APTD-1446
TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
TO REDUCE
MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
IN PITTSBURGH,
PENNSYLVANIA
US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
APTD-1446
TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
TO REDUCE MOTOR
VEHICLE EMISSIONS
IN PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
Prepared by
GCA Corporation
GCA Technology Division
Bedford, Massachusetts
Contract No. 68-02-0041
EPA Project Officer: Fred Winkler
Prepared for
ENyiBCNMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
December 1972
-------
The APTD (Air Pollution Technical Data) series of reports is issued
by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and
Water Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, to report technical
data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies of APTD reports
are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors
and grantees, and non-profit organizations - as supplies permit - from
the Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, or may be obtained
for a nominal cost, from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
GCA Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts, in fulfillment of Contract
No. 68-02-0041. The contents of this report are reproduced herein
as received from GCA Corporation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions
expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. APTD-1446
11
-------
Acknowledgements
Many Individuals and several organizations have been helpful in
carrying out this study; for these contributions the GCA Technology
Division extends its sincere gratitude.
Continued project direction and guidance were given by Mr. Fred
Winkler (Project Officer) and Mr. Dave Tamny of the Land Use Planning
Branch, EPA, Durham, North Carolina, and Mr. Israel Milner (Co-Project
Officer) and Mr. Chuck Miesse of EPA Region III.
Many members of local and state agencies supplied data and critical
analysis to the study.
Alan M. Voorhees, Inc., acted as subcontractors to GCA Technology
Division and supplied major input to the study, especially in the areas
of traffic data, control strategies,and implementation obstacles.
ill
-------
COMMENT REGARDING THE RETROFIT PROGRAM (STRATEGY No. 4)
It has been called to our attention that a retrofit program using
the catalytic converter implies the use of unleaded fuel. There is some
doubt that cars of model years 1968-1970, perhaps 1968-1971, even, can
operate satisfactorily on 91 octane gasoline. The data shown below
indicate that the exclusion of the 1968-1971 model years from the vehicle
age group to be retrofitted under the recommended program would cause a
loss of 4.6% of CO emission reduction, leaving a net reduction due to the
retrofit program of 3.67.. In other words, this is the amount of reduction
from retrofit applied to model years 1972-1974 only, based on the derived
VAD for Allegheny County (see Table 11-15), as of 31 December 1977. Since
only about 2.4% reduction from retrofit is needed to meet the federal stand-
ard for CO by 31 December 1977, there would remain a "pad" of some 1.2% which
would result in a maximum 8-hour average CO concentration of about 8.9 ppm,
still 0.1 ppm to the good. The obstacles to the retrofit program are anal-
ogous to those for the I&M program, i.e., regressive burden on those least
able to pay, etc.
ji
Allegheny County VAD: Pre-1968 1968-1970 1968-1971 1968-1974 1975-1978
(as of 12/31/77) 4.1% 13.6% 22.5% 55.3% 40.6%
From Table 6 of the paper by Kircher and Armstrong, the average emission
factor for the 1968-1971 cars is 37 gm/mi, while the factor for the 1972-
1974 cars is 19 gm/mi. Thus, the weighted reduction realized from the retro-
fit program is 44% of the 8.2%, or 3.6%. This equates to the expected ambient
concentration (maximum 8-hour average) of 8.88 ppm.
NOTE: In the discussion of total net reduction to be realized from the
recommended transportation control program (Sections I and IV), there
is a source of possible confusion in the method of numbering the var-
ious strategies, due to the fact that two different lists are shown
in two different sequences. In order to avoid this needless compli-
cation, it is suggested that the strategies tagged as "#1" and "#2"
in the computation in pages 1-12 and IV-6&7 and in Table 1-4 be re-
numbered #2 and #3 to agree with the priority sequence shown in
Table 1-7. Thus, Strategy #1 will always be Inspection and Maintenance
(I6M), Strategy #2 will always be the street improvement program
Strategy #3 will always be the parking and mass transit improvements
program, and Strategy #4 will be the retrofit program (as modified
above).
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page
I INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1-1
A. BACKGROUND 1-1
B. PURPOSE, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF STUDY 1-1
C. CONTENT OF REPORT 1-3
D. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AND REQUIRED TRANSPORTATION 1-6
CONTROLS
1. Summary and Review 1-6
2. Recommended Strategies 1-11
II VERIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION PROBLEM II-1
A. OUTLINE .OF METHODOLOGY II-1
1. Methodology for Carbon Monoxide II-2
2. Discussion of Methodology for Carbon II-6
Monoxide
3. Methodology and Discussion for Oxidants II-9
B. DISCUSSION OF 1971-1972 AIR QUALITY LEVELS 11-11
1. Natural Features 11-11
2. Instrumentation 11-20
3. Review and Evaluation of Air Quality Data 11-26
C. DISCUSSION OF 1972 AND 1977 VMT 11-40
D. DERIVATION OF 1977 AIR QUALITY LEVELS 11-53
1. Present and Projected Non-Vehicular Source 11-53
Emissions
2. Assessment of the CO and 0 Problems 11-66
X
E. SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF MODELING 11-92
TECHNIQUES AND AREAS FOR AVERAGING
1. Determination of Measurements of CO and Ox 11-92
2. Conclusions 11-97
III IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION III-l
CONTROL STRATEGIES
A. STRATEGY EVALUATION METHODOLOGY III-l
B. GENERATE ALTERNATIVES III-3
C. PRELIMINARY SCREENING III-4
D. IMPACT EVALUATION III-8
1. Technical Effectiveness III-8
2. Economic Impact , 111-37
3. Non-Economic Impact 111-37
4. Political Feasibility 111-40
5. Evaluation Matrix 111-42
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Section Title Page
IV RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION CONTROL PROGRAM AND IV-1
IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY
A. RECOMMENDED PROGRAM IV-1
B. IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY OF RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES IV-6
V IMPLEMENTATION OBSTACLES V-l
A. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE V-l
B. UPGRADE EXISTING STREETS V-3
C. PARKING RATES AND FRINGE PARKING V-4
D. SHORT TERM TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS V-5
VI SURVEILLANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS VI-1
A. INTRODUCTION VI-1
B. SURVEILLANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION: CURRENT CON- VI-1
DITIONS
C. INADEQUACIES OF A STATIC SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM VI-2
REFERENCES R-l
APPENDIX A DAILY MAXIMA OF HOURLY CO CONCENTRATION FOR THE A-l
DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH ZONE, WITH MONTHLY MAXIMA
APPENDIX B RUNS OF HIGH HOURLY CO CONCENTRATIONS, PITTSBURGH B-l
ZONE 1 (ppm)
APPENDIX C POLLUTANT SPECIES C-l
APPENDIX D 1972 AND 1977 VMT D-l
APPENDIX E VMT ALGORITHM E-l
APPENDIX F RESULTS OF RETROFIT METHODOLOGY F-l
APPENDIX G DETAILED RANKINGS OF THE NON-ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR G-l
EACH CONTROL STRATEGY
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
1-1 TOTAL VEHICULAR EMISSIONS IN kg/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM 1-7
8-HOUR AVERAGE CO CONCENTRATIONS IN PPM FOR PITTSBURGH,
ZONE 1
1-2 TOTAL VEHICULAR HC EMISSIONS IN kg/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM 1-8
1-HOUR AVERAGE OXIDANT CONCENTRATIONS IN PPM FOR ALLEGHENY
COUNTY
1-3 TOTAL VEHICULAR EMISSIONS, PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1 (kg/day) 1-10
1-4 PHASE-IN OF REDUCTIONS DUE TO EACH TRANSPORTATION CONTROL 1-14
STRATEGY IN THE RECOMMENDED PROGRAM
1-5 VMT'S AND SPD's FOR PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1, WITH STRATEGIES 1-15
1-6 FRACTION OF TOTAL VEHICLES IN USE - LDV ONLY 1-16
1-7 RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION CONTROL PROGRAM 1-17
II-A SUMMARY SHEET FOR: PITTSBURGH II-5
II-1 PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY OF SURFACE WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED 11-15
(FROM HOURLY OBSERVATIONS)
II-2 EMISSION DENSITIES IN THE SPRPC REGION, 1972 and 1977 11-17
(kg/sq. mi.)
II-3 HIGHEST AND SECOND HIGHEST 1-HOUR and 8-HOUR AVERAGE CO 11-28
AND 0. CONCENTRATIONS, PITTSBURGH, 1971-1972
II-4 HIGHEST RECORDED 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (CO), 11-33
PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1.
II-5 MAXIMUM 1-HOUR OZONE READINGS - ARSENAL HEALTH CENTER 11-37
11-6 PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA; POINT 11-54
SOURCES
II-7 ABSTRACT OF THE 1972 EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR ALLEGHENY 11-56
COUNTY CARBON MONOXIDE
II-8 ABSTRACT OF THE 1972 EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR ALLEGHENY 11-57
COUNTY HYDROCARBONS
II-9 MOTOR VEHICLE POPULATION FROM ALLEGHENY COUNTY 1971 & 11-59
1972 EMISSION INVENTORIES
11-10 ESTIMATED VEHICULAR EMISSIONS FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY (in 11-63
kg/day)
vil
-------
LIST OF TABLES (cont.)
Title Page
CO EMISSIONS FOR ZONE 1 (DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH) FOR 1977 11-75
(kg/day)
11-12 EMISSION STANDARDS FOR 1973, 1974, 1975 AND 1976 MODEL 11-78
YEAR VEHICLES
11-13 COMPARISON OF PASSENGER CAR AGE DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN 11-79
ALLEGHENY COUNTY AND THE SOUTHWEST PENNSYLVANIA AIR
QUALITY CONTROL REGION AS OF 1 JULY 1971
11-14 EXTRAPOLATED "NO-STRATEGY" VMT'S FOR ZONE 1, PITTSBURGH 11-80
(mi/day)
11-15 MOTOR VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION, ALLEGHENY COUNTY AND EN- 11-81
TIRE SPRPC REGION
11-16 TOTAL VMT'S BY COUNTY FOR THE YEARS 1972 AND 1977 (mi/day) 11-83
11-17 VMT'S USED IN SENSITIVITY TESTS 11-84
11-18 SUMMARY SHEET FOR PITTSBURGH CARBON MONOXIDE 11-86
11-19 SUMMARY SHEET FOR PITTSBURGH OXIDANTS 11-88
11-20 TABLE OF VALUES OF REQUIRED HYDROCARBON EMISSION CONTROL 11-91
AS A FUNCTION OF PHOTOCHEMICAL OXIDANT CONCENTRATION
III-l RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES TECHNICAL EFFECTIVENESS III-9
III-2 RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES ECONOMIC IMPACT 111-38
III-3 ECONOMIC CRITERIA 111-39
III-4 RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES SUMMARY RATING: NON- 111-41
ECONOMIC IMPACT
III-5 RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES ON BASIS OF POLITICAL 111-43
CRITERIA
III-6 POLITICAL CRITERIA 111-44
III-7 FINAL RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES ALL CRITERIA 111-45
IV-1 PROJECTED VMT REDUCTIONS FOR 1977 AFTER THE RECOMMENDED IV-4
CONTROL PROGRAM IS INSTITUTED
Vlll
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Title Page
Predicted Air quality levels -- carbon monoxide, 1-9
Pittsburgh, Zone 1.
1-2 Implementation schedule for the recommended transpor- 1-18
tation control program.
II-l SPRPC and SPAQC regions. 11-12
II-2 Zone map, SPRPC region. 11-18
II-3 Zone map, city of Pittsburgh. 11-19
II-4 Taken from the Allegheny County emission inventory 11-21
for 1972.
II-5 Monthly variation in maximum hourly CO concentration 11-29
downtown Pittsburgh. Monthly average also shown.
(Value plotted is average of two highest readings for
the month.)
II-6 Diurnal variation in hourly maximum CO readings (down- 11-30
town Pittsburgh).
II-7 Hourly frequency of daily maximum CO concentration 11-35
June 1971 to August, 1972.
- Distribution of Maximum ozone concentration June - 11-38
September 1971.
2
II-9 VMT density (1000/mi ) vs. distance from CBD (miles) 11-47
Pittsburgh 1972,
VMT density (1C
Pittsburgh 1977.
2
11-10 VMT density (1000/mi ) vs. distance from CBD (miles) 11-48
11-11 1972 and 1977 VMT density (1000/mi2) vs. distance from 11-49
CBD (miles) Pittsburgh.
III-l Development of recommended control strategy program III-2
III-2 Emissions reduction vs. speed increase. 111-15
III-3 Percent choice bus transit trips sensitivity analysis. 111-21
III-4 Percent choice rapid transit trips sensitivity analy- 111-23
sis.
III-5 Isovalue contours, 15-277, Modal choice variations 111-25
employment density and travel time ratio.
III-6 Isovalue contours, 15-277= Modal choice variations 111-25
employment density and excess time ratio.
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
Figure Title Page
III-7 Percent VMT reduction as a function of transit fare 111-27
reduction for District 1.
2
IV-1 Peak hour VMT density (1000/mi ) vs. distance from IV-4
CBD (miles) Pittsburgh.
VI-1 Implementation schedule for the recommended transpor- VT-3
tation control program.
-------
I. INTRODUCTION AMD SUMMARY
A. BACKGROUND
States were required to submit implementation plans by January 30,
197^ that contained control strategies demonstrating how the national
ambient air quality standards would be achieved by 1975. Many urban
areas could not achieve the carbon monoxide and oxidant air quality
standards by 1975 or even 1977 through the expected emission reductions
from the 1975 exhaust systems control. Major difficulty was encountered
by many states in the formulation of implementation plans that included
transportation control strategies (including, for example, retrofit and
inspection, gaseous fuel conversions, traffic flow improvements, increased
mass transit usage, car pools, motor vehicle restraints, and work schedule
changes.) Because of the complex implementation problems associated with
transportation controls, states were granted until February 15, 1973, to
study and to select a combination of transportation controls that demon-
strated how the national air quality standards would be achieved and main-
tained by 1977.
B. PURPOSE, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
The purpose of the study reported on herein was to identify and
develop transportation control strategies that will achieve the carbon
monoxide and oxidant air quality standards required to be met by Pennsyl-
vania in the Pittsburgh urban area by the year 1977. The results of the
study were to help determine the initial direction that the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania should take in selecting feasible and effective transporta-
1-1
-------
tion controls. It was anticipated that the control strategies outlined
in this study would be periodically revised in the coming years. State
implementation plans were analyzed to verify and assess the severity
of the carbon monoxide and oxidant pollutant problems, and the most
promising transportation controls and their likely air quality impact
were determined. Major implementation obstacles were noted after discus-
sions with those agencies responsible for implementing the controls and,
finally, a surveillance review process (January 1973 - December, 1976,
inclusive) was developed for EPA to use in monitoring implementation pro-
gress and air quality impact of transportation control strategies.
It should be noted that the study was carried out relying on the
best data and techniques available during the period of the study and
further, that a large number of assumptions were made as to the nature
of future events. The 1977 air quality predictions were based on extant
air quality data and on predicted stationary source emissions and predic-
ted traffic patterns, and these predicted parameters themselves were based
on anticipated emission control techniques, anticipated growth patterns,
and the assumed outcome of unresolved legal and political decisions.
(The opening of key major traffic facilities before 1977 was particularly
sensitive to the outcome of legal and political decisions.) Further,
the development, ranking and selection of transportation controls were
based on extant and predicted economic, sociological, institutional and
legal considerations. Finally, the surveillance process presented in
this report, although showing key checkpoints towards implementation of
the recommended controls, is in itself dependent upon the same assumed
pattern of future events.
1-2
-------
It should be emphasized therefore, that to the extent that the
time-scale of the recommended program permits, the conclusions and
recommendations of this report should not be construed as a program which
must be rigidly followed until 1977, but rather it should be regarded
first, as a delineation as to what appears at the present time to be a
feasible course of action to attain air quality goals, and secondly, as
a framework upon which an optimum on-going program can be built as new
data and techniques become available, as legal and political decisions
are made, and as the assumptions as to future events are, or are not,
validated.
C. CONTENT OF REPORT
Section II of this report describes how the pollutant concentra-
tion levels which could be expected to occur in 1977 in the Pittsburgh
area were predicted. These levels were determined by an adaptation of
the proportional model using motor vehicle emissions from traffic patterns
predicted for 1977 together with predicted non-vehicular emissions for
1977 obtained from state agencies. Comparison of these predicted 1977
air pollutant concentrations with the national air quality standards
enabled the computation of the motor vehicle emissions which would result
in the air quality standards being met, and therefore, to what extent,
if any, reductions in the predicted 1977 motor vehicle emissions would
be required. In order to determine the pollutant concentration(s) which
was to serve as the basis for the proportional model, an intensive eval-
uation of all existing meteorological and air quality data was performed.
1-3
-------
The final determination as to the concentration value used was made in
close cooperation with representatives of local and state agencies and
of EPA.
Section III describes how candidate control strategies were de-
veloped, evaluated and ranked having regard to technical, legal, insti-
tutional, sociological and economic criteria. An important feature of
this task was the continuing interaction between, on one hand, the GCA
study team, and on the other hand, representatives of local and state
environmental planning and transportation agencies, concerned citizen's
groups, and EPA representatives.
Section IV presents the rationale for selecting the optimum pack-
age of controls necessary to achieve the required reduction in motor
vehicle emissions and also presents the confirmed effect on air quality.
Section V deals in detail with the obstacles to the implementa-
tion of the selected strategies. Since the obstacles to implementation
were important criteria in the evaluation of the feasibility of candidate
transportation controls, there is considerable discussion on such ob-
stacles in earlier sections.
Section VT presents the surveillance review process which will
enable EPA to monitor the implementation progress and air quality impact
of the recommended strategies. A curve showing predicted air quality
levels for the years 1973 to 1977 and beyond is presented, based on the
implementation of the recommended transportation controls. This will
1-4
-------
provide a basic indication of the way in which air quality should improve
as time passes and as controls are implemented. In addition, important
checkpoints are provided delineating the salient actions which must be
taken in order to implement the strategies such as the obtaining of the
necessary financing and legislation. Further, important background
assumptions, such as growth rate are identified, and methodologies sup-
plied, to provide verification that these assumptions are in fact, vali-
dated during the course of the program.
It should be noted,however, that the surveillance process thus
provided is of necessity based on the problem, and the concomitant trans-
portation controls,as they are presently perceived. An equally important
part of any surveillance process is the continuing reassessment of both
the problem itself and the appropriateness of the required controls. As
was discussed earlier in this Introduction, the present study employed a
whole range of extant data and techniques, and also of assumptions about
the course of future events. This data base should be continuously re-
viewed as new information becomes available. Thus, although the key
background parameters are called out in the Surveillance Process, a thorough
and continuing review of all the data, techniques,and assumptions contained
in this report will be required to properly update the problem definition
and appropriate control measures.
1-5
-------
D. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AKD REQUIRED TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
1. Summary and Review
As a result of our investigation of the Pittsburgh region,
it was found that while the federal standards for both carbon monoxide (CO)
and oxidants (0 ) are being exceeded at the present time, only the CO ends-
X
sions will constitute a problem by 1977- This is because, although the
FMVECP together with the planned controls on stationary sources will not,
of themselves, quite achieve the reduction necessary to meet the oxidant
standards by 1977 (Table 1-2), the transportation control strategies which
will be required to achieve the standard for CO by that time will also
satisfy the requirement for reduction of hydrocarbon (HC) emissions s'uffic-
ient to assure a "safe" level of 0 concentrations.
2C
The specific expected emissions and concentrations are shown
in TablesI-landI-:2. The small differences noted between the data in the body
of this report (see Tables 11-18 and 11-19) and the data shown here are due
solely to the use of the vehicle age distribution for Allegheny County in
lieu of the distribution for the entire SPRPC Region. Tables 11-13,11-15 and
11-21 show the differences and the resulting emissions due to these differences.
The model years shown are as of 1971. The computer program VEHEMI2 auto-
matically shifts the derived age distribution forward or backward in time,
to be compatible with the particular calendar year being investigated.
Figure 1-1shows the expected air quality levels for CO, first
with no strategies applied and using the SPRPC vehicle age distribution and that
for Allegheny County, then showing the effects of the various strategies.
