Per Million:
1 more than 0.015
:%: 0.010 to 0.015
37
GRANT PENDLETON
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
38
Figure 13: MEASURED SUSPENDED PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
Micrograms Per Cubic Meter:
more than 120
80 to 120
40 to 80
GRANT PENDLETON
KENTUCKY
-------
39
Figure 14: MEASURED DUSTFALL
Tons Per Square Mile Per Month
more than 20
10 to 20
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
40
Figure 15: CINCINNATI WIND ROSE
WINTER
SUMMER
ANNUAL
N
PER CENT FREQUENCY
OF OCCURRENCE
-------
41
chosen as most relevant for determining region boundaries. These
results are presented in Figures 16, 17, and 18.*
Sulfur Oxides
Estimated sufur oxides concentrations from the diffusion model
indicate the strong impact of the power plants noted above. The
plant in Dearborn and the plant in Clermont cause two peaks of
ambient sulfur oxides concentrations which straddle Cincinnati. Dear-
born, Boone, Clermont, Campbell, Hamilton, and Kenton are all
subjected to sulfur oxides levels substantially above the background
level. However, pollution from these sources does not seem to affect
Butler County to an important degree. On the other hand, sulfur oxides
emission sources in Middletown seem to have a significant impact upon
Montgomery County and the Dayton area. In those instances where a
comparison can be made, the estimated sulfur oxides concentrations
correspond roughly to the measured concentrations shown in Figure 12.
The deviation appears to be about a factor of 2.
Particulates
Particulate emissions in the Cincinnati area do not appear to
present a serious problem outside of the downtown urban center. The
results of the diffusion model, Figure 17, indicate that Hamilton,
* The wind speed and direction data used in the diffusion model were
assumed to be representative of the previaling wind patterns throughout
the general Cincinnati and Dayton areas. Since the Martin-Tikvart
diffusion model used in the study attempts to show long-term rather
than episodic air quality conditions, only average emissions and long-
term average meteorology are considered. The pollutant concentrations
estimated by the diffusion model process are in addition to "background"
levels since the model was not supplied with information on sources
located outside the emissions inventory grid area for Dayton and
Cincinnati.
-------
42
Figure 16: ESTIMATED SULFUR
OXIDES CONCENTRATIONS
Parts Per Million:
more than 0.06
°-04 to 0.06
°-02 to 0.04
less than 0.02
INDIANA
—-*
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
43
Figure 17: ESTIMATED SUSPENDED PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS
Micrograms Per Cubic Meter:
H3 more than 140
11 120 to 140
60 to 120
less than 60
BUTLER •••::
3
Hamiffon^'; / WARREN
GRANT PENDLETON
INDIANA
^^
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
44
Figure 18: ESTIMATED CARBON MONOXIDE CONCENTRATIONS
Parts Per Million:
more than 0.4
0.2 to 0.4
! less than 0.2
BOONE
OHIO f \ VBELL
KENTON .„
GRANT PENDLETON
INDIANA
->
KENTUCKY
KENTUCKY
-------
45
Kenton, and Campbell Counties are affected by concentrations some-
what above background levels. Butler County appears unaffected by
particulate emission sources in Cincinnati. However, sources of
particulate s in Butler County combine with sources in Montgomery
County to produce a corridor of high particulate concentrations
between Hamilton, Middletown, and Dayton. In this case, as with
sulfur oxides, Butler County appears to be linked to the Dayton
problem. Where comparison is possible, estimated concentrations of
particulates correspond roughly (within a factor of 2) to the
measured concentrations shown in Figure 13.
Carbon Monoxide
Concentrations of carbon monoxide which are significantly
greater than background levels appear to form an elongated pattern
along the Cincinnati-Dayton corridor. The highest values of carbon
monoxide concentrations are found in Cincinnati, Covington, and
Newport. But Butler and Warren Counties also experience levels which
are somewhat above the background. The pattern of carbon monoxide
pollution extends through Butler County into Montggmery.
SUMMARY
The emissions inventory) and the estimated air quality information
are important measures of how large a region must be in order to
contain all of the major technical elements of the air pollution
problem. Based on the analysis of sulfur oxides, it appears that
Dearborn, Boone, and Clermont are linked to Cincinnati's air pollution
problem. Butler, however, appears linked to the Dayton area. Based
-------
46
on the analysis of particulates, the pollution of Cincinnati appears
to have little impact on Dearborn, Boone, and Clermont Counties. Butler
still appears linked to the Dayton area. However, carbon monoxide
concentrations seem to have an impact along the whole Cincinnati-
Dayton corridor, with the heaviest concentrations occurring at the
Cincinnati end.
-------
47
THE PROPOSED REGION
PROPOSAL
Subject to the scheduled consultation, the Secretary, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, proposes to designate an air quality
control region for the metropolitan Cincinnati area, consisting of the
area encompassed by the following jurisdictions:
In the State of Ohio
Clermont County
Hamilton County
In the Commonwealth of Kentucky
Boone County
Campbell County
Kenton County
In the State of Indiana
Dearborn County
The boundaries of the proposed Region are illustrated in Figure 19.
Figure 20 locates the Region in relation to the rest of Ohio, Kentucky,
and Indiana.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL
Introduction
To be successful, an air quality control region should meet three
-------
48
Figure 19: PROPOSED METROPOLITAN CINCINNATI
INTERSTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
Miles
-------
49
Figure 20:
PROPOSED METROPOLITAN CINCINNATI
INTERSTATE AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION
Chicago
Air Quality
Control
Region
ILLINOIS
Proposed
Cincinnati
Region
-------
50
basic objectives, as discussed in the section entitled "The Size
of a Region," page 6. First, a region should be self-contained
with respect to air pollution sources and receptors. Second, a
region should be designed to meet not only present conditions but
also future conditions. Third, region boundaries should be
compatible with and even foster unified and cooperative governmental
administration of the air resource throughout the region. The
proposed boundaries of the Metropolitan Cincinnati Interstate Air
Quality Control Region were designed to satisfy these three
objectives.