1-6
-------
TABLE 1-1
TOTAL VEHICULAR EMISSIONS IN KG/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM 8-HOUR AVERAGE CO CONCENTRATIONS
IN PEM FOR PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1
; YEAR
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
j 1975
j 1976
1 1977
j 1978
1 1979
I 1980
1981
i 1982
1983
1984
j 1985
! 1986
NO STRATEGIES
CO HC
29,530
28,541
27,111
24 ,654
22,343
19,538
15,992
13,120
10,698
8,897
7,199
5,974
5,278
4,825
4,447
4,404
4,309
4,775
4,325
3,820
3,399
3,012
2,558
2,059
1,704
1,443
1,221
1,034
928
856
791
774
770
759
C0 *
CONC.
21.3
19.3
17.5
15.2
12.7
10.6
8.8
7.6
6.4
5.5
5.1
4.8
4.5
4.6
4.5
WITH STRATEGIES
1 AND 2
CO HC
22,119
18,910
15,028
12,207
9,965
8,300
6,730
5,598
4,957
4,540
4,192
4,154
4,067
2,988
2,488
1,947
1,596
1,352
1,145
971
873
806
746
730
726
717
WITH I & M
CO HC
14,352
11,108
9,068
7,553
6,124
5,094
4,511
4,131
3,815
3,780
3,701
1,842
1,424
1,206
1,021
866
779
719
665
651
648
640
WITH
RETROFIT
CO HC
13,764
10,197
8,324
6,934
5,622
4,676
4,141
3,792
3,502
3,470
3,398
1,766
1,307
1,107
937
795
715
660
610
598
595
588
NON-VEH.
CO
2,200
1,940
1,680
1,419
1,419
1,419
1,469
1,520
1,573
1,628
1,685
1,744
1,805
1,868
1,933
TOTAL
EMISS.
CO
29,311
26,594
23,799
20,329
15,183
11,616
9,793
8,454
7,195
6,304
5,826
5,536
5,307
5,338
5,331
NET
CO
CONC.
21.3
19.3
17.3
14.8
11.0
8.4
7.1
6.1
5.2
4.6
4.2
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
* Includes non-vehicular emissions - see Column 11
NOTE: It was assumed that the reductions in HC emissions from strategies 1 and 2 shown for Zone 1 were just
offset by corresponding increases spread over the rest of the County; i.e., the County-wide total HC
emissions were not changed as a result of the application of these strategies. See Table 1-2
-------
00
TABLE 1-2
TOTAL VEHICULAR HC EMISSIONS IN KG/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM 1-HOUR AVERAGE OXIDANT CONCENTRATIONS
IN PPM FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY
YEAR
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
WITHOUT
STRATEGIES
124,141
112,553
99,500
88,603
78,588
66,803
53,822
44,593
37,793
31,995
27,124
24,381
22,505
20,817
20,374
20,282
20,020
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
128,320
114,454
101,471
86,718
71,247
59,529
53,252
47,995
43,684
41,521
40,245
39,178
39,378
39,951
40,387
OX
CONG.*
.165
.153
.140
.122
.101
.084
<.080
\ r
<.080
WITH I & M
50,915
39,777
33,712
28,539
24,195
21,748
20,075
18,569
18,173
18,092
17,867
WITH
RETROFIT
48,828
36,516
30,947
26,199
22,211
19,964
18,429
17,046
16,683
16,608
16,402
NON-VEHICULAR
EMISSIONS
28,820
25,851
22,883
19,915
17,425
14,936
15,459
16,000
16,560
17,140
17,740
18,361
19,004
19,669
20,357
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
128,320
114,454
101,471
86,718
66,253
51,452
46,406
42,199
38,771
37,104
36,169
35,407
35,687
36,277
36,759
NET
7. RED. OX
REQD** CONG
55.0 .165
49.5 .153
43.1 .140
33.4 .122
12.8 .095
0.0 <.080
0.0 <.080
Maximum observed 1-hour average 03 concentration; includes non-vehicular emissions - see Column 7.
** % reduction in HC emissions required to reach "safe" rate of 57,744 kg/day (based on 55% red. from .165 Ox cone.)
NOTE 1: Strategies 1 and 2 were not applied, since it was assumed that the Zone 1 reductions in hydrocarbons due to
those strategies would not be realized in the rest of the County; i.e., the total emissions would remain unchanged.
(See Note, Table 1-1).
NOTE 2: Oxidant concentrations were derived from the data in Table 11-20, page , and by reading the curve in
3* **o CFR 51, "backwards," assuming a "safe" HC emissions rate of 57,744 kg/day from all sources.
-------
I
VD
Predicted Air Quality Uvela
Carbon Monoxide, Pittsburgh, Zone 1
Allegheny County VAD
Ho Strategy
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977 1978
Figure I-l.
1979
I960
1961
1982
1983
-------
CALENDAR
YEAR
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
TABLE 1-3
TOTAL VEHICULAR EMISSIONS, PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1 (Kg/day)
WITHOUT STRATEGIES WITH STRATEGIES 1 & 2
REGIONAL VEHICLE
AGE DISTRIBUTION*
CO
29,845
28,903
27,543
25,179
22,916
20,186
16,705
13,829
11,340
9,474
7,658
6,326
5,551
5,049
4,593
4,535
4,401
HC
4,852
4,416
3,923
3,505
3,113
2,656
2,154
1,794
1,523
1,288
1,084
971
890
815
793
787
771
ALLEGHENY COUNTY
VEHICLE AGE DIST.*
CO
29,530
28,541
27,111
24,654
22,119**
18,910**
15, 208**
12,207**
9,965
8,300
6,730
5,598
4,957
4,540
4,192
4,154
4,067
HC
4,775
4,325
3,820
3,399
2,988**
2,488**
1,947**
1,596**
1,352
1,145
971
873
806
746
730
726
717
* See Table 11-13, p. 11-58; and Table 11-15, p. 11-60.
** Transportation Control Program phased in over the 1974-1977 time period.
Because of the greater relative number of "new" cars in Allegheny County
as compared with the rest of the Region (see Tables 11-13 and 11-15), the completed
CO and HC emissions are somewhat lower if the local vehicle age distribu-
tion (VAD) is used. Because of the increasing influence on the total
vehicle population of late-model "controlled" cars, this differential in
computed emissions increases with time until about 1978, when the population
begins to become more homogeneous (see Figure 1-1). After that time, as the
effect of uncontrolled vehicles becomes less important, the differences due
to different VAD's become smaller again, ranging from 1% for 1970 up to
around 5% for 1978 and 1979, then back down to 1% again by 1986.
1-10
-------
While the effects of the individual strategies are broken out, year by
year, in Tables 1-1 and 1-2, only the cumulative effect of the entire strategy
package is shown in the bottom curve in Figure 1-1.
2. Recommended Strategies
In order of preference, the recommended strategies are:
STRATEGY AMOUNT OF ROLLBACK EXPECTED
Inspection and maintenance (affects en- 9% (CO); 10.8% (HC)
tire Region)
Traffic flow improvements through the 1.4% (CO & HC)
upgrading of existing streets (affects
Zone 1 only)
Increase daily parking rate by $1.45, use 5.5% (CO & HC)
existing parking space in fringe areas,
and improve short-term mass transit
(affects Zone 1 only)
B-etrofit program (use of oxidizing catalytic 8.2% (CO & HC)
converters) (affects entire Region)
The amounts of rollback shown are taken for each strategy as though it
were the only one to be adopted. The actual amounts expected as a re-
sult of the total program package are shown below. The total net roll-
back is expected to be 22.2% . The total rollback of vehicular emissions
* Computations of rollback percentages from various baseline values:
REQUIRED EXPECTED
27111-10965 ,. ,_ 27111-10213 ,. ,.
From 1972 vehicular CO emission rate: - 27111" = 59t&/° "" "27111 = 62'3'°
29311-12384 c_. , 29311-11632 ,. oro
From 1972 total CO emission rate: 29311 = 5'-''- 29311 = 60.3%
From 1977 vehicular CO emission rate: 13120-10965 = UM 1312,0-10213 . 22 2%
From 1977 total CO emission rate: 14539 = 14>87° 14539 = 20'0%
1-11
-------
required to meet the federal standard for CO by 1977 is 16.4% of the 1977
vehicular emission rate expected as a result of the EMVECP alone. The
apparent "pad" of 5.8% in the recommended package of strategies is re-
lated to an air quality level of 8.4 ppm, only 0.6 ppra below the federal
standard for CO (see Figure 1-1 and Table 1-1) .
Less 1.4% emission reduction expected from
traffic flow improvements (2% increase
in average speed)
Less 5.5% emission reduction expected from
parking strategies and improvements in
short-term mass transit (5.5% decrease
in VMT within Zone 1)
Less 9.0% emission reduction expected from
regional or state-wide inspection and
maintenance program
Less 8.2% emission reduction expected from
regional or state-wide retrofit program
(oxidizing catalytic converters attached
to 1968-1974 model year vehicles)
Net expected CO emission rate for Zone 1
Net expected rollback from 1977 "no-
strategy" rate
Successive Reductions And
Resultant Emissions Rates
1972 CO emissions from motor vehicles, Zone 1
(the "Baseline" value)
Less expected reduction from FMVECP (51.6% of
baseline)
1977 vehicular CO emission rate, no strategies 13,120
184 due to strategy 1
12,936
711 due to strategy 2
12,225*
1.100 due to I & M program
11,125*
912 due to retrofit
10,213* kg/day
22.2% (62.3% of 1972)
* The slight differences between these values and those shown in Table 1-1
are due to the fact that the "with strategies 1 & 2" column in the Table
uses the values generated by the computer programs VEHEMI2 and VEHEMI3,
whereas the listing above only approximates the reduction in emissions
from the 2% increase in average speed in Zone 1. In any event, the
difference is very small: on the order of 0.15%.
1-12
-------
From Table 1-1 the e/c ratio is 29,311/21.3 = 1376.1; hence, the "safe"
emission rate from all sources is 9 x 1376 = 12,384 kg/day. This is the
*
rate to be attained by 1977; assuming that the e/c ratio holds, it will
just meet the federal standard of 9 ppm CO for the maximum 8-hour average
concentration. Since the highest maximum value observed occurred in the
CBD, and since the other zones are expected to have much lower emission
rates (see Appendix C), the standards should be met by the recommended
program everywhere within the Region. The expected CO emission rate from
non-vehicular sources in 1977 is 1,419 kg/day. Adding this to the figure
derived above for vehicular emissions gives an expected total emission rate
of 11,632 kg/day. This is 6% below the so-called "safe" value of 12,384
kg/day, which requires a vehicular emission rate of 10,965 kg/day, and
20% below the no-strategy rate of 14,539 kg/day from all sources. The
net vehicular CO emission rate derived above is 6.867. below this "safe"
rate for vehicular emissions of CO; combined with the other emissions it
would result in an ambient CO concentration of 11,632/1376 =8.4 ppm, as
shown in Table 1-1.
In the absence of any prior direction on the effective date in 1977 by
which these reductions were to be attained, and to maintain compatibility
with the other data used in the computations (VME, derived VAD, etc.)*
the computer program relates everything to 31 December of the calendar
year. If it is desired to shift the effective date to some other day -
say, 1 July - then the VAD may be used as given in Table 11-13 but the VMT's
will have to be altered by interpolation to account for the desired amount
of temporal shift. Under these conditions, of course, since the FMVECP
would be operating for a shorter time, the required emissions reduction
from controls would be correspondingly higher.
1-13
-------
H
TABLE 1-4
PHASE-IN OF REDUCTIONS DUE TO EACH TRANSPORTATION CONTROL STRATEGY IN THE RECOMMENDED PROGRAM
1974 1975 1976 1977
Strategy 1, Street Improve- (27%)(2.0%)=0.54% (70%) (2.0%)-1.40% (93%)(2.0%)=1.86% 100%=2.0% incr. avg.
ments speed
Values of SPD: 39.21, 19.10, 17.09 39.55, 19.27, 17.24 39.73, 19.35, 17.32 39.78, 19.38, 17.34
(27%)(1.4%)=0.38% (70%)(1.4%)=0.98% (93%)(1.4%)=1.30% 100%=1.4% deer, in
emissions
Strategy 2, Parking & (10%)(5.5%)=0.55% (37%)(5.5%)=2.04% (83%)(5.5%)=4.57% 100%=5.5% deer, in VMT
Transit Improvements (99.45%)VMT?4 (97.96%)VMT75 (95.43%)VMT76 (94.5%)VMT?7
See Table 1-5 for values of VMT and SPD used in the "with strategies" runs.
After the computer run using the "strategy 1 & 2" values was made, the reductions for the other two strategies
were computed by hand, assuming that 50% of the reductions due to the I & M and retrofit programs were effective
in 1976 and 100% of these reductions were effective in 1977 and following years, as shown below:
Inspection and Maintenance (50%)(9.0%)=4.5% 100%=9.0% for CO
(50%)(10.8%)=5.4% 100% = 10.8% for HC
Retrofit, controlled vehicles
only (1968 - 1974 model years) (50%)(8.2%) =4.1% 100% = 8.2% for both
CO & HC
The expected emissions resulting from the application of the above reductions in the manner shown are displayed
in Tables 1-1 and 1-2.
-------
TABLE 1-5
VME'S AMD SPD'S FOR PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1, WITH STRATEGIES
OFF-PEAK SPEEDS, AVERAGE
YEAR
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
(1987)
(last
CODE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
line not used
V lil>i *«^
LOT
399,772
407,054
414,336
421,619
426,542
427,287
423,201
425,958
432,840
439,721
446,604
453,487
460,368
467,251
474,132
481,014
487,897
(494,778)
in computations)
*W*A4*^ *J^**»**
HDV
20,545
20,919
21,294
21,668
21,921
21,959
21,749
21,891
22,244
22,598
22,952
23,306
23,659
24,012
24,367
24,720
25,073
(25,428)
* *. »»! v " f r f "-*
0V
7,704
7,845
7,985
8,125
8,220
8,234
8,155
8,209
8,342
8,475
8,607
8,739
8,873
9,005
9,137
9,271
9,403
(9,535)
TOTAL
428,021
435,818
443,615
451,412
456,683
457,480
453,105
456,058
463,426
470,794
478,163
485,532
492,900
500,268
507,636
515,005
522,373
(529,741)
FREEWAY
39.00
39.00
39.00
39.00
39.21
39.55
39.73
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
39.78
FSPD -
0.17
ARTERIAL
19.00
19.00
19.00
19.00
19.10
19.27
19.35
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
19.38
fraction of VMT's
each speed class,
0.13
LOCAL STREETS
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.09
17.24
17.32
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
17.34
traveled at
Zone 1:
0.70
The above values were the inputs to the programs VEHEMI2 and VEHEMI3 for the "with strategies11 computer runs. They
may be compared with the VMT's in the Appendices (see 1977 24-hour VME for Zone 1), and with those listed in Table II-
14, pageH-80. The latter formed the basis for the "no-strategy" computer runs.
-------
TABLE 1-6
FRACTION OF TOTAL VEHICLES IN USE - LDV ONLY
(As of 31 December)
AGE (YEARS) NATION-WIDE REGION-WIDE COUNTY-WIPE
0 0.038 0.030 0.033
1 .068 -104 -114
2 .117 -124 -133
3 .111 .120 -126
4 .098 -HI -113
5 .106 .108 .108
6 .105 -HO -107
7 .087 .094 -089
8 .076 .071 -066
9 .059 .050 .045
10 .036 .028 .025
11 .029 .015 .013
12 .016 .009 .007 .
13+ .054 .026 .021
The above tabulation compares the nation-wide data as given in Table 14
of the paper by Kircher and Armstrong with those derived from the AM?
data for the SPRPC Region and Allegheny County, respectively. The base
year was 1971- The "zero years" age group refers to next year's models
introduced in the fall; in this case, these would be the 1972 models.
As explained in the text, the computer program
shifts the selected VAD forward or backward in time from the year 1971,
assuming that the same VAD holds for the calendar year being studied.
The successively "younger" vehicle populations are evident as we go
from the national average to the Regional distribution, then to that
for Allegheny County by itself. The importance of this is that the
greater the mix of "new" cars, the lower the overall rate of emissions
from the given population. This is the reason for the apparent dis-
crepancy between the numbers generated earlier in this study using
the Regional figures, and those given here which are based on the
County averages. Since it is good practice to use local distributions
whenever possible, the lower emission figures are believed to be more
nearly correct than those published in the Draft Report.
1-16
-------
TABLE 1-7
RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION CONTROL PROGRAM
Trans pot tat Ion
Control
Strategy
91 Inspection
& Mainten-
ance
#2 Upgrading
existing
streets
Traffic Flow
Improvements
#3 Increase
daily parking
rate $1.45,
utilize existing
parking spaces
In fringe areas,
and institute
express bus ser-
vice, extend
coverage, decrees
headways & In-
crease running
speed
fit Retrofit
Total Control
Program
Emission
Reduction
CO, HC
07. 16. «
L////X/I
Decrease dally CO evil
sions by n and daily
HC emissions by 10.81
CO, HC
m 16.41
tt \
Decrease dally CO and
HC emissions by 1.4%
CO.HC
ra i«,4i
K/J 1
Decrease CO & HC
emissions by
5.5 percent
CO, HC
n is.**
I////I 1
Decrease CO & HC
emissions by 8.21
CO
OX 241
V///////A \
Decrease daily CO
emissions by 22.21,
HC emissions by
24 %-
Desired reduction
for CO is 16.41,
SOURCE OF EMISSION REDUCTION
Emission
Rate Reduction
Expected to reduce HC
emission rate by 10. 8)1
and daily CO emission
rate by 9.01
Due to 2 percent aver-
age dally speed In-
crease, a 1.41 emission
rate reduction
Ho significant reduc-
tion expected
Expected Co reduce
daily CO & RC emission
rates by 8.21
An 18.51 HC emission
rate reduction and
a 16.71 CO emission
rate reduction
'VHI Reduction
Ho reduction
expected
No reduction
expected
Expected to
reduce VMt by
5.51
Ro reduction
expected
A 5.51 WO re-
duction
Capital Costs
Approximately $38
Million
Minimal capital
cost
Approximately $12
Million
Approximately $34
Million"
Approximately $84
Million
Non-Economic Impact
Program Is adaptable to existing
program.
State legislation required.
Technology has been developed.
Similar program Implemented.
Mo legislative enactment needed.
No technical Innovation required.
Similar program implemented elsewhere.
No legislative enactment needed.
No significant technical innovation
required.
Program is adaptable to existing progr
State legislation required.*
Technology has been developed.
Program Is Implementable with State
legislation.* Ho significant tech-
nical innovation required.
Sections 834(a) and 850-
Total capital cost of retrofit plus I&M is approximately $72 million for the SPRPC Region.
-------
Incr****
\
601 of
1001 of
IM*
lacraMO
Shore T«r*
Tv«niU
MM
B*sla
Short T«r»
I«9f avti i
2.5% Mod.
Chelc*
UglgUelon
Cavt«tl, Mela-
: Iteration
Hma*i
c«*u»
IHkllcil
ItiidUl
V
/
/
1
tatln
Ml la
Inautlwlaa
301 lf(M-
tlw«B«M
lUtllUtlMI
C**fl*M ,
1001 Iff.e-
tl*n>»
Figure 1-2. Implementation schedule for the recommended transportation
control program.
1-18
-------
II- VERIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION PROBLEM
A. OUTLINE OF METHODOLOGY
The basic procedure employed was to develop, for each city,
pollutant concentration levels which could be expected in 1977 without
the application of transportation controls (the potential 1977 levels).
Pollutant levels were determined by the proportional model using non-
vehicular emissions supplied by state agencies and using vehicular emis-
sions based on traffic data developed during the course of this study.
More sophisticated techniques could hot be employed due to the lack of
suitable extant calibrated diffusion models, and the short time period
of the contract which precluded the development of a suitable model and
the required inputs. Comparison of potential 1977 air quality levels with
the appropriate standard gave the allowable motor vehicle emissions in
1977, which in turn formed the basis for the development of transportation
control strategies.
Emissions from non-vehicular sources were obtained from state
implementation plans updated as required from information supplied by
state agencies. Emissions from vehicular sources were computed follow-
ing the recommendations given in EPA draft publication An Interim Report
on Motor Vehicle Emission Estimation by David S. Kircher and Donald P-
Armstrong, dated October 1972. Air quality data for each sensor within
In this discussion, the word city is used to denote the urban area
covered by the study and is not restricted to the area within the politi-
cal limits of the city.
II-l
-------
the city area was reviewed and evaluated in close cooperation with state
and local agencies. The instrumental method and sensor location were
studied and records of instrument maintenance and calibration examined so
as to identify questionable readings. Meteorological records were then
examined and compared with seasonal and diurnal variations in air quality
levels. Finally the pollutant concentration which would form the basis
for the proportional rollback calculations was decided upon in concert
with state and local agencies and EPA representatives. The year in which
this concentration level occurred defined the base year for the propor-
*
tional rollback calculations.
Because of the major differences involved, the detailed method-
ologies for carbon monoxide and oxidants are presented separately below.
1. Methodology for Carbon Monoxide^
Because ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide at any
given location appear to be highly dependent on carbon monoxide emissions
in the near vicinity, it was felt that some justification existed for a
modification of the proportional model. It was felt that in order to re-
duce ambient CO levels in, for example, a central business district (CBD),
it would be more appropriate to roll back CO emissions in the CBD itself,
rather than the entire air quality region. The assumption was therefore
made that pollutant concentration in any given zone was directly propor-
Because the air quality data for Pittsburgh were available for the
period June 1971, to July 1972, and because the "as of" date of the VMT
is December 1971, the fact that the highest 8-hourly maximum occurred in
November 1971 makes all data closely compatible in time.
II-2
-------
tional to the emission rate of that pollutant emission within that zone.
Accordingly, each city area was divided into traffic zones - about the
size of the central business district (CBD) in the center of the city
with increasingly larger zones towards the suburban areas. Where traffic
data was already available for existing "traffic districts" the traffic
zones were either the traffic districts themselves or suitable aggrega-
tions thereof. Otherwise the traffic zones were based on rectangular
grids.
An emission concentration ratio (e/c ratio) was
assigned to each sensor, the e/c ratio being based on the daily CO emis-
sions (expressed in kg/24 hrs.) for the base year within the zone in
which the sensor was located, and the CO concentration value which formed
the basis of the proportional rollback computations. Based on the e/c
ratios so obtained, the maximum allowable emission rate was derived
which corresponded to the national air quality level to be achieved (i.e.,
9 ppm for an 8-hour average). The emission rates for the critical
zone were then prepared for years 1977, etc., based on the predicted
vehicular and non-vehicular emissions for those years. Vehicular emis-
sions were based on traffic patterns predicted for those years in the
absence of any transportation controls imposed in order to meet national
air quality standards for CO (the "no strategy case"). Non-vehicular
emissions for the years of interest were obtained from state implementa-
tion plans and state agencies, and take into account predicted growth
and the predicted control strategies to be applied to those sources. The
predicted control strategies were generally those which state agencies
II-3
-------
considered to be the maximum feasible, and therefore the predicted non-
vehicular emissions were assumed to be irreducible for the purposes of
this study.
On the assumption that the predicted emission densities from
non-vehicular sources were to be taken as irreducible, the allowable emis-
sions from motor vehicles in each zone for the year of interest were then
determined. For the purposes of evaluating the effects of candidate
transportation controls, the maximum allowable emission rate for the
year 1977 was expressed as a percentage reduction from the 1977 "no
strategy" emission rate. However, as will be seen in following sec-
tions of this report, as each traffic control was developed, emissions
were recomputed, using the revised VMT's and speeds resulting from the
application of the control measures.
A typical summary sheet of the output of this methodology is
shown in Table II-A. It should be noted that the term "with-
out strategy" refers to a transportation strategy, i.e, one which affects
only vehicle emissions. The non-vehicular emissions used reflected
both the growth expected in such emissions and also the effect of various
control strategies for non-vehicular sources as predicted by state agen-
cies. It should also be noted that total emissions rather than emission
densities are presented in Table II-A, since the summary refers to the
rollback in one zone only.
II-4
-------
TABLE II-A
SUMMARY SHEET FOR: PITTSBURGH
DATE: 5 January 1973
II. CARBON MONOXIDE
A. Zone for which emissions computed
Zone 1 - the Golden Triangle (downtown Pittsburgh)
B. Area: 1.26 sq. miles
C. Carbon Monoxide Emissions (kg/24 hr.) and CO levels (ppm)
Pres- 1975 1977
ent Without Without
1972 Strategy Strategy
1977 1977
with with
Oxidant CO
Strategy Strategy
Only Only
Vehicular Emissions
Non- Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
CO level (8-hr average)
27,1H
2,200
29,311
21.3
19,538
1,419
20,957
15.2
13,120
1,419
14,539
10.6
*
13,120
1,419
14,539
10.6
10,197
1,419
11,616
**
a.4
**
No special oxidant strategy planned
Federal standard is 9.0 ppm
WITHOUT STRATEGIES
CO level (8-hr average)
1978
1979
8.8
7.6
1980
6.4
1982
Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
10,698
1,469
12,167
8,897
1,520
10,417
7,199
1,573
8,772
5,278
1,685
6,963
5.1
II-5
-------
2. Discussion of Methodology for Carbon Monoxide
a. Modified Proportional Model Applications
Modified proportional model applications and the limita-
tions of the conventional proportional rollback method have been well docu-
mented and reviewed and need not be discussed further here. The tech-
nique used in the present study was an extension of the conventional roll-
back technique to the extent that it was assumed first, that the constant
of proportionality between emissions and concentration may be derived from
emissions emanating from the relatively small area around the sensor (the
traffic zone), and second, that this constant of proportionality (the
emission/concentration ratio) could be applied to determine pollutant con-
centrations in other zones of comparable area on the basis of the pollutant
emissions in those zones.
Some justification of the first assumption can be found, for
2 3
example, in recent work of Hanna and Gifford who demonstrate the dominance of
urban pollution patterns by the distribution of the local area sources.
The success of their urban diffusion model, in which concentration is
simply directly proportional to the area source strength and inversely
proportional to wind speed, is attributed largely to the relatively uni-
form distribution of emission within an urban area and the rate at which
Noel de Nevers. Rollback Modeling, Basic and Modified. Draft Docu-
ment, EPA, Durham, N.C. (August 1972).
2
Hanna, S.R., "A Simple Method of Calculating Dispersion from Urban
Area Sources," J. APCA 21., Ilk-Ill (December 1971)
Gifford, F.A., "Applications of a Simple Urban Pollution Model,"
(paper presented at the Conference on Urban Environment and Second Con-
ference on Biometeorology of the Amer. Meteor. Soc., October 31 - Novem-
ber 2, 1972, Philadelphia, Pa.).
II-6
-------
the effect of an area source upon a given receptor decreases with distance.
In the proportional model, meteorological effects, such as wind speed, are
assumed to be duplicated over one-year periods. The validity of the
second assumption depends, in large part, upon the extent to which
diffusion and transport parameters are uniform from zone to zone ~ a
factor which could not be investigated because of the constraints of
the program. Thus, it was felt that, in the absence of a more sophis-
ticated technique, the use of this extension to the proportional model
was justified first, to obtain some assessment as to whether the existing
sensors were located in the hot-spots, and second, to obtain some assurance
that transportation strategies intended to reduce emission densities in
one zone (to the level required to meet ambient standards) did not increase
emission densities to unacceptable levels in adjacent zones, in Pittsburgh
it was found that the sensors were, in fact, in the "hot spot" zone and also
that the recommended transportation controls did not increase emissions in
adjacent areas to unacceptable levels. Thus the final rollbacks were con-
fined to the zone with a sensor within its boundaries and the extensions of
the techniques to other non-sensor zones did not, therefores play a primary
role in the final computations.
As might be expected, where an urban area had several
sensors, the emission concentration ratios were widely different and
this served to underline the fundamental limitations of the technique
employed. An implicit assumption in the technique employed was that the
air quality in a traffic zone could be fairly represented by one con -
II-7
-------
centration level and that this level depended only upon the average emis-
sion density within that zone. The two major factors mitigating against
this assumption are
(a) Emission densities are not uniform across
even a small traffic zone,
(b) Concentration levels are not uniform across
the traffic zone partly because of the lack
of uniformity of emission density and partly
because the point surface concentrations are
affected by micrometeorology and microtopo-
graphy as well as emission density.
Considerable judgment had to be used, therefore, both in the derivation
of e/c ratios and in their subsequent use. In heavily trafficked down-
town areas the variation was judged not to be too great, so that the
single recorded concentration might reasonably be expected to be repre-
sentative of the zone's air quality and emission density. However, in
suburban zones having overall low traffic densities, sensors were often
found to be placed at very localized hot spots, such as a traffic circle,
so that the recorded concentration levels were neither representative
of the overall air quality nor of the overall emission density in the
zone.
Accordingly, e/c ratios were generally derived from sen-
sors in the central areas of the cities and applied to suburban areas for
the prediction of 1977 concentration levels. This procedure gave air
levels which were generally representative of the suburban zone. How-
ever, it must be realized that control strategies based on this procedure,
II-8
-------
while they may ensure that the overall air quality in a suburban zone will
not exceed ambient standards, do not preclude the occurrence of higher
concentrations in very localized hot spots such as might occur in the
immediate vicinity of a major traffic intersection.
b. Seasonal and Diurnal Variations
The carbon monoxide concentration level chosen as the
basis for the base year e/c ratio in the CBD was the highest valid 8-hour
average observed during the base year 1971-1972. The one-hour averages
were very much closer to the standard than the 8-hour average, so that
controls required to meet the 8-hour standard would also result in the
1-hour standard being met. Although seasonal variations in readings
were noted, traffic data were not available on a seasonal basis, so that
vehicle emissions were based on annual average work day traffic data.
c. Background Concentrations
Background concentration levels of CO were not taken
into account. Where a zone was located near a large point source, simple
"worst case" diffusion calculations were performed to assess the effect
of the point source on the zone. In all cases, it was found that this
contribution was negligible.
3. Methodology and Discussion for Oxidants
The technique employed for oxidants was basically the same
as has just been described for CO with the major difference that only
one, very much larger area, was used as the basis for the proportional
rollback. Because of the length of time required for the formation of
II-9
-------
oxidants from hydrocarbon emissions, the relatively small areas used as
the basis for CO could not be justified. The actual area used in each
city was largely a matter of judgment and the decision was made in con-
cert with state and local officials and EPA. In general, it was about
the size of the metropolitan area. For Pittsburgh, Allegheny County was used.
The reductions in hydrocarbon emissions necessary to achieve
oxidant ambient standards were obtained from Appendix J, Federal Register
of August 14, 1971.
11-10
-------
B. DISCUSSION OF 1971-1972 AIR QUALITY LEVELS
1. Natural Features
a. Topography
The Southwest Pennsylvania Intrastate Air Quality Control
Region is designated in paragraph 81.23 of 40 CFR 81, Federal Register.
Vol. 36, No. 228, 25 November 1971 in accordance with the provisions of
the Federal Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC 1857 as amended by PL 91-604)
to consist of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) and surrounding Armstrong, Beaver,
Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties (see
Figure II-l). Most of the population and activity is concentrated in the City
of Pittsburgh and suburban Allegheny County. The region lies to the west of
the Allegheny Mountains of central Pennslyvania and occupies the central
portion of the Allegheny Plateau, which extends from southwestern West
Virginia through western and northern Pennsylvania into central New York.
Several large rivers have cut deep valleys into the plateau, so that the
terrain is characterized by quite rugged relief. The larger valleys, such
as those of the Ohio, Allegheny, Monongahela and Youghiogheny Rivers, have
steep sides and narrow, winding channels lying some 300 to 500 feet below
the level of the plateau. Historically, commerce and industry developed
along the river valleys, and the consequences in terms of air pollution
have been apparent for generations. The City of Pittsburgh was founded
at the point where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers join to form the
Ohio River; today, the "Point" of the "Golden Triangle" is at the center
of a large metropolitan region containing a major portion of the steel
industry of the United States as well as much other industrial and commer-
11-11
-------
Figure II-l. SPRPC and SPAQC regions.
11-12
-------
cial activity. The emanations from the many mills and factories are to
a considerable extent trapped by the walls of the valleys and thus are not
dispersed as they would be in more open terrain. This condition is exacer-
bated under conditions of atmospheric stability and especially when tem-
perature inversions are experienced,as discussed in the following section.
b. Meteorology and Climatology
The Allegheny Plateau, shielded to a large extent from the
moderating influence of the Atlantic Ocean by the Appalachian Mountains,
is for the most part under the influence of continental polar air masses
traveling from Canada by way of the Great Lakes or the Great Plains,
although during the summer months the area is frequently overrun by
maritime tropical air from the Gulf of Mexico. The Pittsburgh area,
lying near the mean storm track for much of the year, is subject to
moderately high annual amounts of precipitation and cloudiness, although
episodes of slowly moving anticyclonic circulations, the so-called "stagnant
highs", are fairly common, especially in the fall and winter months. Under
these conditions the air becomes very stable, especially at night under
clear skies when radiations 1 cooling gives rise to pronounced temperature
inversions near the ground. The pollutants from the numerous steel mills
and other stationary sources, as well as those from motor vehicles, tend
to become trapped in the lower layers of the atmospheric during the late
night and early morning hours, until the increasing input of solar energy
after sunrise can burn off the ground fog and clear the air generally
by wiping out the inversion and restoring a more normal temperature
11-13
-------
distribution aloft. While this condition is certainly not unique to
the Pittsburgh area, it is made worse there by the presence of concentrated
emissions of pollutants in the narrow, deep, and winding valleys which act
both as physical deterrents to the dispersal of pollutants and as delaying
agents to the onset of the solar heating effect referred to above. There
is an additional effect as well., that of the well-known "mountain and
valley breeze", which tends to concentrate the colder air near the bottoms
of the valleys during the hours of darkness, thus increasing still further
the strength of the temperature inversions which are present on a regional
basis anyway, and causing a further delay in their break-up during the day.
All of this gives rise to frequent river fogs and, where concentrations of
pollutants are present, to potentially severe air pollution episodes.
One of the best-known of such occurrences, that at Donor a, Pennsylvania,
took place in 1948 not more than 20 miles from downtown Pittsburgh under
precisely the conditions outlined above: stable atmosphere with little or
no wind, cold weather, night-time hours, concentrated industrial emissions
in a narrow, winding, steep-walled valley (that of the Monongahela River).
Next to terrain and atmospheric stability effects, the most
important meteorological parameters for air pollution considerations are the
wind speed and direction. These three factors, topography, stability and
wind velocity, are closely interrelated in many ways, but for our purposes
it suffices to emphasize that, while the Pittsburgh area lies in the heart
of the prevailing westerlies of the Temperate Zone (see Table II-l) the
rough terrain creates wide variations from the mean wind velocity, in
11-14
-------
TABLE II-l
PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY OF SURFACE WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED (FROM HOURLY OBSERVATIONS)
Greater Pittsburgh Airport, 1945-1965
(knots) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 56
Mean
DirectTbtt^^^
North
NNE
NE
ENE
East
ESE
SE
SSE
South
ssw
sw
wsw
West
WNW
NW
NNW
CALM
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
7.8
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.4
1.8
1.4
1.8
1.5
1.7
1.4
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.5
1.4
1.2
24.7
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.6
2.0
3.4
4.5
2.9
2.6
2.3
1.9
32.9
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.3
2.7
4.6
2.7
2.6
1.7
1.1
20.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.7
1.5
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.1
4.8
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0 0.0 0.0
0 0.0 0.0
0 0.0
0 0.0
0
1 0.0 0.0
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.9
4.7
4.3
4.7
3.8
4.4
5.4
9.5
13.5
9.0
8.0
6.0
4.8
7.4
100.0
7.3
6.8
5.2
7.0
6.8
7.6
7.1
7.8
7.0
8.9
10.0
11.4
10.5
10.7
9.4
8.7
8.3
I
l-»
Ol
Total number of observations was 176,927.
-------
general, the "roughness effect" acts to decrease the mean wind speed due
to frictlonal forces; at the same time, the local wind direction tends
to become channeled along the orientation of the valleys. The overall
result is to create a tendency for further concentration of pollutants
in the valley areas occupied by industrial and highway sources.
With this combination oi unfavorable influences at work in the Greater Pitts-
burgh area since the middle of the 19th Century, there is little wonder that
a serious air pollution problem has existed for a long time. Forbes Maga-
zine for 15 November 1972 contains a photograph (p. 36) of Pittsburgh as it
looked thirty years ago, before the clean air campaign took hold.
One favorable aspect of the distribution of industry and
motor vehicle traffic in the Pittsburgh area is that, from the standpoint
of one who is studying the air pollution problem there, the fact that
population and pollution sources tend to be concentrated in the valleys
at least allows him to focus his attention on these relatively small geo-
graphical areas. The 20 zones with the highest emission densities are
listed in Table II-2. As can be seen by referring to Figures II-2 and
II-3, they are clustered around the CBD. Zone 1 is the downtown Pitts-
burgh area, the "Golden Triangle." The zones contiguous to Zone 1 are 2,
9, 14, 16, and 17. Zones 1-20 are in the City of Pittsburgh. Zones 21-
51 compose the rest of Allegheny County. In general, the higher the zone
number, the farther it is from the "Point", but there are exceptions to
this. (It is of some interest to note that the sequence of highest emis-
sion densities is not the same for HC as it is for CO; the reasons for
this are not yet fully understood, although non-vehicular sources do play
a larger part in HC emissions than they do in CO emissions.) The "zone"
11-16
-------
TABLE II-2
EMISSION DENSITIES IN THE SPRPC REGION, 1972 and 1977 (kg/sq. mi.)
Showing the 20 highest zones in descending order of CO emission density.
Zone #
1
2
16
3
14
6
9
17
18
11
7
23
50
13
20
21
12
5
8
19
1972
CO
21,859.16
7,929.38
7,373.80
6,437.18
6,230.87
6,016.03
5,957.84
5,207.37
4,071.58
3,214.32
2,803.93
2,498.99
2, 104. 05
2,103.67
1,972.03
1,904-18
1,761.90
1,586.24
1,450.34
1,345.57
SC
3113.65
1159.65
1063.84
925.84
976.34
864.62
836.96
745. 04
592.94
463. 03
390.82
449.39
387.23
297.25
278.33
336.67
255.58
220. 24
198.93
194.73
Zone #
1
16
2
3
14
6
9
17
18
11
7
23
20
50
21
13
44
12
5
8
1977
CO
10,975.53
4,419.27
3,950.94
3,165.03
3,155.99
2,996.99
2,959.80
2,648.50
1,981.63
1,515.73
1,378.30
1,286.98
1,114.95
1,111.17
1,031.89
949.95
804.22
' 804.08
725.99
721.98
HC
1423.70
579.63
523.46
413.77
441.85
391.55
379.86
345.02
261.90
198.56
175.76
197.91
143. 94
173.90
156.67
122.50
126.62
105.93
92.28
90.86
Source: computer program VEHEMI2, "no-strategy" case.
11-17
-------
Figure H-2.Zone map, SPRPC region.
11-18
-------
Figure U-3. Zone map, city of Pittsburgh.
-------
terminology refers to the AMV Districts, which are aggregates of the
Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (SPRPC) Traffic
Analysis Zones (see Figures JI-2 and II-3).
2. Instrumentat ion
a. Sampling Locations
(1) General
While we have some data on CO, total oxidants, and total
hydrocarbons (HC) from five different sites in the Greater Pittsburgh
area (See Map, Figure II-4), close inspection of these data and consultation
with personnel of the Allegheny County Bureau of Air Pollution Control
(BAPC) have revealed that only the observations from the three sites dis-
cussed in detail below were both consistently accurate and of sufficient
frequency over a significant period of time to form the basis for con-
clusions regarding the ambient air quality in the region. No data were
abstracted from the other three stations of the BAPC telemetering network
(nos. 2, k, and 5 in Figure II-4).
(2) Downtown Pittsburgh (Zone 1)
The sensor is located on the Forbes St. (southwest)
side of the Allegheny County Court House, about 15 feet above the street
level and 20 feet in from the curb. Its position below a window of the
Court House is about 50 feet from Grant Street. The recorder and other
instrumentation are in a room of the Court House adjacent to the sensor
location. Situated on the southeast side of the Golden Triangle, in the
11-20
-------
BUREAU OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
TELEMETERING AIR MONITORING
STATION MAP
1 HAZELWOOD
2 LIBERTY BOROUGH - CLAIRTON
3 GLASSPORT
4 SPRINGDALE
5 LOGANS FERRY HEIGHTS
6 BELLEVUE
7 DOWNTOWN
ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Figure II-4.