The first objective, that a region be self-contained with
respect to pollution sources and receptors, opened the possibility
that the Cincinnati area should be combined with the Dayton area
to form one air quality control region. This question was resolved
by recognizing the lack of urban, governmental, and technical
factors which could link these two cities. Dayton and Cincinnati
are not closely linked in terms of population. Hamilton County
(containing Cincinnati) has more than 900,000 residents, and
Montgomery (containing Dayton) about 600,000. Yet Butler County,
which separates the two cities, has only about 200,000 residents.
The distance between downtown Cincinnati and downtown Dayton is
more than 45 miles. There are no strong governmental links between
Dayton and Cincinnati, nor any joint programs for the control of
air pollution. Regional planning is handled separately for the two
-------
51
urban areas. Finally, the analysis of air quality, presented
earlier,indicates that the Dayton air pollution problem is
essentially separate from the Cincinnati problem, except perhaps
for pollution caused by automobiles. This last exception would
be a weak reason for combining Dayton and Cincinnati into one
region, since control of automobile emissions is more feasible
On the state or Federal level than on the local level. Therefore,
it appears reasonable to designate separate air quality control
regions for Cincinnati and Dayton.
The Core Area
The core area of the Cincinnati region consists of the cities
of Cincinnati, Covington, and Newport. Within these three cities
resides about 45% of the population of an eight-county area composed
of Hamilton, Butler, Warren, Clermont, Campbell, Kenton, Boone,
and Dearborn Counties. The heaviest concentrations of carbon
monoxide and particulate emissions are located in these three
cities. Suburban communities circling the urban center are also
part of the core area. These communities contain another 30% of
the population of the area, add to the volume of traffic flowing
into and out of Cincinnati each day, and experience ambient pollutant
concentrations substantially above background levels. Since the
core area extends into Hamilton, Kenton, and Campbell Counties,
these three counties should be included in the Metropolitan
Cincinnati Interstate Air Quality Control Region.
-------
52
Areas on the Periphery
In terms of population, employment, and location, the counties
of Dearborn (Indiana), and Clermont (Ohio), are on the periphery
of the Cincinnati urban area. However, Dearborn and Clermont
Counties both contain large coal-fired power plants located on
the Ohio River. The power plant in Dearborn alone is responsible
for approximately 37% of the sulfur oxide emissions in the whole
Cincinnati area, and the one in Clermont County is responsible for
about 25% more. Clearly, no program for the control of sulfur oxides
pollution in the Cincinnati area could be successful if it ignored
these two emission sources. For this reason, the proposed Region
includes both Dearborn and Clermont Counties.
In contrast to Dearborn and Clermont, Boone County does not
contain important emission sources. It is less densely developed
than the core areas in Hamilton, Kenton, and Campbell Counties.
Nevertheless, it seems reasonable to include Boone in the proposed
Region for a number of reasons. Boone County lies less than 10 miles
from downtown Cincinnati, and is bound to develop closer and closer
links to the urban center as time passes. As an indication of this
liklihood, Boone is expected to experience as much as 50% population
growth during the next decade due to an influx of surburban residents.
Boone County is a member of the OKI Regional Planning Authority, which
is responsible for planning activities in a nine county area
surrounding Cincinnati. This is another indication of growing links
*Hamilton, Butler, Warren, Clermont, Campbell, Kenton, Boone, Ohio,
and Dearborn.
-------
53
between Boone and the urban center. Boone County also participated
in the 1965-1967 regional study of air pollution in the Cincinnati
area**. Finally, the power plant in Dearborn County is located
directly across the Ohio River from Boone County, less than one
mile away. The resulting high concentrations of sulfur oxides which
Boone experiences are a strong argument for including Boone County
in the proposed Region.
Butler County
Butler County contains important air pollution emission sources,
experiences high concentrations of some air pollutants, has a
moderate population density, and is expected to grow rapidly during
the next decade. These factors definitely indicate that Butler
should be included in an air quality control region. But the results
of this study seem to demonstrate that Butler is more closely
connected to the air pollution problem of Dayton than that of
Cincinnati. The prevailing wind for the Southwestern Ohio area is
southwest. Thus, although pollutants emitted in Cincinnati can be
transported into Butler County and create a link between the two areas,
an even more important link is created by transport of pollution from
Butler County into the Dayton area. The emission sources in Butler
County are most likely to be controlled in the future if they are
included in the same air quality control region which contains the
**"Air Resource Management for Southwestern Ohio and North Kentucky",
a report by t'ie Study's Technical Committee.
-------
54
people they affect. Since it appears desirable to place Butler
County in an air quality control region for the Dayton area, it
is not included in the proposed Region for Cincinnati.
Warren County
Warren County is located just to the east of Butler County,
and is expected to grow at a faster percentage rate during the
next decade than any other county considered in this study.
However, at the present time, Warren is not densely populated, and
contains few emission sources of any consequence. If Warren is to
be included in any air quality control region at all, it appears
reasonable to keep it joined with Butler County. For this reason,
Warren County has not been included in the proposed Region for
Cincinnati.
This proposal represents a starting point for discussion in
the consultation with appropriate state and local officials, which
will be held before the Cincinnati Region is finally designated.
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1969 )Ur&A (JfiOo)
------- |