Taken from the Allegheny County Emission
Inventory for 1972.
-------
very heart of downtown Pittsburgh, this location is well suited to give
a true representation of the concentrations of CO and HC pollutants to be
expected from the heavy vehicular traffic to which it is exposed. Given
the general experience in most urban areas that practically all of the CO
emissions (on the order of 90 - 95%) come from the internal combustion
engine and that the vast preponderance (75 - 80%) of HC emissions also
come from gasoline-fueled engines, this site is almost ideally located
for purposes of a study of transportation-related air pollution. This
is all the more true since, as will be discussed later, there is only one
major point source located within Zone 1, the downtown area, and it contri-
butes only about 0.2 ppm to the ambient concentration of CO. Since the
sensing device is located on the wall of a high building there is a physical
restriction of the sampling process: it is exposed to air from only one-
half of the possible directions. On the other hand, the "roughness" con-
cept as discussed in the preceding section with respect to the effects of
terrain and underlying surface is equally applicable to urban areas with
their many tall buildings and narrow, canyon-like streets. Indeed, the
study of the eddy motions of all scales related to turbulence induced by
urban built-up areas is a highly complex area of specialization in its
own right and can only be acknowledged in passing here, important as it
is in air pollution meteorology.
(3) Bellevue (Zone 30)
The sensor for this site (No. 6 in Figure II-4) is
positioned on top of a camper-type trailer semipermanently parked on the
north bank of the Ohio River on a high bluff about 200 feet above the
11-22
-------
water level and 30 feet in from the river bank below. The site is off of
Ohio River Blvd. in the Borough of Bellevue, about 4 miles downstream (north-
west) of the Golden Triangle. The height of the sensor above the ground
is 20 feet; it is about 100 feet from the roadside, behind a steel fence
which separates it from a gasoline service station. There is a possibility
of some interference from the HC fumes emanating from the adjacent gas
station, which is only some 40 feet away. Because of its high elevation
and nearness to a major highway artery, the readings from this site
should prove to be representative of the surrounding area as far as motor
vehicular pollutants are concerned.
(4) Arsenal Health Center (Zone 2)
This is under the jurisdiction of the Allegheny County
Health Department, the parent organization of the BAFC. The complex of
buildings is located at the corner of 39th Street and Penn Avenue, in the
Lawrenceville section of Pittsburgh near the Allegheny River. While this
site is some three miles from the downtown area, it is still well within
the built-up and highly industrialized area characterizing the city proper.
As a matter of fact, it is situated not far from several large point
sources (tank farms and the like) which are located along the south bank
of the Allegheny within a mile of the Center. It is also located near a
major arterial highway, but not close enough to be exposed to high con-
centrations of exhaust emissions from motor vehicles. This site was
used only for measurements of ozone concentrations in this study, and its
precise location with respect to the various sources is therefore not a
11-23
-------
critical matter as long as it lies generally downwind from them, since
in the case of oxidants we are concerned more with the area-wide picture
than with particular zones within the area. The sensing instrument was
located 20 feet above the ground.
b. Type of Instrumentation
(1) Downtown Pittsburgh
The instrument used for the detection and measurement of
CO concentrations is an MSA Lira non-dispersive infrared analyzer. It has a
25 cu ft/hr flow rate and a refrigerator to remove moisture. Sampling is
continuous and is recorded at three minute intervals and telemetered to
the Arsenal Health Center (see above). The room where the instruments are
located is presently undergoing remodeling and they are covered with plastic
sheets to prevent excessive dust from interfering with their operation.
The effectiveness of these measures could not be assessed. It is expected
that the instruments will be moved to a new location within the Court
House, possibly on the Grant Street side. If this does occur, a new
exposure will create some minor discontinuity in the records, but the
effect, if any, on the overall efficiency of the BAPC operation should
prove to be only slight.
A Mast instrument for measuring total oxidants was also
installed in the equipment room; however, it had been shut down because
of the danger to the historical site (the Old County Court House itself)
represented by the hydrogen tank associated with the Mast instrument. In
11-24
-------
any event, the data from this and other oxidant-measuring instruments at
other sites in the Pittsburgh area were not usable because they lay out-
side the range of possible values as oxidants are usually measured and
reported for purposes of air pollution control.
(2) Bellevue
The same type of CO analyzer was installed at this site;
the MSA Lira with refrigerant dryer to remove moisture from the air stream.
As in the downtown location, sampling is continuous and the results are
telemetered to the Arsenal Health Center at three minute intervals for
data reduction. This instrument was down for parts at the time of our visit
and had been so since 1 September 1972; it should be back in operation
"shortly". The operating personnel had some difficulties with the air
conditioner during the year that the installation was in operation. During
the summer months the trailer housing the recorder and other instrumentation
gets very hot, and the failure of the air conditioning produced some bad
data. This station commenced operation in August, 1971, and the first
full month's data are for September of that year. Thus, because of the
shortness of the record, the data from the Bellevue site must be used
with some caution. The CO data appear to be within reasonable limits, but
those for total oxidants and total hydrocarbons, like the corresponding
data from the downtown site and elsewhere, were not in useable form. In
the case of the Bellevue site the possibility of interference from the
nearby gas station has already been mentioned (for HC measurements).
11-25
-------
(3) Arsenal Health Center
The reference method for determination of ozone con-
centrations, instrumental chemilumineecence, was used in the special study
made by EPA and other agencies during the summer of 1971 to assist those
cities which did not possess an adequate capability for monitoring oxidant
levels. No information is available to us on the details of the equipment
used or the level of the staff expertise. However, some additional infor-
mation is included in the following section on the air quality data it-
self (see Section IIB 3c).
3. Review and Evaluation of Air Quality Data
a. General
Some general comments on the regularity, validity, and re-
liability of the available data have already been made in the preceding sec-
tions. As stated previously, the CO data were uniformly good, with only one or
two "far-out" observations recorded. On the other hand, the 0 and HC data
X
from the stations listed below were not available in useful form because the
results tabulated were "out of range" for the expected values of "HC cor-
rected for methane" and "oxidants as ozone," respectively. The several
tables of these data are not reproduced in this report, since they do not
add anything of value and are quite voluminous. In any event, they are
already available to the various interested agencies. Some of the possible
reasons for the results appearing in this form have been treated in the
section on instrumentation.
11-26
-------
Type of
Pollutant
Carbon. Monoxide (CO)
"Oxidants" and "total
oxidants" (Ox)
Ozone
"Total hydrocar-
bons" (HC)
Name of
Station
Downtown
Bellevue
Bellevue
Glassport
Hazelwood
Arsenal
Downtown
Bellevue
Ref. No.,
Figure II-4
7
6
6
3
1
"Central"
7
6
Period of
Record
Mar 71-Aug 72
Apr 71-Aug 72*
Apr 71-Aug 72*
Apr 71-Aug 72
Apr 71-Mar 72
Jun 71-Sep 71**
Apr 71-Feb 72
Oct 71-Oct 71
(No data from the Logan's Ferry, South Allegheny (Liberty), or Springdale
stations.)
*
The trailer-mounted instruments were originally set up at the Arsenal
Health Center (39th St. and Penn Ave.) and were moved out to the present
site in Bellevue in August, 1971.
**
These data were taken by the EPA-M1TRE Summer Study project (see below).
b. CO Data
An analysis of the usable CO data from the two sites described
in Section HB 2a, above, for the periods shown in Section 3A yielded the re-
sults summarized in Table II-3. The curves in Figures II-5 and II-6 show
the seasonal and diurnal variations in maximum intensities. Complete
tables of maximum 1-hour CO concentrations are included as Appendix A.
As can be seen, both the 1- and 8-hour average concentrations
of CO in downtown Pittsburgh have exceeded the approved national stand-
ards. The highest recorded 1-hour average concentration of CO as meas-
ured at the sensing device for Zone 1 (AMV District 1) is 44.2 ppm and
the second highest is 38.6 ppm for the period of record. The required
reduction of 20.8 percent from the highest reading can easily be attained
11-27
-------
TABLE II-3
NS
00
Averaging
Station Zone Period
Downtown 1
Bellevue 30
If the Federal
Summary of Data
Arsenal 2
1-hour
8-hour
1-hour
8-hour
standard could be
for Ozone for the
1-hour
Highest
ppm Date
44.2
21.3
37.3
20.6
met by
Period
0.165
1 Oct 71
18 Nov 71
14 Sep 71
29 Feb 72
2nd Federal
Highest Standard
ppm Date ppm
38.6
21.2
35.3
20.0
3 Nov 71 35.0
2 Oct 71 9.0
15 Dec 71 35.0
24 Feb 72 9.0
Reduction
Required*
(%)
20.8 9.3
57,8 57.6
6.2 1.0
56.3 55.0
neglecting non-vehicular emissions.
1 June - 30
28 Jun 71
(1200)
September 1971:
0.155
28 Jun 71 0.08
(1300)
51.5 48.4
-------
0
II
3«
14
I
to
zz
20
JUNC
Figure II-5. Monthly variation in maximum hourly CO concentration downtown
Pittsburgh. Monthly average also shown. (Value plotted is
average of two highest readings for the month.)
-------
LO
O
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 16 19 20 21 Z2 23 24
Figure II-6. Diurnal variation in hourly maximum CO readings (downtown
Pittsburgh).
-------
as a result of the operation of the presently authorized and required
Federal program for control of emissions from motor vehicles. Even though
the presence of emissions from non-vehicular sources would act to prevent
the desired standard from being achieved if this amount of reduction were
just barely reached, there is sufficient leeway in the expected results
of the Federal program, as will be shown later, to insure that the 1-hour
standard can be met. The problem arises when we look at the 8-hour
averages: the highest recorded thus far at the Zone 1 site is 21.3 ppm
and the next highest is 21.2 ppm (see Table II-3 above). These
are more than twice as large as the Federal standard and require a reduc-
tion in vehicular emissions (under the same assumption of negligible non-
vehicular emissions) of 57.8 percent and 57.6 percent, respectively.
These are not attainable through the present Federal program; thus, a
transportation control plan for the downtown area must be instituted in
order to bring the level of CO concentration down to the standard by
1977. It must be emphasized here that the above reduction percentages
are not the actual figures required to attain the standards. As will be
shown in a later section, the non-vehicular emissions cannot be neglected
and the reduction percentages must be figured based on total emissions,
not just vehicular ones.
Since the control strategy required to reduce high 8-hour CO
concentrations may depend on the time of day or the season of the year
when they occur most often, the data were analyzed to determine, if
possible, the patterns of interest. The 1-hour averages were directly
available from the raw data (see Appendix A), but the 8-hour values had
11-31
-------
to be computed from the 1-hour data. The method used was to scan the
raw data for "runs" of high hourly values, then add successive overlapping
8-hour series to obtain the candidates for highest 8-hour average con-
centrations. As can be seen from the table below (Table II-4), this tech-
nique produced several values which were nearly the same. Thus, conclu-
sions as to time of maximum 8-hour concentration are apt to be based on
somewhat shaky ground if it turns out that the high values are more or
less randomly distributed through the day and through the year. More-
over, with only one year's record available for analysis, it is not
really valid to assume that it is typical of the long-term period in
which we are interested (out to at least 1977). With these caveats in
mind, we can state, at least tentatively, that the diurnal cycle of CO con-
centration seems to be displaced in Pittsburgh from the early morning or
nighttime maximum usually found elsewhere (see Figure II-6). Based on
these limited data, the maxima at both sites appear in the late morning
hours; similarly, whereas the common experience in most areas has been
that the highest concentrations of CO occur generally in the late fall
and winter months, it appears from these data that the annual maximum can
be found in the early fall in and around Pittsburgh (Figure II-5). The
reasons for this apparent departure from the distribution to be expected
on the basis of previous experience are not immediately apparent; it may
be that additional data from future months and years, especially if the
instrumentation and technical staff are maintained at a high level of
efficiency, will enable us to ascertain the true patterns of annual and
diurnal variation. About all that can be said with any degree of confi-
11-32
-------
TABLE I1-4
HIGHEST RECORDED 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (CO), PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1
8-HOUR AVB.
DATE HOURS CONCENTRATION (PPM)
18 Nov 1971
2-3 Oct 1971
29 Feb - 1 Mar 1972
14-15 Dec. 1971
1 Oct 1971
17-18 Nov 1971
18 Aug 1971
07-14
20-03
18-01
18-01
19-02
08-15
17-24
07-14
21.27
21.2
20.9
20.4
20.4
20.4
19.8
18.7
HIGHEST RECORDED 8-HOUR AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS (CO), BELLEVUE, ZONE 30
8-HOUR AVG.
DATE HOURS CONCENTRATION (PPM)
29 Feb-1 Mar 1972
24 Feb 1972
14-15 Dec 1971
19-02
11-18
17-24
18-01
20.6
20.0
19.1
19.1
11-33
-------
dence at this time is that there is a greater frequency of high 8-hour
average concentrations of CO in the late afternoon and evening (1800 to
0200 hrs) than at other times, although even this generality is based on
extremely limited data.
An interesting picture is presented by the histogram in
Figure II-7, which displays the number of daily maxima of hourly readings
of CO concentration in Zone 1, by hour. The morning and evening rush hour
traffic shows up clearly and several secondary features also appear. This
is an excellent example of the way in which the driving habits and life
styles of a city's residents are faithfully reflected in the diurnal var-
iation in the concentrations of its atmospheric pollutants. Without
stretching the point too far, one could deduce something about the times
of day when most Pittsburghers go to work (between 0700 and 0900), when
the ladies do their shopping or meet friends for lunch (around 1100), when
the people who work in the downtown area go home for supper (1600 to 1800),
when they go out to eat or to a movie, perhaps (2000 to 2100), and when
they return home again (2300 to 2400). Even the relative shape of the
frequencies is preserved: one can equate the "early shift" (0700) to the
early quitting time (1600), and so on.
c. Oxidant Data
As stated earlier, the oxidant data obtained from the
BAPC were found not to be useful for the present study. Fortunately, a
special study was carried out during the summer of 1971 by the EPA and sev-
eral of the State and local agencies with the assistance of the MITSE Corp-
11-34
-------
LJ
Ul
70
60
I
t-
3
1,0
a
a
30
o
z
20
10
19
11
o
35
32
23
40
25
13
11 11 11
29
14
19
26
23
1 - 1
1 - 1
i I J 1 L
00
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
t- TIME
Figure II-7. Hourly frequency of daily maximum CO concentration
June, 1971 to August, 1972.
-------
oration to determine concentrations of ozone (0.) in cities lacking &
capability to monitor ozone adequately but large enough to pose a puta-
tive oxidant problem. Fortunately again, Pittsburgh was among the 33
cities included in this study. As stated previously, the site selected
in Pittsburgh was well located with respect to the greatest ambient con-
centrations of hydrocarbons, in that it lies some 3 miles to the north-
east of the downtown area. As shown in the computer printout of vehicular
emissions of HC for 1972 and 1977 (see Appendix C), the downtown area
(Zone 1) has by far the greatest output per unit area of HC (and CO) from
motor vehicles. Given the strong prevalence of westerly to southwesterly
winds in the Pittsburgh area (Table H-l), it is at once apparent that the
Arsenal was an excellent choice.
Ambient ozone concentrations were measured continuously, using
the reference method (chemiluminescence) as prescribed by the EPA in 40
CFR 50, Appendix D, Federal Register. Vol. 36, No. 228, 25 November 1971,
pp. 22392-22394. Hourly average values of 0~ concentration were recorded
and collected by the EPA; these data were validated by cross-reference to
weekly summary data. In this manner, obvious errors in hourly data were
removed and a good set of data was made available to the various agencies
for their use in preparing the Implementation Plans for submission to the
EPA. Since the original data sheets contain a great deal of information
not pertinent to the present study, only the daily maxima and hourly fre-
quency of highest readings are reproduced in Table II-5 and Figure II-8A,
below. The last line in Table II-3, above, summarizes the most important
11-36
-------
TABLE II-5
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR OZONE READINGS - ARSENAL HEALTH CENTER
Period of Record: 1 June - 30 September 1971. Method: Chemiluminescence
Monthly highs and 2nd highs are underlined.
Day
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
Aye*;
June
.070
.045
.055
.090
.085
.095
.055
.055
.040
.065
.085
.045
.070
.065
.030
.055
.075
.050
.055
.085
.060
.065
.080
.075
.095
.065
.090
.165***
.105
.070
.071
July
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
.085
.100
.090
.100
.070
.050
.050
.070
.070
.075
.080
.025
.050
.065
.050
.075
.105
.075
.045
.095
.075
.055
.065
.035
(ND)
(ND)
.069
Aug.
.055
.040
.020
.020
.045
.080
.110
.100
.120
.085
.060
.080
.135
.095
(ND)
.055
.080
.105
.075
.055
.070
.055
,045
.045
.070
.035
.040
.050
.085
.080
.145
.U7T
Sept.
.075
.060
.045
.050
.070
.050
.040
.055
.090
.095
.030
.020
.030
.025
.060
.025
.020
.020
.015
.020
.030
.030
.030
.030
.040
.015
.025
.035
.040
.035
.040
Time
June
16,18
18-19
18-19
12
14-15
15
13
12-13
15
17
14,16
16
13-14
18
14-16
17-18
16
15
14-16
16
14
16-17
14-15
17
15
15
16-17
12
15
12
of daily high
July
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
(ND)
16,19-
20
15
13
17-18
15
17-18
17-18
19
20
19
14
19-20
14
14-15
18
16
15,19
13,19
13
19
00*
17-18
14
00,06
(ND)
(ND)
Aug
17
13
13-14
16-17
12-13
16
17-18
14
15
13-14
18
17-18
17
15
(ND)
15-18
15-16
16
15
15
15
14
17
15-18
14
16
15
14
17
18
15
reading
Sept
14-16
13-14
13-14
16-17
12-13
14-15
14-15
16
12-14
13
18
04,22-
23
18
17-18
15,17-
18
00*
13
14-18
14
11-14
14
13-15
18-19
14-17
15-16
04-06
14-15
13-16
14-16
14,17
Frequency
Hr. #
01 0
02 0
03 0
04 2
05 1
06 2
07 0
08 0
09 0
10 0
11 1
12 8
13 20
14 35
15 36
16 25
17 24
18 22
19 0
20 2
21 0
22 1
23 1
24* 3
Times
Ex **
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
7
12
15
15
16
13
11
10
4
1
0
0
0
TOTAL: 105 times
*00 hrs = 24 hrs
**No. of times the
std. of 0.08 ppm
has been exceeded.
JUN: 36/701=5.14%
JUL: 24/512-4.69%
AUG: 37/696=5.32%
is second
this one.
highest reading, 0.
155, occurred
11-37
the hour following SEP:8/720=1.11%
AVG: 105/2629-3.99
-------
I
LO
*£
1 °
V
§3*
JS
3 30
TJ
O
«25
2
c
1)
o 20
u
o
"o 15
X
u
S 10
Ex
5
~ 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 1 1 1 1
»e 3v
_ Distribution of Maximum Ozone Concentration
June - September 1971
_
-
t *)
~~\ 0 0 0 i i 1 i i 0 0 0 0 _
20
8
1
25
_. 24
i
-
.
1 2Z
1
l''i 1_
_
-
3
0 rn o '
, 1 , IJLJ , 1 _L_
cT 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 01
TJ
8
Tine of Occurence Figure II-8A..
20
I
Li _
,11111 ' i i
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 01
Time of Occurence Figure II-8B.
-------
findings needed to form a basis for the determination of the amount of
"rollback" required to meet the Federal standard.
The data clearly show both the expected summer-time
seasonal maximum and the commonly observed diurnal maximum beginning in the late
morning to early afternoon. Figure II-8B depicts the number of times that
the Federal standard for oxidants has been exceeded during the four-month
period. The corresponding data for CO were not available at the time of
preparation of this report. Here also the summer-time maximum is clearly
visible, both as regards absolute maximum values and frequency of measure-
ments exceeding the standard. It is felt that, given the care with which
these data were generated, even though only one season is represented, they
form an adequate basis for forming conclusions as to the likelihood of
Pittsburgh's experiencing an oxidant problem within the next few years.
In particular, since we are concerned in the case of photochemical oxidants
with an area-wide average concentration rather than a localized one, the
approach used here seems to be the best that could be devised for the
present purpose. As will be discussed at greater length in a later sec-
tion, the situation in Pittsburgh, based on the information in the bottom
line of Table II-3, appears to be that no serious oxidant problem can be
expected to persist once the Federal program and the strategiea for reduc-
tion of CO emissions have been instituted.
Of the 33 cities included in the Summer Study, Pittsburgh
ranked fourth in highest level of 0, concentration measured and fifth in
11-39
-------
the number of times that the standard was exceeded. In absolute terms,
the highest concentration recorded anywhere during the study was 0.190
ppm (at Corpus Christi, Texas, Dayton, Ohio, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin),
not too far above Pittsburgh's 0.165, while the standard was exceeded
no less than 168 times in Dayton, 156 times in Toledo, Ohio, 112 times
in Columbus, Ohio, 110 times in Rochester, New York, and 105 times in
Pittsburgh.
C. DISCUSSION OF 1972 AND 1977 VMT
The following methodology describes resources, assumptions and
analysis techniques used to calculate the data needed to estimate vehicle
emissions for the Southwestern Pennsylvania Region. This region is de-
fined to include the City of Pittsburgh and the Counties of Allegheny,
Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Washington and Westmoreland. This region cov-
ers approximately 4,500 square miles of land and has a present population
of approximately 2.6 million people. In order to facilitate the analysis,
the region was divided into 72 districts. Figures II-2 and II-3 delineate
the district boundaries. The data required to estimate vehicle emissions
by district include:
(1) Vehicle miles of travel (VMT ) by time period
where the time periods are Peak Hour, Peak
Twelve Hour, and Daily.
(2) Age distribution by vehicle type where the
vehicle types are classified Light Duty Gas,
VMT is defined as the number of vehicles travelling on a given
segment of roadway multiplied by the length of that roadway.
11-40
-------
Heavy Duty Gas, and Heavy Duty Non-Gas. Light
duty vehicle is defined as a vehicle weighing
less than 6,000 pounds.
(3) Percent of VMT generated on each type of highway
facility where the facility types are classified
Freeway, Arterial and Local.
(4) Average vehicular speed by facility type by time
period.
(5) Percent of VMT generated by type of vehicle.
The base information needed to calculate the required data listed
above was collected from different sources which are specified in this
report. The methods used to estimate each of the five sets of data needed
are described in the ensuing paragraphs in the identical order that they
are listed. The major contributor of data is the Southwestern Pennsyl-
vania Regional Planning Commission. The data supplied by the Commission
was reviewed by the Consultant and found to be the best available data
which would satisfy the study's requirements.
It is assumed that some additions to the existing transportation
system will be made by 1977. Highway improvements falling into this cate-
gory are the completion of 1-79. Short range transit improvements con-
tributing to a modal split increase of 5 percent for trips destined to
the CBD were also assumed.
The data base used in estimating 1972 and 1977 vehicle miles of
travel by district for the Southwestern Pennsylvania region was derived
from traffic assignments simulated by the Southwestern Pennsylvania
Regional Planning Commission, SPRPC. 1967 was used as the base year,
11-41
-------
and the trip generation, distribution, modal split and assignment models
were calibrated to survey data. The models were then applied to regional
input totals for the projection year 2000, and the result was a 2000,
Cycle I, traffic assignment. The links in the highway network were then
identified with one of the 968 SPRPC zones in the region. The Inter-
zonal VMT was then calculated by zone by summing the VMT for all the
links in each zone by the following equation:
N
VMT. = 2 D. ADT.
where :
VMT. = Daily Interzonal VMT for zone i
D. = Length of link j
ADT. = Simulated daily traffic for link j
N = Number of links in zone i
The next step was to aggregate the zones into districts. This aggrega-
tion of zones into districts was based on:
(1) Topology
(2) Meteorology
(3) Political Jurisdiction
(4) Similar VMT Density
(5) A Minimum District Area of One Square Mile
The aggregation reduced the 968 SPRPC zones to 72 districts with
ranging from 1.21 to 513.30 square miles with an average district
11-42
areas
-------
area of approximately 63 square miles. The interzonal VMT for all zones
in a district were summed for 1967 and 2000. At this point, reasonable
estimates of interzonal VMT by district were known for 1967 and 2000.
In order to arrive at 1972 and 1977 estimates of interzonal VMT
by district, methods of interpolating the 1967 and 2000 interzonal VMT
data were analyzed. The first method used SPRPC zonal population equiv-
alents for each district to apportion county VMT increases between 1967
and 2000 to district increases. This method underestimated VMT growths
for districts containing high volume transportation facilities and for
districts with modest population-employment growths and a high percentage
of through trips. Similar results occurred when a population plus growth
factor was used. Appendix E details the algorithm used and describes its
inadequacies.
The method selected to estimate 1972 and 1977 interzonal VMT by
district from 1967 and 2000 data was to linearly interpolate the data by
district. This method assumes a constant annual growth in VMT for each
district and unlike the first method, it does not severely underestimate
growths for districts with high volume transportation facilities or a
high percentage of through trips. At the same time it does not under-
estimate VMT increases for districts which experience large population and
employment growths from 1967 to 2000. These growths are inherently ac-
counted for in the trip generation model. Overall, the linear interpola-
tion of VMT by district reflects transportation demand and supply changes
for each district. The following equations were utilized.
11-43
-------
« ^2000 ' j ^1967) X 35 " AVMTj
j VMTlg?2 - j VMT196? + AVMT.J
J VMT197? = j VMTig72 + ATM!.,
where:
j = District being analyzed
j VMT2000 = Interzonal VKT for district j for 2000
j VMT1967 * Interzonal VMT for district j for 1967
j VMTig72 - Interzonal VMT for district j for 1972
j VMT1977 = Interzonal VMT for district j for 1977
AWT. = Five year interzonal YMI growth for district j.
Upon completion of the interpolation, interzonal VMT for 1972
and 1977 by district were known.
A factor was then applied to the interzonal VMT for all dis-
tricts in a county in order to include VMT generated by intrazonal trips.
The number of intrazonal trips was derived from SPRPC's base year assign-
i
ment. Based on the data available, the estimation of intrazonal VMT
was calculated on the county level. The number of intrazonal trips
multiplied by average trip length resulted in intrazonal VMT. The intra-
zonal VMT for the county was then added to the base year interzonal VMT
previously calculated. The ratio of total VMT to interzonal VMT was then
calculated. The appropriate county ratio was then applied to the 1972
and 1977 interzonal district VMT's in order to arrive at total VMT by
district for 1972 and 1977. These ratios varied from 1.0056 to 1.0520.
11-44
-------
After reviewing traffic counts in different locations throughout the
region, it was estimated that 75 percent of the daily VMT occurred dur-
ing the peak 12-hours of the day and that 10 percent of the daily VMT
occurred during the peak hour. These factors were applied to the dis-
trict VMT totals and the result was the completion of estimating VMT by
district for all three time periods for 1972 and 1977. The methodolo-
gies for the four remaining sets of required data follow in the next
paragraph in the same order as they were listed.
The age distribution of passenger cars and trucks in operation
by county as of July 1, 1971, was received from R. L. Polk. The per-
cents of VMT traveled in each district via freeway, arterial, and local
facilities were summarized from SFRPC's base year highway assignment.
District peak hour and off-peak hour speeds for each of the three facility
types were similarly derived from the base year assignment. The VMT esti-
mates for heavy duty gas and heavy duty non-gas vehicles were derived from
1967 base year data. The VMT traveled by heavy duty gas and non-gas
vehicles were estimated by county. The VMT generated by these types of
vehicles by county were based on the mean truck trip length for the region,
and on the heavy duty truck trip ends produced and attracted in each county.
The mean truck trip length multiplied by the number of truck trips in the
county resulted in Truck VMT. The VMT estimated for heavy duty gas and
non-gas vehicles for the base year for each county were then divided by
the total base year county VMT estimates, and the resulting percentages
were applied to 1972 and 1977 VMT estimates.
11-45
-------
Appendix D summarizes the results of the analysis just des-
cribed. Vehicle miles of travel are listed by district for 1972 and
1977 by facility and vehicle type for each time period analyzed. Also
listed are average vehicle speeds by facility type, district and time
period.
Figures II-9 and 11-10 show the district VMT densities as a
function of their distances from the CBD for 1972 and 1977, respectively.
Also shown in each figure is a non-linear approximation of the function.
Figure 11-11 compares the 1972 and 1977 non-linear approximations.
In further elucidation of the VMT question, the following infor-
mation is reproduced from the Annual Report Issue (September, 1971) of
the SPRPC Reports with the kind permission of Mr. Robert Kochanowski of
the SPRPC Staff.
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Transportation planning activities during the past year have been
primarily in technical work preparatory to the development of the trans-
portation plan. This work is a necessary and important part of the
transportation planning process. The major work activities follow;
Accuracy Checks
During the past year a series of accuracy checks were completed on
data from various SPRPC surveys. The purpose of this job was to establish
the validity of the data collected as a basis from which to forecast
future activities and travel in the region. Included among these were
11-46
-------
1000-
100
tN_
si
III
Q
0 1 2 3 45 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
DISTANCE FROM CBD (MILES)
2
Figure II-9. VMT density (lOOO/mi ) vs. distance from CBD
(miles) Pittsburgh 1972.
11-47
-------
1000-r
100
03
111
a
10-
0 1 2 34 5 6 78 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
DISTANCE FROM CBD (MILES)
Figure 11-10. VMT density (1000/mi ) vs. distance from CBD
(miles) Pittsburgh 1977.
11-48
-------
1000-
100-
CO
ill
Q
10'
1972 APPROXIMATION
1977 APPROX MATION
10
DISTANCE FROM CBD (MILES)
15
19
Figure 11-11.
1972 and 1977 VMT density (1000/mi ) vs.
from CBD (miles) Pittsburgh.
distance
11-49
-------
checks of employment, dwelling units, population and automobiles avail-
able. One of the most significant checks is called the Screenline Check.
This check establishes the accuracy of the trip data by making a traffic
assignment of all vehicle trips reported in the travel surveys and com-
paring the assigned traffic volumes on major bridges in the region with
traffic counts taken at these same locations. The results of these var-
ious accuracy checks have established that the base year survey informa-
tion meets the required quality standards and can be used for transporta-
tion planning.
Highway and Transit Networks
One of the most important tools in the transportation planning pro-
cess is traffic assignment. By using traffic assignment, future highway
and transit trips can be assigned to proposed networks and the assigned
volumes evaluated to determine the user demand characteristics of pro-
posed systems. But before traffic assignments can be used with confidence
to test future systems, the base year highway and transit networks must
simulate existing traffic volumes. This is accomplished by coding the
existing networks in a form acceptable for computer application and then
assigning existing highway and transit trips from the travel surveys.
Minor adjustments are then made to the existing network until the desired
degree of simulation accuracy is achieved.
Trip Generation Models
Trip generation is the process of developing mathematical relation-
ships between the amount of travel produced (going) and attracted (coming)
11-50
-------
in each traffic zone of the region, and the factors which are most di-
rectly related to the reasons for this travel. Equations are developed
with base year data and are then used to forecast travel for the year
2000.
Trip Distribution Models
Trip distribution is the process of linking up the person trip pro-
ductions and attractions that are developed for each zone in trip gen-
eration to produce tables to trip movements from zone to zone. The model
used for trip distribution at SPRPC is called the Gravity Model and it
operates on the general principle that trips between two zones are di-
Mectly proportional to the size of the zones and inversely proportional to
some function of the travel time between them.
Modal Split Models
When the steps of trip generation and trip distribution have produced
a table of future travel, the next question that must be answered is which
transportation modes will these people choose? The modal split model is
developed to answer this question and to determine what percent of per-
sons will ride transit in the planning year. At SPRPC the modal split
model work has been divided into two parts. The first part is the de-
velopment of a model to predict captive transit ridership. (A captive
transit trip is a transit trip made by a person who did hot have the
choice to go by auto at the time his trip was made.) The captive model
predicts the number of captive transit trips by relating them to such
factors as auto ownership, density of development and the level of transit
11-51
-------
service available as represented by accessibility to desired destina-
tions. The second part of the SPRPC modal split work is the choice
model (for persons who have the opportunity to choose between transit
and auto). The transit trips predicted by the captive and choice modal
split models will then be assigned to coded future transit systems for
testing and evaluation.
TOPICS Planning
SPRPC has contracted with the City of Pittsburgh and PennDOT to
undertake a TOPICS planning program for the City of Pittsburgh, TOPICS
being a federal highway program that is designed to improve the capacity
and safety of existing arterial streets in urban, areas. SPRPC's staff
have been working with the City of Pittsburgh's staff in developing a
series of recommendations for short range improvements on city streets
and state roads within the City. These will be published in the form of
an early action report. In addition, a second phase of TOPICS planning
involves the adaption and adjustment of a model which will be used to
evaluate such possible improvements as one-way street systems within the
Golden Triangle or the impacts of major new traffic generators on traffic
patterns. (End of quoted material.)
11-52
-------
D. DERIVATION OF 1977 AIR QUALITY LEVELS
l' Present aad Protected Non-Vehicular Source Emissions
a. Poinr Sources
All data used in this section were based on information contained
in Pennsylvania's Implementation Plan, the Allegheny County Emissions
Inventories for 1971 and 1972, and the results of meetings and discussions
with personnel of the Allegheny County Health Department BAPC and the
SPRPC.
A summary of the available data on point sources in and around
Pittsburgh is presented in Table II-6. Although this information is frag-
mentary, it supposedly includes all major point sources within the County
and to that extent may be taken as at least an indication of the distribu-
tion of non-vehicular emissions of CO and HC in that area of 745 square
miles. The "Zone" column again refers to the AMV Distric.ts which are
shown in Figures H-2 and II-3. Details of plans for control of industrial
emissions, other than those included in the tabulation of the "major point
sources", and the number of new industrial installations to be built dur-
ing the period of interest, are not known at this time, although a very
general indication of growth rates is included in the IBM Study prepared
for the EPA in February, 1972 (see references). According to this docu-
ment, point sources (primarily industrial sources) in the Pittsburgh area
are expected to "grow" at a negative rate of 7.7 percent, or about -1.54
percent per year, for the period 1970 to 1975. Area sources (incineration,
residential, and others, including transportation), on the other hand, are
expected to grow at a rate of 1.1 percent, or about 0.22 percent per year,
11-53
-------
TABLE II-6
PITTSBURGH AND ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
POINT SOURCES
Definition of a "Major Point Source" = emissions of > 25 T/yr (62 kg/day),
All units are kg/day.
Zone
1
5
9
10
14
15
16
24
25
30
31
34
35
38
40
44
50
Totals:
ro- 73
o,. 20
CO
248.
323
934
149
2,277
1,337
36,585
482
31,316
124
73,775
,775 - 47
73,775
,822 - 14
1912
HC
5 124
2,833
162
944
467
945
944
1,629
596
398
2,287
5,120
944
870
2,112
447
20,822
COT
CO
248.5
323
149
2,277
1,337
35,806
482
6,959
6
47,587
1972 to 1977
1 QT) «-_ 1 OT7
1977
HC
124
2,833
162
944
945
944
1,628
596
398
2,287
1,144
945
870
L24
447
14,391
20,822
11-54
-------
over the five-year period. Other references, however, give much more
sanguine estimates of future growth rates in the various categories of
industrial and commercial enterprise; for example, the Implementation
Plan gives growth factors for various industries ranging from l.l to over
7 percent. In this study an average overall growth factor of 3.5 percent
per year was assumed for long-range planning purposes, effective over
the period 1977-1987. The values computed for 1972 and 1977 incorporate
the effects of the EMVECP and the growth incorporated in the vehicle-miles-
traveled (VMT) data; this growth in VMT amounts to 1.5 percent per
year for Pittsburgh and 2.8 percent for Allegheny County, between
1972 and 1977.
b. Area Sources
Point and area sources are combined in the summary tabulations
given below. These data, taken from the 1972 Allegheny County Emissions
Inventory (hereafter referred to as "the Inventory"), are presented in
Tables II-7 and II-8 for CO and HC, respectively. A considerable difference
exists between the data in the Inventory and those computed by the computer
program prepared at GCA Corporation. The following comparison of the
data from the 1972 Emission Inventory for Allegheny County and the output
of the VEHEMI2 computer program is made for the purpose of trying to re-
solve the discrepancy between the emissions reported in the Inventory and
those computed for the present study.
Based on the emission factor of 2000 Ib CO generated for every
1000 gallons of fuel burned, the 1972 Emission Inventory prepared by the
11-55
-------
TABLE II-7
ABSTRACT OF THE 1972 EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY
CARBON MONOXIDE
Motor
Passenger cars
Commercial vehicles
(trucks)
Buses (diesel-fueled)
Tractor-trailers
Total vehicular
Total transportation
Total non-transport
Total, all sources
Vehicular sources :
Non-vehicular
sources : 1
Conversion factor:
Vehicles
Tons/yr kg /day
592,000 1,467,359
285,000 706,414
2,500 6,197
11,800 29,248
891,300 2,209,218
28,812 71,415
920,112 2,280,633
37,659 93,343
957,771 2,373,976
93%
77.
L007.
907.1846 kg = 1 ton,
366 day = 1 year (in 1972),
2.4786 ton/yr = 1
kg /day
Other Sources
RR engines
River boats
Aircraft
Total
Tons /yr
710
200
27.902
28,812
kg /day
1,760
496
69.159
71,415
Industrial Sources:
Metallurgical
Cement mfg.
Asphalt pits.
Food prod.
Printing
Petroleum &
Coal Prod.
Chemical prod
Rubber Prod.
Stone, clay,
& glass
prod.
Non-ferrous
metal
Metal fabri-
cation
Gasoline in-
dustry
Dry cleaning
Paints & var-
nishes
Total indus-
trial
Power gener-
ating
Space Heatng.
Solid waste
disposal
Total
Total non-
vehicular
Total, non-
transport
(none)
(none)
(none)
7
(none)
7
. 30,000
4
4
7
13
(none)
(none)
(none)
30,042
2,336
4,628
653
7.617
66,471
-28.812
37,659
17
17
74,359
10
10
17
32
_
74,463
5,790
11,471
1.619
18.880
164,758
-71.415
93,343
11-56
-------
TABLE II-8
ABSTRACT OP THE 1972 EMISSION INVENTORY FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY
HYDROCARBONS
Motor
Private cars
Commercial vehicles
(trucks)
Buses
Truck-tractors
Total vehicular
Total transportation
Total non-transport
Total, all sources
Vehicular sources:
Vehicles Other Sources
Tons/yr kg /day
88,000 218,121
45,000 111,539
495 1,227
2,360 5,850
135,855 336,737
9,904 24,549
145,759 361,285
28,574 70,825
174,333 432,110
78%
Non-vehicular sources: 227,
1007
J.WU/O
RR Engines
River boats
Aircraft
Total
Industrial Sources:
Metallurgical
Cement mfg.
Asphalt plants
Food Prod.
Printing
Petroleum & coal
production
Chemical prod.
Rubber prod.
Stone, clay, &
glass prod.
Non-ferrous metal
Metal fabric.
Gasoline Industry
Dry cleaning
Paints, etc.
Total industrial
Power generating
Space heating
Solid waste dis-
posal
Total
Total non-vehicular
Total non-transport
tons/yr
505
140
9,259
9,904
(none)
97
(negligible)
16
500
14
2,600
8
12
228
50
14,170
1,700
5,855
25,250
839
2,325
160
3,324
38,478
-9,904
28,574
kg /day
1,252
347
22.950
24,549
240
40
1,239
35
6,444
20
30
565
124
35,122
4,214
14.512
62,586
2,080
5,763
397
8,239
95,374
-24,549
70,825
11-57
-------
Allegheny County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) gives total emis-
sions of CO from vehicular sources (passenger cars, trucks, buses, and
tractor-trailers) for the year 1972 as 891,300 tons/yr (2,209,218 kg/day).
This is 3 2/3 times the output of the VEHEMI2 computer program for Alle-
gheny County (including the city of Pittsburgh) for 1972: 603,590 kg/day.
Since these two values purport to represent the same quantity, it was
important for the purposes of the present study to try to resolve the ap-
parent discrepancy.
The first thing noted was that the vehicle populations
used differed by some 204,275 according to the Inventory
there were 842,100 vehicles in the four categories of highway motor
vehicles registered and operating in Allegheny County in 1971,
whereas the information used in this Report gives a value
of only 637,826 for the two categories they used for the year 1971 (see
Table II-9). The ratio GCA/Inventory, then is 637,826/842,100 = 0.7574. For
passenger cars only, the ratio for 1971 is 571714/702500 = 0.8138. Assuming
the same rate of annual growth as used in the Inventory, 2.5 percent, we
get an LDV population of 586,007 for 1972. The GCA/Inv ratio is 586.007/
720,000 = 0.8139. The next thing that became apparent was that the average
annual VMT/car numbers used in the two documents were also quite different:
whereas the BAPC staff had assumed a figure of about 10,000 miles per car
year (a check of their computations indicates an actual value of 9950, at
12 mi/gal average mileage), the VMT "s provided by the subcontractor indi-
cate an average annual travel of only about 8480 miles per car. This is
a further proportionality factor of 0.8480. These two factors may be
11-58
-------
TABLE II-9
MOTOR VEHICLE POPULATION FROM ALLEGHENY COUNTY 1971 & 1972 EMISSION
INVENTORIES
Passenger cars and station wagons
Commercial vehicles (trucks)
(gasoline-fueled)
Buses (diesel-fueled)
Truck tractors (diesel-fueled)
Total highway vehicles*
1970
21,84
35,600
1971
1972
682,000 702,500 720,000
97,600 99,700 102,500
2,100 2,100
37.8QO 40,000
81/.384 842,100 864,600
The Emission Inventories also include motorcycles and dealer registra-
tions, which are not included in the data furnished to us by the sub-
contractor. These have therefore been omitted from the above tabulation.
MOTOR VEHICLE POPULATION, FROM A.M. VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES, INC.
"In operation" as of 1 July 1971
Allegheny County
Armstrong County
Beaver County
Butler County
Washington County
Westmoreland County
Totals for SPRPC Region:
Passenger
Cars
571,714
31,498
77,497
51,549
83,876
142,650
Trucks
66,112
7,683
11,830
12,410
15,519
24,342
Total
637,826
39,181
89,327
63,959
99,395
166,992
958,784
137,896
1,096,680
11-59
-------
checked by comparing the total VMT's: 13578293/19672131 = 0.6902;
0.8138 x 0.848 = 0.6902. Finally, the emissions index computed by the
program VEHEMI3 is 40.25 gat/mi (for the LDV's only), while the emission
factor of 2 Ib CO/gal fuel burned is equivalent to 75.22 gm/mi, giving a
factor of 0.5351. The product of these three factors is 0.3693. The
ratio of emissions is, for passenger cars only, 557863/1479752 = 0.3770.
(The 1,479,752 kg/day is based on the recomputed value of 597,000 tons/yr
of CO instead of the 592,000 given in the Inventory.) There is thus an
unexplained residual differential which amounts to only some 2.047. of the
emissions ratio. Given the many imponderables and assumptions that went
into these numbers, it is felt that this close a result may be considered
as having accounted for the observed difference in the two sets of calcu-
lated emissions.
For the HC emissions the results are dependent upon the same three
factors: of these, only the emission index and the emission factor are
new: 6.68 gm/mi from the VEHEMI3 program and 11.095 gm/mi from the Inven-
tory, respectively, giving a ratio of 0.602. The product of this value and
the VMT ratio of 0.69 is 0.4156; this compares with the emissions ratio of
92556/218263, or 0.4241. The remaining difference amounts to only about
2.01 percent of the emissions ratio, a result quite close to that obtained
for the CO emissions.
The other vehicle categories were not investigated in this manner,
partly because of the uncertainties in the ways in which they were defined
in the two documents (this report and the Inventory), and partly because
11-60
-------
the LDV category (passenger cars) is not only better defined but accounts
for no less than 95.6 percent of all the VMT's for the year according
to this study. Again, the situation is more complicated in the Inventory,
since the trucks are handled on an average mileage basis (45 mi/day, or a
g
total of 1,688 x 10 VMT/yr), while the diesel-fueled vehicles (buses and trac-
tor trailers) are handled on the basis of average fuel consumption for the year
with no mileage figures given. However, the VMT's for the HDV category in the
present study (supposedly the group which corresponds to the "commercial vehi-
cles" category in the Inventory) are only about l/10th of the VMT's as calculated
from the data given on page 16 of the Inventory. This large difference is only
partially accounted for by the vehicle population assumptions made in the
two studies: 66,112 trucks in Allegheny County as of 1 July 1971 was
the basis for the figure used in our computer runs, while the Inventory
gives a figure of 99,700 trucks for 1971, a ratio of 0.6631. Applying this
same ratio to the 1972 estimated number of trucks from the Inventory, 102,500,
we would have had a corresponding value of 67,968 trucks for our computer
input value for the 1972 computations. The obvious problem here, of course,
is the very large discrepancy in the average miles per truck assumed in
the two instances. Whereas the Inventory study uses the figure of 45 mi/day
for trucks (gasoline-fueled), the data used in this report imply a figure of
only about 6.63 mi/day/truck if the HDV value of VMT is used, or 9.156
mi/day/truck if the total of HDV + 0V is used. This brings to light a
minor problem in the data supplied to GCA: while there are three cate-
gories of vehicles used as the basis for the VMT's, only two groups of
11-61
-------
vehicles are broken out in the vehicle population figures. Thus,
another possible source of confusion and error creeps in.
The various factors and parameters used in the above discussion
are included in the tables which appear below (Tables 11-12 through 11-16).
To sum up the stationary, or rather the non-vehicular source sit-
uation, it appears that only about 7 percent of the total CO emissions
come from sources other than vehicular (defined for the purposes of this
report as passenger cars, commercial trucks and tractor-trailers, and
buses), while about 22 percent of the total HC emissions come from the
non-vehicular sources. These figures are used in a later part of
the report to derive the most probable values of emissions from non-vehicular
sources in later years. A discussion of the rationale behind this procedure
is perhaps superfluous in light of the paucity of data mentioned previously
and the absence of any really viable alternative. Several methods of
modifying these ratios were imnestigated; among them being the application
of the ratios between the CO and HC emissions for Zone 1 for the successive
years (see Table 11-10) and those for the entire County, the percent reduc-
tion figures for the point sources for the 1972-1977 period, and other such
derived information. After much thought and several hand calculations,
it was decided to use the Inventory ratios essentially as given and to
use the planned reductions of CO and HC from the major point sources
as an estimate of the amounts of reduced CO and HC emissions, respec-
tively, to be expected from non-vehicular sources over the next five years.
The downward trend in industrial emissions of CO between the 1971 and 1972
11-62
-------
TABLE 11-10 (see also Figure 11-12)
ESTIMATED VEHICULAR EMISSIONS FOR ALLEGHENY COUNTY (in kg/day)
Zone 1 only (computed)
Totals for all of Allegheny County
(estimated)
Calendar
Year
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
Total
CO
29844.63
28903.25
27542.52
25179.25
22915.87
20185.92
16704.66
13829.16
11339.56
9473.62
7657.86
6325.90
5551.40
5048.9?
4593.02
4535.49
4401.01
Total
HC
4851.98
4415.93
3923.19
3505.03
3113.12
2656.35
2154.04
1793.87
1522.78
1288.19
1083.60
971.03
889.88
814.60
793.34
786.61
770.84
Total
CO
642027.11
627540.28
603589.96*
557013.76
511777.70
455160.66
380325.58
317949.66*
263294.33
222171.62
181409.99
151388.02
134224.72
123348.97
113393.90
113169.40
110996.47
Z../TC
l
-------
PITTSBURGH ZOME I ONLT
LINEAR INCREASE INVMT , CONSTANT SPEED
Figure II-9. FMVECP only - no strategy.
11-64
-------
Inventories was at the rate of 6.4 percent per year, which would give a
total reduction of 32 percent over the five year period. This compares
well with the 35.5 percent reduction employed in the calculations sum-
marized in Table 11-18 below. There was a small increase of about 2.8 per-
cent in HC emissions from industrial sources between the two inventories
which does not bear out the three year reduction of 30.9 percent used in
the HC calculations (Table 11-19). The many uncertainties inherent in the
planning process make any given value of predicted ambient concentrations
as good as any other (within limits, of course). Thus, the forecast val-
ues of CO and HC reductions to be expected as a result of planned con-
trols on stationary sources were used as given, with no attempt to second-
guess the sources of the estimates.
As for the question of the uniformity of distribution of the
various pollutants over the County, the previous discussion on the ter-
rain features and the concentrated industrial activity in the valleys
would indicate that we cannot consider the emanations from stationary
sources to be sufficiently well mixed over a period of several hours to
assume that we can consider point sources in the aggregate as a single
area source, at least for directly vehicle-related substances such as
CO. In the case of 0 , where we are concerned not so much with the
immediate emanations of HC as with their photochemical products a few
hours later, we must take into account the effects of wind velocity and
atmospheric stability as discussed in the section on meteorology (Section
II B 1 b). This, of course, is the reason for selecting a site at
11-65
-------
some distance downwind from the principal source of HC emissions; in this
case, the downtown district (Zone 1). Thus, while we are completely
justified in limiting our attention to Zone 1 for the CO problem, we must
consider a much larger area - at least all of Allegheny County and per-
haps the entire SPAQCR (nine counties) or the SPRPC region (six counties).
As will be seen, we elected to concentrate our attention on Allegheny
County in addressing ourselves to the problem of photochemical oxidants.
This was done for two reasons: because the County has by far the great-
est concentrations of gaseous pollutants of all types, including hydro-
carbons, and because good information was available on a county-wide
basis for emission rates of the various pollutants.
2. Assessment of the CO and 0 Problems
^1^^M^£*W^^^V^IM««aillllll*
a. Implementation Plan Assessment
According to Pennsylvania's Implementation Plan:
"Oxidant concentrations presently exceed the standard
in the Allegheny County area. The Federal Motor Vehicle
Emissions Control Program (FMVECP) and the stationary
source control regulations for hydrocarbons will achieve
the oxidant standard in Allegheny County by 1977."
(From the Addendum to Pennsylvania's Implementation
Plan - undated).
As it happens, the present study does not bear out the
above statement. Based on our calculations, it appears that the trans-
portation control strategies which must be adopted in order to bring
11-66
-------
the CO emissions down to a level where the Federal standard can be
reached will, together with the planned reductions of HC emissions from
non-vehicular sources, bring the total HC emissions in Allegheny County
below the level at which the oxidants standard can be met. This should
be accomplished by 1977, according to our calculations (see the computa-
tion sheet for HC emissions, below). The FMVECP and stationary source
controls by themselves, however, will not quite do the job, falling 3
percent short of the required reduction.
Since the 0 problem is a "non-problem" as far as we can
X
tell at this time, it remains to deal with the CO emissions rate, which does
pose a definite problem, as we shall see. Having established that only
Zone 1 is of concern in the case of CO emission density (Appendix C),
it remains to determine the ratio of emissions to concentrations, use
that to compute the so-called "safe" emission rate, and compare that
with the expected "no-strategy" rate of emissions in 1977 to find the
additional amount of reduction of emissions which will be required to
achieve the Federal standard for ambient concentrations of CO. This
procedure is developed in the following section; for now, we wish to
review the analysis described in the Implementation Plan and try to
determine whether it is a realistic portrayal of the CO problem in the
Pittsburgh area. Here, another quote may be of value; this time, taken
from the Control Strategy Evaluation, Summary, page II-l:
"Air Quality data indicate that the carbon monoxide
standard is presently being exceeded in the Alle-
gheny County area. The Federal Motor Vehicle Emis-
sion Control Program (FMVECP) will reduce the
present 8-hour maximum concentration from 24 mg/m
11-67
-------
(21 ppm) to 18 mg/Tn3 (15.7 ppm) by 1975 aad to less
than the standard value of 10 mg/m3 (8.7 ppm) by
1979. Since 88% of the CO emissions come from motor
vehicles, stationary source control would not have
a significant impact on air quality."
In this instance, as in the previous case, we cannot agree
completely with the statements from the Implementation Plan. As is shown in
the computation sheet for CO (Table II-A), and as was stated earlier in this
report, the standard is exceeded by the maximum observed 8-hour average con-
centration by some 58 percent and the FMVECP will not, by itself, reduce
this to the required level by 1977- Our investigation, moreover, indicates
that the program will by 1975 reduce CO emissions from motor vehicles in
the downtown Pittsburgh area (Zone 1) by about 26.7 percent of the 1972
value, resulting in an ambient concentration (assuming that the present
emission to concentration ratio holds) of 15.5 ppm, in excellent agreement
with the Implementation Plan. Furthermore, we find, as shown below, that the
unassisted Federal program could not reduce the total CO emissions to a level
below the standard before 1979, although it comes very close in 1978. As
for the last statement, the percentage of CO emissions attributed to non-
vehicular sources depends to a large extent on the manner in which these
sources are defined. For example, in the Inventory we find that sources
are grouped under the headings of "mobile," "industrial processes," "power
generation," "domestic, industrial, and commercial space heating," and
"solid waste disposal"; it turns out that "mobile" includes all forms of
transportation, whereas we are concerned in the present study only with
highway transport: cars, trucks and buses. This is the reason for our
11-68
-------
going to a category called "vehicular" as opposed to "non-vehicular" (i.e.,
all others, including other types of transport as well as the stationary
sources). In a letter to Mr. Ruckelshaus dated 5 May 1972, Governor Shapp
stated that "8670 of the CO emissions in Allegheny County are generated
by mobile sources." This is, of course, in good agreement with the figure
of 88% given above for "motor vehicles". However, if we look only at the
"vehicular" category as defined by GCA for this study, we find that only
77, of the total CO comes from "non-vehicular" sources (see Table II-7).
But if we check the 1971 Inventory (on which the statements quoted above
were presumably based), we find that no less than 96.2% of all CO emissions
in 1971 came from "mobile" sources, leaving only 3.8% as the contribution
from all of the stationary sources. If we try to resolve the seeming
discrepancy between the Governor's statement and that of the Inventory we
find that "mobile sources" in this instance apparently meant just cars
and trucks even so, these two categories alone account for 92.4% of
all the CO emitted in the County during 1971, while passenger cars
alone contributed only 64.67. of the total. It is really difficult to
find a combination of sources which add up to either 86% or 88% of the
total emissions some 828,647 tons or 847,918 tons, respectively, for
the year 1971. In the end, we decided to stay with the actual numbers from
the Inventory as far as the ratio of vehicular to non-vehicular sources
was concerned, although, as we have already seen, the absolute values could
not be used.
11-69
-------
Perhaps the most important difference between the findings of
the Implementation Flan and the results of our study is that the station-
ary (or, as we have it, the non-vehicular) sources Cannot be ignored.
Difficult as it may be to derive reasonable figures for future values of
emissions from these sources, we found that they must be taken into account
for both CO and HC estimates if the standard is to be achieved. Realist-
ically, one might say that if these emissions are only 7% of the total
(for CO), they cannot make much difference in the final result. True
enough, yet a small difference in the estimate for the year 1977 makes
all the difference in the attainment of the standards for both CO and HC
emissions, as is shown in Tables 11-18 and 11-19.
Before leaving this review of the Implementation Plan it would
be well to mention a minor discrepancy which, if it were not resolved,
would nevertheless have an appreciable effect on the computations of
amount of "rollback" required to meet the Federal standards. I refer
to the "Additions and Clarifications to Pennsylvania's Implementation
Plan" dated 4 May 1972 which accompanied the letter from Governor Shapp
to Mr. Ruckelshaus, cited above. In particular, it was noted that in
section 51.14, Control Strategy for CO. the maximum 8-hour concentrations
for CO in Allegheny County for the period November 1971-February 1972
are given as:
28 ppm
23 ppm
23 ppm
25 ppm
20 ppm
20 ppm
17 Nov
18 Nov
6 Dec
14 Dec
27 Dec
29 Feb
1700-2400
0900-1600
1700-2400
1700-2400
0900-1600
1700-2400
11-70
-------
The raw data were carefully searched for both 1-hour and 8-hour maximum
values of both CO and HC emissions; while the HC data were not available
in useable form, the CO data were apparently quite accurate - at least
they were consistently within "reasonable" limits. The technique for
deriving the 8-hour maxima from the tabulated 1-hour high values of CO
concentrations was explained earlier. Careful scrutiny of all the avail-
able data from the Downtown and Bellevue sites failed to reveal any values
as high as the highest ones reported in the referenced document. The 8-
hour concentrations corresponding to those reported above are:
Downtown Bellevue Implementation Plan
17 Nov 1700-2400 19.8 (bad data) 28.0
18 Nov 0900-1600 18.7 " " 23.0
6 Dec 1700-2400 (hourly data not avlbl) 23.0
14 Dec 1700-2400 19.8 19.1 25.0
27 Dec 0900-1600 (hourly data not avlbl) 20.0
29 Feb 1700-2400 20.4 19.9 20.0
(All of the above data are in parts per million by volume - ppm).
It is, of course, possible that the 8-hour maxima reported in the
Implementation Plan were derived from stations other than the two on which
our data are based, or that data from other years are available to those
who derived the information incorporated in the Plan. It was noted, how-
ever, that the figures given in the Plan for the three dates in December
11-71
-------
correspond to hourly maxima, and that the second number for the month of
November corresponds to the hourly maximum for the preceding day (17
November). The first value as given in the plan could not be accounted
for at all, and the last one was in agreement with our findings. While
this discussion should perhaps have been included in the section on air
quality data, it was felt that in our review of the Implementation Plan
this was perhaps the most significant area for study since, as we have
seen, there was quite good agreement in almost all other areas.
The review conducted for this Report indicates that addi-
tional information of potential value should be worked up and made avail-
able to EPA. As an example, if we examine not just the highest values
for each month, but the second, third, fourth, and fifth highest, we find
a significant correlation between the data for Bellevue and those for
the Downtown site, with advection from the direction of Bellevue to down-
town along the Ohio River valley quite apparent on some days. The sig-
nificance of a quantification of this effect would be, of course, that a
much better idea of the so-called "background" value of CO would be forth-
coming and consequently a more accurate "rollback" number could be gen-
erated. In terms of economics this could be quite significant in that a
possibly unnecessary reduction of emissions could be avoided and the cost
associated with this "overkill" could be obviated. It should be emphasized
that this is only a tentative finding and requires much more study and
analysis before it can be accepted as factual.
11-72
-------
CORRELATION BETWEEN OBSERVED HIGH VALUES OF 8-HOUR CO CONCENTRATION AND METEOROLOGICAL
PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE IN AIR POLLUTION EPISODES
The dates and times of high 8-hour concentratL ons of CO in the Pittsburgh area are shown in Table II-4, page
and in Appendix B. In an effort to determine the reasons for the apparent difference in the hourly data for
Pittsburgh as opposed to the common experience in other locations (see discussion on page and Tables in
Appendix A, also Figures II-5 and II-7, pages and , respectively), an analysis of the 1-hourly data was
attempted to try to discover whether any meteorological phenomena could be found to account for this situation.
No significant correlations were apparent, however. The 8-hour data were then examined in a similar manner, with
the following results.
AIR POLLUTION METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS
i
-j
DATE
18 Aug 71
1 Oct 71
M 2-3 Oct 71
17-18 Nov 71
14-15 Dec 71
29 Feb -
1 Mar 72
24 Feb 72
(Bellevue)
TIME
03-17
05-22
14-06
17-17
15-05
15-05
11-24
INVERSION
Pronounced
Moderate
Weak to
Moderate
Moderate
to Strong
Moderate
Weak
Weak
TIME OF
BREAK
0930
0930
1000
1000,
1130
2000,
-------
b. Current Assessment
(1) General
This section contains a review of the methodology
employed in the analysis of the existing and future situations as regards
both ambient concentrations and emission rates in the Pittsburgh area, and
of the results of the efforts to determine the likely situation in the
target year, 1977. Also reviewed in this section are some of the more
important factors involved in developing the bases for the strategy recom-
mendations, although a review of the strategies themselves belongs to a
succeeding section.
The two factors which form the basis for the de-
velopment of projected values of emissions and emission densities as
given in Appendix C - that is, the parameters which are varied under the
control of the computer program which generates the emission values on
a zone-by-zone basis, are the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per car per
year, and the mix of vehicle speeds for the highway facilities found in
each zone. Repeated runs were made on the computer to asses" the effect
of each change in these parameters. As would be expected, the emissions
varied in a linear fashion with VMT's but in a non-linear manner with
speed. A partial matrix constructed of values generated during these
sensitivity tests is included below as Table 11-11.
To recapitulate the procedure followed in deriving the
county-wide data for years other than those for which computer runs
11-74
-------
TABLE il-ll
CO LnlSSIOKS FOR ZONE 1 (DOIVTOUS PITTSBURGH) FOR 1477 (kg/d.y) Arc* > 1.26 «<|. «1.
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED PEE BAY
rcd., red,, ^ rtd., V red..
h.wi. total , 7J* veh.*m. total
nly «. 2'4 only «,.
7. red., 7 red,, 7 red.» 7 «d.
veh.en. total r«27" weh.ea. tottl
oaly «. 5'TO only e.
vth.n, COMI
only «.
.1, «.
SPIi*" vi-h.
SPfi * v^-h.
i.i tie.
SPB + w-h.
2.1" tut.
SPD ^
i.n
v,.h.
tot.
1392 )
l52iH
13336 3.6
14755
13285 3.9
14704J
3.2
13205
3.6 U624
12810
14249*
12061 7.0
14280*
12560 9.2
6.6 13»J9*
ll«» U.I
$.3
11768 14.» tOMI 31.*
"""* "' '"»"*
SPD 4
1.5
SPFI -
3.0
44610 S.O
58904 3.8
45395 3.3 45107 3-9
59689 2.5 59401 3.0
43992
58276
6.3 43040 8.)
4.S 37134*
J»J7J ]».>
5.4 >»**»
41470 11.6
5i764» ».»
14704 -(.125)14704 12866 - 302 k«/t- values; CO: vehicular **i»5ion5 ?nly, 1977: 13,829 kg/d*y, Zone 1 only. R«<]
-------
were made (1972 and 1977), and in obtaining the relationships between
vehicular and non-vehicular emissions, CO and HC emissions for a given
area and year, and expected future values of emission reductions from
non-vehicular sources, the following summary may be of assistance.
GIVEN QUANTITIES:
a. Federal standards for CO and Ox
All-source emissions, CO and HC.
(NOTE: modified to be compatible
with results of computer pro-
gram. )
VMT's for years 1972 and 1977
(totals by zone for the SPAQCR
less Fayette, Greene, and Indi-
ana Counties); % VMT by vehicle
type.
d.
SPDC & FSPD values by highway
facility type for each zone
of 72 zones.
NOTE: SPDC = peak and off-peak
speeds in mph; FSPD = fraction
of total VMT to each speed class.
Zonal areas (sq. mi., for each of
72 zones)
Age distribution of motor
vehicles for each of 6 counties
in SPRPC Region, 2 categories
only (LDV = passenger car; HDV =
truck).
Source:
40 CFR 50, 25 Nov 71
(p. 22385) (see also
Table 11-12)
Emissions Inventory
(see Section HD1 and
Tables II-7 and II- 8)
AMV Assoc., Inc.
(see Appendix D)
AMV Assoc., Inc.
(see Appendix D)
AMV Assoc., Inc.
(Appendix D)
AMV Assoc,, Inc.
(Table 11-13)
Average annual miles driven Table 14, Kircher & Armstrong
per LDV by model year (vehicle age).
h. Average annual miles driven per
HDV by model year (vehicle age).
Table 20, K & A.
Emission factors (gm/rai), 1975 K & A; Table 6, Table 17,
Federal test procedure emission Tables 8 & 9, Figs 2 & 3
rates (gm/mi) by model year, deter- & Table B-2, Tables 15
ioration factors, weighted speed & B-3, and Fig. 1.
adjustment factors by model year,
11-76
-------
j.
evaporative and crankcase emis-
sion rates by model year, and
emission factor geographic area
(Area V for Pittsburgh).
Ambient concentrations of CO and
V
Source;
DERIVED QUANTITIES;
a. Partial VMT's by Zone for each
vehicle type (LDV, HDV, and 0V)
for 1972 and 1977.
b. Partial VMT's by vehicle type for
all years, 1970-1986 (except 1972
and 1977), Zone 1 only.
c. Adjusted vehicle age distribution
for 1/2-year adjustment (1 July
to 31 December), LDV's and HDV's
for Allegheny County and entire
SPKPC Region.
d. % of total vehicle population by
model year (vehicle age), Alle-
gheny County and SPRPC Region.
e. Emissions of CO and HC by vehicle
type and zone.
f. Emission densities by vehicle
type for each zone, CO and HC.
g. Total emissions of CO and HC,
by zone, for 1972 and 1977.
h. Sensitivity analyses for VMT and
SPDC variations, Zone 1 only,
for 1977.
Air quality data
i. CO .and HC emission indices by
vehicle age for calendar years
1972 & 1977, Zone 1 only.
j. Total emissions of CO and HC, 1972
and 1977, by counties (City of Pitts-
burgh = 20 zones, Allegheny County =
31 zones, other 5 counties = 21 zones).
Hand computations
Straight-line
interpolation
(Table 11-14)
Hand computations
(Table 11-15 and
Figure 11-10)
Hand computations
(Table 11-15
Computer program
VEHEMI2 and hand
calculations (these
agreed within 0.87,).
VEHEMI2
(Appendix C)
VEHEMI2
(Appendix C)
VEHEMI2
(Tables 11-11 and
11-17)
VEHEMI3
(Appendix C)
Hand computations
(Table 11-16)
11-77
-------
TABLE 11-12
From 40 CFR 85, "New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle Engines - Con-
trol of Air Pollution," Federal Register, vol. 37, No. 221, Part II,
15 November 1972, pp. 24249-24320.
LDV
Emission standards for 1973 model year vehicles:
A. Exhaust:
HDV
(1) HC: 3.4 gm/VMT
(2) CO: 39.0 gm/VMT
(3) N0x: 3.0 gm/VMT
B. Evaporative:
(1) HC: 2 gm/test
C. Crankcase: 0.0
Emission standards for 1974 model year
vehicles: (same as for 1973)
Emission standards for 1975 model year
vehicles :
A. Exhaust:
(1) HC:
(2) CO:
(3) NO :
0.41 gm/VMT
3.4 gm/VMT
3.1 gm/VMT
B. Evaporative:
(1) HC: 2 gm/test
C. Crankcase: 0.0
Emission standards for 1976 model year
vehicles: (same as for 1975, except)
A. Exhaust
CD
(2)
HC:
CO:
0.41 gm/VMT
3.4 gm/VMT
(3) NO : 0.40 gm/VMT
HC: 275 pptn
CO: 1.5% (by volume)
Crankcase: 0.0
1974 model year vehicles:
HC + NO (as NO,,): 16 gm/bhph
X *£
CO : 40 gm/bhph
Crankcase: 0.0
0V (Diesel)
1974 model year vehicles:
HC + NO (as NO,): 16 gm/bhph
CO x : 40 gm/bhph
LEV (low-emission vehicle)
(1) HC: 3 gm/VMT
(2) CO: 28 gm/VMT
(3) NO : 3.1 gm/VMT
X
11-78
-------
TABLE 11-13
COMPARISON OF PASSENGER CAR AGE DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN ALLEGHENY COUNTY AND
THE SOUTHWEST PENNSYLVANIA AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGION AS OF 1 JULY 1971
Model Allegheny County SW Pennsylvania RPCR
Year (incl. Pittsburgh) % Total (6 Counties) % of Total
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959
1958
1957
1956
< 1956
50,731
78,011
72,736
70,052
58,466
63,280
57,875
43,353
31,199
19,915
8,637
5,678
2,413
1,279
1,747
1,302
5.040
8.9
13.7
12.7
12.2
10.2
11.1
10.1
7.6
5.5
3.5
1.5
1.0
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.9
76,687
121,833
115,079
113,417
97,465
108,010
101,389
78,010
57,445
37,419
16,282
11,401
4,899
2,467
3,606
2,641
10,734
8.0
12.7
12.0
11.8
10.2
11.3
10.6
8.1
6.0
3.9
1.7
1.2
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.3
1.1
TOTALS: 571,714* 100.0 958,784 100.0
This figure represents 59.6% of the passenger cars "in operation" in the
SPRPC Region as of 1 July 1971.
There were also 137,896 trucks in operation in the six counties making up the
Southwestern Pennsylvania RPCR as of 1 July 1971, for a total number of vehi-
cles = 1,096,080, 87.4% passenger cars and 12.6% trucks. For Allegheny County
alone, there was a marked difference in these proportions: of the 637,826
vehicles in operation there as of 1 July 1971, only 66,112 or 10.4% were
trucks. These made up only 47-9% of the trucks in the entire region, showing
the far greater numbers of trucks operating in rural areas in proportion to the
total numbers of vehicles. It was also noted that trucks tend to be kept in
service somewhat longer than cars: cars of model years 1958 and older made
up only 1.8% of the total, while trucks of the same vintage made up 12.7% of
their total.
A slight shift in the age distribution toward older cars is noted in the out-
lying areas. There are more "new" cars ( <4 yrs old) in the metropolitan
Pittsburgh area, and fewer "old" cars (> 5 yrs old), than there are in the
Southwest Penn. AQCR as a whole. 1967 is the nodal year for the calendar
year 1971; cars older than that are more numerous in the outlying areas,
while cars newer than the 1967 model year are relatively more common in the
city. Thus, for 1977, the 1973 model year would be the nodal year used.
11-79
-------
TABLE 11-14
EXTRAPOLATED "NO-STRATEGY" VMT'S FOR ZONE I, PITTSBURGH
(mi/day)
Year
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
(1987)
Code
13
L4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
39
30
LDV
(.934)
399,772
407,054
414,336
421,619
428,901
436,185
443,467
450,749
458,032
465,314
472,597
479,880
487,162
494,445
501,727
509,010
516,293
(523,575)
HDV
(.048)
20,545
20,919
21,294
21,668
22,042
22,41
22,791
23,165
23,539
23,913
24,288
24,662
25,036
25,410
25,785
26,159
26,533
(26,908)
0V
(.018)
7,704
7,845
7,985
8,125
8,266
8,406
8,546
8,687
8,827
8,968
9,108
9,248
9,389
9,529
9,669
9,810
9,950
(10,090)
TOTALS
428,021
435,818
443,615
451,412
459,209
467,007
474,804
482,601
490,398
498,195
505,993
513,790
521,587
529,384
537,181
544,979
552,776
(560,573)
Note: The last line is not usable in the computer program VEHEMI2 as it
is presently constituted.
A(VMl)/yr = 7797.2 ~ 1.758% (VMT)
72'
11-80
-------
TABLE 11-15
MOTOR VEHICLE AGE DISTRIBUTION, ALLEGHENY COUNTY AND ENTIRE SPRPC REGION
(as of 31 December 1971)
Derived for the VEHEMI2 program from figures supplied by AMV Assoc., Inc.
Passenger Cars
Model Allegheny
Year
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
1963
1962
1961
1960
1959 and
earlier
Totals:
Totals,
original
AMV data
% Diff.:
County
18,770
64,371
75,374
71,394
64,259
60,873
60,578
50,614
37,276
25,557
14,276
7,158
4,046
11,781
566,327
571,714
0.9
% of
total
3.3
11.4
13.3
12.6
11.3
10.8
10.7
8.9
6.6
4.5
2.5
1.3
0.7
2.1
100.0
SPRPC
Region
28,374
99,260
118,456
114,248
105,441
102,738
104,700
89,700
67,727
47,432
26,851
13,841
8,150
24,347
951,265
958,784
0.8
% of
total
3.0
10.4
12.4
12.0
11.1
10.8
11.0
9.4
7.1
5.0
2.8
1.5
0.9
2.6
100.0
Trucks
Allegheny
County
2,014
6,616
8,141
7,530
6,048
5,594
5,310
4,525
3,517
2,670
2,103
1,812
1,522
8,621
66,023
66,112
0.1
% of
total
^^^MM«
3.1
10.0
12.3
11.4
9.2
8.5
8.0
6.9
5.3
4.0
3.2
2.7
2.3
13.1
100.0
SPRPC
Region
3,785
12,588
15,732
14,704
12,058
11,350
10,791
9,330
7,399
5,648
4,514
4,019
3,484
22,617
138,019
137,896
0.1
% of
total
^MMMM
2.7
9.1
11.4
10.7
8.7
8.2
7.8
6.8
5.4
4.1
3.3
2.9
2.5
16.4
100.0
The above age distributions for the two vehicle categories were created
by an averaging procedure, as shown graphically in Figure 11-13. The neces-
sity for shifting the initial age curve forward in time by six months to
achieve compatibility with the VMT data gives rise to a small inaccuracy,
as can be seen by comparing the shape of the original distribution to that of
the derived one. As shown in the table above, the differences in total vehicle
population are very small -- less than 1% in every case. In light of the
many other assumptions which have had to be made during the course of this
study, some of which undoubtedly contribute much larger errors to the final
results, and since any other approach would have required much more time and
labor, this distribution was the one selected for use with the computer pro-
gram which computes emissions.
11-81
-------
I
oo
an n TO
M «7
6J U
MODEL YEAR (« of JULY I9TI1
M «* inn
Figure 11-10. Derivation of vehicle age distribution (for
use with VMT data in VEHEMI2).
-------
TABLE 11-16
TOTAL VMT'S BY COUNTY FOR THE YEARS 1972 AND 1977 (mi/day)
1972 1977
% OF % OF
DISTRICT # Lpy'S HPV'S OV'S TOTALS TOTAL LDV'S HDV'S OV'S TOTALS TOTAL
1 City of
Pittsburgh 3,458,169 177,722 66,646 3,702,537 13.4 3,713,750 190,857 71,571 3,976,178* 12.5
2 Rest of
County 10,120,124 272,949 104,981 10,498,054 38.0 11,745,900 316,798 121,845 12,184,543 38.2
Allegheny
County 13,578,293 450,671 171,627 14,200,591 51.4 15,459,650 507,655 193,416 16,160,721** 50.7
3 Butler
County 2,086,405 34,133 12,800 2,133,338 7.7 2,398,682 39,242 14,716 2,452,640 7.7
4 Armstrong
S County 1,029,916 44,779 17,475 1,092,170 3.9 1,220,602 53,070 20,710 1,294,382 4.0
i
25 5 Westmore- *
land County 4,931,992 138,280 51,215 5,121,487 18.5 5,765,001 161,636 59,865 5,986,502 18.8
6 Washington
City 3,015,601 62,049 24,820 3,102,470 11.2 3,587,162 73,810 29,524 3,690,496 11.6
7 Beaver
County 1,905,955 80,675 30,253 2,016,883 7.3 2,185,843 92,522 34,696 2,313,061 7.2
TOTALS-SPRPC 26,548,162 810,587 308,190 27,666,939 100.0 30,616,940 927,935 352,927 31,897,802 100.0
* 7.4% growth = 1.487./year
** 13.87. growth = 2.767./year
A small redistribution of VME's is noted between the City of Pittsburgh and the rest of Allegheny County. A
slightly larger percentage of VMC's is present in the County in 1977 as compared to 1972. Similarly, there is a
little more activity in the counties of Westmoreland and Washington, and a little less in Allegheny County as a
whole, in 1977 as compared to 1972. Since the general idea is to get the vehicles out of the city, these small
differences are in the right direction to spread the pollution around more evenly. There is ample leeway in the
other zones and districts to allow for a small amount of dispersion of exhaust emissions to the outlying areas; this
will not violate either the letter or the spirit of the EPA regulations directing the maintenance of existing
air quality levels in those areas where the air quality is already better than the federal standards.
-------
LDV:
HDV:
0V :
414,336 450,749
21,294 23,165
7,985 8,687
419,196
21,543
8,079
TABLE 11-17
VMX'S USED IN SENSITIVITY TESTS
WITHOUT STRATEGIES WITH THE STRATEGY PACKAGES DEFINED BELOW
1972 1977 1977, Pkg 1 1977. Pkg 2 1977. Pkg 3
377,276 439,883
19,389 22,606
7,271 8.477
TOTAL: 443,615 482,601 448,818 403,936 470,966
The average "off-peak" speeds corresponding to the above VME's,
categorized by type of highway facility, are as follows (in mph):
Fwy: 39. 39. 39. 43. 40.2 40.6 39.58 39.78
Art: 19. 19. 19. 21. 19-6 19.8 19-28 19.38
Lcl: 17. 17. 17. 19. 17.5 17.7 17.26 17.34
("Fwy" = Freeway, "Art" = Arterial, "Lcl" = Local Street)
The entries in Table 11-11 are the computed emissions of CO and HC
in Zone 1 and Allegheny County, respectively, which would result from the
application of the several strategy packages as defined below.
Package 1 consists of a 7% reduction in VMT with no change in the
average speeds.
Package 2 entails a further 10% reduction of VMT from that used in pkg
1, above, for a net reduction of 16.3% from the baseline ("no-strategy")
value for 1977, coupled with a 10% increase in each of the three average
speed categories.
Package 3 assumes a 2.4% decrease in VME with four different sets of
speeds: increases of 3.0%, 4.0%, 1.5% and 2.0% over the baseline values
of 39, 19, and 17.
The first combination was to be achieved through a program of increasing
parking costs, increasing transit service, and using existing park areas for
fringe parking. The second package was used only for sensitivity analysis.
The third program consisted of a 12.5% rollback from the 1977 "no-strategy"
emission rate attributable to an inspection and maintenance program, plus
an additional 3.4% reduction in emissions due to the reduction in VMT as
shown above. The increases in average speeds on the various highway facilities
were presumed to arise as a result of the reduced VME's.
11-84
-------
(2) CO Problem
With the caveats and assumptions outlined above, we
can now proceed to a discussion of the specific findings and results of
our study and analysis of the air pollution situation in Pittsburgh as re-
gards CO and QX emissions and concentrations, both present and expected
in future years.
With respect to the CO problem, the following tabula-
tion presents the situation as of now (see Table 11-18, below). The data
are self-explanatory; however, a word on the assumptions and methodology
employed to achieve them should be included. The vehicular emissions data
come directly from the computer program VEHEMI2 (see Appendix C for a
complete listing of these data). The assumptions and methodology
inherent in this program have been discussed in the general intro-
duction to this Report. The non-vehicular emissions were derived,
as explained previously, by applying the 7.0% of total CO emissions due
to non-vehicular sources in the Inventory to the computed value of
vehicular emissions. The 35.5% reduction in non-vehicular emissions be-
tween 1972 and 1975 came from the point source data we collected during
our visits to Pittsburgh. Since we had no definitive information on
planned reductions beyond 1975, the same level was assumed for 1977.
Beyond that year, the annual growth rate of 3.5% was assumed to take over,
as far as non-vehicular emissions are concerned. The successive ambient
levels of CO concentrations expected were computed using the e/c ratio
(e.g., 21605/1396 = 15.5, etc.). The final result is that in order to
achieve the federal standard of 9 ppm per maximum 8-hr, average by 1977, we
11-85
-------
TABLE 11-18
SUMMARY SHEET FOR PITTSBURGH
CARBON MONOXIDE
Emissions computed for Zone 1 (downtown Pittsburgh) only. Area = 1.26 sq. ml.
All emission rates are in Kg/day, and all concentration levels are in ppm.
Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
27,543
2,200
29,743
e/c Ratio: 29743/21.3 = 1396.4
1977 1977
(with QJJ (with CO
Present 1975 1977 strategy strategy
(1972) (without strategies) only)* only
20,186 13,829 13,829
1,419 1,419 1,419
21,605 15,248 15,248
* No separate 0 strategy is planned - see Summary Sheet for Oxidants)
** 57.8% rollback in total emissions - 59.5% rollback in vehicular emissions
required to meet federal standards.
CO Ambient Level 21.3 15.5
(maximum 8-hour average concentration)
10.9
10.9
9.0
(fed, std.)
Background CO Level
2-4 ppm, based on emissions of known point sources
in the Zone and an allowance for advection of CO
from adjacent zones.
Estimates for future years (without strategies):
Vehicular Emissions
*
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
* Assumed overall annual growth rate for industry in the Pittsburgh area = 3.5%.
9.2 7.9 6.6 5.7 5.2
1978
11,340
1,469
12,809
1979
9,474
1,520
10,994
1980
7,656
1,573
9,229
1981
6,326
1,628
7,954
1982
5,551
1,685
7,236
CO Ambient Level
(maximum 8-hour average)
Background CO Level
2 ppm, (allowance made for some improvement in
control of emissions from non-vehicular sources
outside the Zone).
11-86
-------
need to reduce the vehicular CO emissions from the present 27,543 kg/day
to 11,145 kg/day; this represents a reduction ("rollback") of 59.57.. Since
the federal program (the FMVECP) will achieve a reduction of 49.8% all
by itself (under the assumptions outlined above), this leaves another
9.7% of the 1972 emission rate to be achieved. Another way of stating the
requirement is that we need to reduce CO emissions from motor vehicles
an additional 19.4% of the 1977 rate which will be achieved without any
transportation strategies. Obviously, it makes a lot of difference what
base year one uses in stating the percent reduction required to achieve
a standard. As it turns out, it also makes a difference whether one
includes emissions from other sources in his calculations of reduction
required. Even though such sources contribute only 7.0% of the total CO
emissions (according to our assumptions), they are not being reduced at
as fast a rate as are the emissions from motor vehicles; this disparity must
be compensated for by "over-correcting"'the vehicular emissions, so that
the actual ambient concentrations, which come from all sources, will reach
the desired level.
(3) 0 Problem
The Summary Sheet for oxidants (Table 11-19) is also self-
explanatory. As before, the top line, vehicular emissions, comes directly
from the zone-by-zone computations of the computer program VEHEM12 which,
in turn, is based on and follows exactly the procedure set forth in the
paper by Klrcher and Armstrong. The non-vehicular emissions are based on
the ratio between vehicular and non-vehicular emissions in the 1972
11-87
-------
TABLE II-19
SUMMARY SHEET FOR PITTSBURGH
OXIDANTS
Emissions computed for all of Allegheny County. Area = 745.4 sq. mi.
All emission rates are in kg/day, and all concentration levels are in ppm.
Vehicular Emissions
Non -Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
Percent Reduction
from 1972 emission
rate (tot. emissions)
Oxidant level (max.
1-hr, average)
Present
(1972)
102,179
28,820
131,000
0.0
0.165
1977 1977
(with Ox (with CO
1975 1977 Strategy Strategy
(without strategies) only) only)
69,374
19,915
89,289
31.8
0.124
46,935
14,936
61,871
52.8
0.087
(44,014) 43,
(14,936) 14,
(58,950) 57,
(55.0) 55
(no Ox strategy
planned)
0.080** < 0
034*
936
970
.7
.080
**
57.9% reduction in vehicular emissions only
Federal standard
(amounts in parentheses are those required to just meet the federal standard)
Estimates for future
Vehicular Emissions
V
Non-Vehicular Emis-
years (without strategies) :
1978 1979 1980
39,879
15,459
33,766
16,000
28,430
16,560
1981
2i,500
17,140
1982
23,391
17,740
sions
Total Emissions
Oxidant level (max.
1-hr, average)
55,338 49,766 44,990 42,640 41,131
(all levels are below the federal standard of 0.08 ppm)
Assumed ratio of Zone 1 emissions to total County emissions = 3,8% (see
Table 11-10).
W
Assumed same growth factor as for CO calculations; i.e., 3.5% per year.
11-88
-------
Emissions Inventory: according to that document, 77.9% of the total HC
emissions in Allegheny County in 1972 came from sources we define in this
Report as "vehicular"; thus, we have applied the same proportion to the
computed HC emissions from the three categories of motor vehicles (LDV,
HDV, and 0V); 22.1% of the total gives the value 28,820 kg/day. Now,
following the same procedure as for the CO emissions, we noted that
according to the point source information given to us in Pittsburgh, a
30.9% reduction in HC emissions from these stationary sources is planned be-
tween now and 1975 (Table II-6). In the ease of hydrocarbons, however, there
was additional information given to us verbally to the effect that an addi-
tional 25% reduction was planned between 1975 and 1977- This gives a total
reduction of 48.27. based on the 1972 emissions of 28,820 kg/day. The
accuracy of the forecast figure for non-vehicular emissions is of some
importance, since it turns out that, with the amount of reduction assumed,
the federal program and the amount of rollback required to meet the CO
standard will just meet the standard for oxidants with no special strategy
required for oxidants by themselves. Based on that assumption, the numbers
in parentheses show the nominal values for vehicular and total emissions
which will just attain the 55% reduction in HC emissions required to meet
the standard for oxidants. As can be seen, the next column of figures
doesn't beat these values by very much. The oxidant problem is somewhat
peculiar in that oxidants, unlike CO and hydrocarbons, are secondary
pollutants, i.e., they are formed in the atmosphere as the result of an
extremely complicated series of photochemical reactions which require
some period of time (on the order of a few hours, ordinarily) to generate
the irritating and harmful products - ozone and the other oxidizing
11-89
-------
agents - lumped together as "total oxidants". Because of the time delay
implicit in the generation of oxidants resulting from photochemical reactions
in the atmosphere, it is necessary to consider larger areas than are of
interest in studying the CO problem. Moreover, it is not possible to
measure the oxidizing agents directly under test conditions as is commonly
done with CO and the other "primary" pollutants which are generated
directly as a result of the combustion of gasoline in an internal combustion
engine. This difficulty has been handled up to now by recognizing the
close relationship between the amounts and types of hydrocarbons coming
out the tail pipe and the amount of photochemical oxidants appearing some-
where downstream later on. This admittedly imperfect procedure has the
advantage of being fairly straightforward computationally (the basis for
the HC-0 relationship being the curve in Appendix J of 40 CFR 51). To
tS.
facilitate computation and help to insure uniformity of results, I made a
tabulation of this relationship by exercising the closest possible care
in reading off the values of required hydrocarbon emission control as
functions of the observed photochemical oxidant concentration (maximum
1-hour average). A copy of this is attached as Table 11-20. As stated in
an earlier section, it was necessary to make some sort of assumption as
the basis for deriving the HC emission rates for the whole of Allegheny
County for the "off-years" (years other than 1972 and 1977); the one
selected was that the relationship between the Zone 1 emissions and those
for all of Allegheny County for the two years for which computed values
were available would also hold for all the other years falling»within the
purview of this study. Table 11-10 shows the details of this derivation-
11-90
-------
TABLE 11-20
TABLE OF VALUES OF REQUIRED HYDROCARBON EMISSION CONTROL AS A FUNCTION OF
PHOTOCHEMICAL OXIDANT CONCENTRATION
(From Appendix J, 42 CFR 51, federal Register, vol. 36, no. 228
25 Hovember 1971, p. 22413)
Maximum Measured 1-hour Photochemical Reduction in Hydrocarbon Emissions
Oxidant Concentration (ppm) Required to Achieve National Stan-
\
0.080
.085
.090
.095
100
.105
.110
.115
.120
.125
.130
.135
.140
.145
.150
.155
.160
.165
.170
.175
.180
.185
.190
.195
. 200
.210
.220
.230
.240
.250
.260
.270
.280
.290
.300
0
4
8
13
18
22
26
29
32
35
38
41
43
46
48
51
53
55
57
59
60
62
63
65
67
69
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
95
98
11-91
-------
It should be emphasized that a constant ratio was not assumed; rather, it
was assumed that the rate of change in the ratio as measured over the five
year period 1972 - 1977 (i.e., 0.0035% per year, decreasing with time)
was applicable to all the years 1970 - 1986. Since this assumption resulted
in a function which follows closely the curve shown in Figure 11-12 for the
computed Zone 1 values, it was felt that this was probably the most logical
course to take, given the lack of time or manpower to compute the large
number of VMT's, SPD's, and FSPD's needed to compute the county-Wide values
more accurately (that is, directly from the computer program).
E. SUMMARY AND RATIONALE FOR SELECTION OF MODELING TECHNIQUES
AND AREAS FOR AVERAGING
1. Determination of Measurements of CO and 0
It has been determined from the measurements of CO and 0
x
that:
(a) The present ambient concentrations of CO and HC in Pitts-
burgh and Allegheny County, respectively, do exceed the federal standards
to be attained by the year 1977.
(b) The amount of rollback required in each case has been
determined.
(c) The federal program (FMVECP) will not, of and by itself,
or in combination with the stationary source controls planned in the
Pittsburgh area, achieve that amount of reduction in expected emissions.
11-92
-------
It therefore becomes necessary to consider other measures for the
reduction of emissions from vehicular sources in the Region. Following
the dichotomy presented in the pertinent federal regulations with respect
to sources (40 CFR 51, as amended), two types of reduction measures or
strategies may be considered:
(a) Those which have their effect more or less uniformly over
an entire Air Quality Control Region or a major subregion such as a county,
and
(b) Those which affect directly only small, localized zones or
districts.
As shown in Appendix C, we have determined, at least for the "no
strategy" case, precisely which zones within the SPRPC Region make the
largest contributions to the maximum concentration levels which exceed
the standards. We have seen that, for reasons of economy of effort, a simple
proportional or "rollback" model was used to derive the relationships
between future emission rates and ambient concentrations (air quality levels).
As we have also seen, the meteorological and emissions data were not of
sufficient fineness of mesh to permit the use of diffusion techniques for
each of the 72 zones chosen by the subcontractor to represent the Region.
The subcontractor selected these zones on the bases of similarity of
terrain and exposure to the prevailing meteorological elements, population
and traffic density, and type of highway facilities present within each
zone. Our review disclosed no reason to change any of the zone selections
aade by the subcontractor (see maps, Figures II-2 and II-3).
11-93
-------
Since the downtown Pittsburgh district (Zone 1) was the only area
where CO emissions constituted a serious problem, the method chosen was
to establish the present ratio of emissions to concentration (e/c ratio),
then, using that as the relationship between emissions and expected ambient
concentrations in future years, to calculate the amount of rollback required
to meet the federal standard by 1977. This, in turn, led to the determina-
tion of the "safe" emission rate from all sources of CO which would, assuming
the 1972 e/c ratio was valid for 1977, result in the desired level of
concentration of CO in Zone 1.
In the case of the oxidants problem, the area chosen was all of
Allegheny County. The basic reason for this selection has already been
given: the physical and chemical nature of generation of photochemical
oxidants is such that the immediate, direct, localized emanations from
the tailpipe are not of paramount concern; rather, it is the secondary
contaminants arising from the complex photochemical reactions occurring
in the atmosphere over an appreciable period of time (several hours) that
is the problem in this case. Since the ambient air in which these pollutants
are being generated is moving itself under the influence of meteorological
elements as discussed above, a much larger region is required for study
and evaluation. As stated above, the ideal positioning for an oxidant-
measuring site is some three to five hours (5 to 15 miles) downwind of
the principal source of HC emanations (usually the downtown area, as in
this case). We have seen that, partly due to fortuitous circumstances,
11-94
-------
the site from which the measurements of ozone were made during the summer
of 1971 in Pittsburgh was very well suited to its purpose. As with CO,
albeit on a much larger geographical scale, the single sampling site
was deemed adequate for the present purpose since it represents the great-
est ambient concentration to be expected within the entire SPRPC Region.
The three additional counties which, with the six counties making up the
SPRPC Region, compose the SPAQCR, were surveyed briefly in the early
stages of the present study. The conclusion reached was that, while there
are a few point sources, some of considerable magnitude, located within
these counties (e.g., the large power plant near Indiana, Pennsylvania),
the ambient concentrations of CO and HC at no point approach critical
levels affecting any appreciable population groups. The terrain, meteor-
ology, and population and vehicle densities are similar to those in the
adjacent counties included within the SPRPC Region (Washington, Westmore-
land, and Armstrong, respectively) and further study of these three
counties was deemed both unnecessary and inappropriate in view of the
terms of the present contract which is couched in terms of cities rather
than AQCR's.
It was apparent that the observed concentrations of CO do
not follow the distributions in space and time commonly observed else-
where; i.e., for CO, the greatest 8-hour concentrations elsewhere usually
tend to be grouped in the evening or nighttime hours during periods of
limited atmospheric dispersion (low mixing, or high stability conditions),
typically during the fall and winter months, while, as we have seen,
11-95
-------
the situation in Pittsburgh seems to be quite different. The highest
0 concentrations tend to occur in the late morning or early afternoon
during the season of greatest insolation (June, July and August, usually),
following high emanations of HC during the early morning hours. The
fact that this disparity between the time of maximum expected concentra-
tions of CO and 0 exists dictates that certain strategies will be more
x
effective in reducing one of the two pollutants than they will be on the
other; indeed, it is possible that some measures taken to alleviate,
say, the CO problem could actually e-xacerbate the 0 situation, or vice
X
versa. This constitutes an additional constraint on the choice of
strategies, whether applied to a small neighborhood, an area as large as
a traffic analysis zone or one of our larger air pollution analysis
zones, a whole county, or the entire SPRPC Region. Given the amount
and kinds of meteorological and air quality data available to us at this
time, the terrain and vehicle density in the various portions of the
Region, and the physical nature of the two pollutants studied in this
Report, it is felt that the methodology and area sizes selected are optimum
for the present purposes.
Two important things to keep in mind are: (1) it is the VMT's
(vehicle miles traveled), not the number of cars, that are of importance
in the above discussion; (2) it is not the absolute tonnage of CO or HC
emissions that is important in making comparisons between, say, the
Allegheny County BAPC's emission figures and those generated from the
SPRPC's VMT figures, but rather the ratios between vehicular and non-
11-96
-------
vehicular emissions, between successive yearly emission data, between
CO and HC emission rates, and so on. As long as we are consistent in
our choice of baseline figures, we are interested at this stage primarily
in determining the percentage reduction required (the "rollback") rather
than the absolute values of the tons per year or kilograms per day of
CO, HC, or any other pollutant. As has been repeatedly pointed out, we
dp need much better information on the actual amounts of the various
pollutants being introduced into Pittsburgh's air. To meet the 15 Febru-
ary 1973 deadline imposed by Federal law; however, the ratios, not the
absolute values, are what is needed, and these have been pretty well
determined.
2. Conelus ions
As far as the extent and severity of the CO and 0 problem
X
is concerned, it may be stated in summing up this part of the Report
that there ia a definite CO problem, that some sort of transportation
strategy will be required to meet the Federal standards by the target
date, and that if this is done, no separate oxidant problem will exist
in Allegheny County by the year 1977; i.e., the Federal standards for
photochemical oxidants should be met.
11-97
-------
IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF TRANSPORTATION CONTROL STRATEGIES
A. STRATEGY EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
This process describes the process used to evaluate the various
alternative strategies for the reduction of emissions.
The general methodology used in the evaluation of the alternative
Strategies is illustrated in Figure III-l. As indicated on this figure,
the major steps in the process are:
Generate Alternatives A listing of all alternative
strategies to be considered, regardless of any con-
straints.
Preliminary Screening Certain alternatives appearing
to be immediately infeasible are eliminated from fur-
ther consideration.
Impact Evaluation This set of rankings is the basis
for the selection of a recommended control strategy.
Major elements of the evaluation process are:
(1) Technical Effectiveness: Each alternative measure
is examined to determine the extent to which it is
effective in eliminating emissions.
(2) Economic Cost: This state of the analysis assesses
the cost of the various emission reduction measures
in "traditional" economic terms.
III-l
-------
Generate
Alternatives
k
f
Preliminary
Screening
|
F
Impact Evaluation:
Technical Effective-
ness of Strategy
Economic Impact
Non-Economic
Impact
Political Feasi-
bility
Recommended
Strategy
Program
Figure I1I-1. Development of Recommended Control Strategy Program.
-------
(3) Non-Economic Cost: In addition to economic costs,
various other impacts of the alternative emission
control strategies are considered. These impacts
include social, administrative, legal and technical
impact.
(4) Political Feasibility: The political feasibility of
the various strategies is also examined as a separate
impact.
Recommended Program based on the results of evaluation
matrix, a recommended program of control strategies was
developed.
B. GENERATE ALTERNATIVES
A basic list of all candidate strategies was compiled and classi-
fied according to the manner in which the strategies contributed to the
objective of reducing emissions. This list is presented below:
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversions
Idling Controls
III-3
-------
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four-Day Week
Communications Substitute for Travel
Episode Specific Controls
Traffic Flow Restrictions
Motor Vehicle Use Restraint
Increase Transit Use
Short-term Transit Improvements
Long-term Transit Improvements
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions, Modification of Supply
Vehicle-free Zones
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Episode Specific Controls
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Episode Specific Controls
Vehicle-free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Delivery
Location of Government Offices
Zoning and Parking
Through-traffic Bypass
C. PRELIMINARY SCREENING
A preliminary screening of the preceding list indicated several
alternatives that appear to be immediately infeasible. The following
alternatives fell into this category, and were eliminated from further
considerations.
III-4
-------
1. Idling Controls
On the basis of current information, it has not been estab-
lished that this strategy yields sufficient emission reductions to justify
the serious enforcement problems its use would necessitate.
2. Communications Substitutes for Travel
The long range outlook for such technology indicates that
considerable amounts of personal travel will be replaced by communications
(without travel). However, the point where this will result in measurable
decreases in VMT is beyond the time frame of this analysis.
3. Episode Specific Controls
Despite considerable local interest in this measure, it was
held to be inappropriate at this time for the attainment of the desired
1977 emissions rollback objectives. As more precise information is devel-
oped concerning the frequency with which air quality standards are exceeded,
the effectiveness of episode specific controls should be re-evaluated.
4. Motor Vehicle Use Restraint and Traffic Flow Restrictions
The experience in various cities where motor vehicle use
restraints have been employed indicated that such restraints are feasible
only if a number of conditions are met. A major prerequisite for a suc-
cessful vehicle-free zone is the provision of transit service at a level
which furnishes an attractive alternative to the use of the private
automobile. Another important precondition for the success of vehicle-free
III-5
-------
zones appears to be enthusiasm on the part of employers, employees, insti-
tutions and commercial establishments in the affected areas. An additional
apparent prerequisite of success for vehicle-free zones is the undertaking
of comprehensive planning by the responsible jurisdiction, and the support
of downtown merchants.
None of these conditions appears to be met at present in the
Pittsburgh area, and it is highly unlikely that this climate will alter
significantly before 1977. It is not likely that transit service will be
improved to a level such that it could be considered an attractive alter-
native to automobile use by 1977. It should be noted that this does not
imply that no transit improvements and related increases in ridership will
be obtained; it is implied, however, that improvements sufficient to per-
mit the implementation of vehicle-free zones will not be forthcoming.
Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that employers, employees,
institutions and the business community will accept major vehicle restraints.
Within the last decade, the CBD area has enjoyed a very substantial increase
in office floor area and employment. CBD retail activity has not only held
its own, but has actually expanded in the past few years. Both the gains
in employment and retail activity have taken place simultaneously with
increases in the percentage of trips to the CBD by automobile. Given the
lack of attractive transit alternatives, it does not appear reasonable
that CBD employers, employees and retail interests would accept the major
de-emphasis of automobile trips that is implied by the institution of
vehicle-free zones. Incidents such as the recent parking strike, which
III-6
-------
involuntarily created a vehicle-free zone in the entire Triangle, rein-
forced much of the downtown community's wariness of this approach.
5. Long-term Transit Improvements
It does not now appear that any rapid transit system or seg-
ment thereof will be operational by 1977. Even if the legal status of the
now-stalled Early Action transit program was clarified, and implementation
of this plan started immediately, it is not expected that the rapid transit
mileage stipulated in this plan would be operational by 1977. It is further-
more likely that the legal resolution of the Early Action plan will require
considerable more time, thus delaying even further the implementation of
any major transit improvements therein. It seems safe, therefore, to
assume that implementation, if any, of these plans will be delayed to well
beyond 1977.
6. Bypass for Through-traffic
Litigation involving many aspects of the freeway and express-
way system in the near vicinity of the Triangle is increasing the likeli-
hood that these improvements will not be operational by 1977. Furthermore,
it is almost certain th ».t no facility, as yet unplanned, will contribute
substantially to the reduction of through-traffic in the Triangle by 1977.
It furthermore does not appear to be reasonable to expect that substantial
alleviation of through-traffic in the Triangle can be accomplished by
further utilization of existing surface streets, since this alternative
has undoubtedly been exhausted over the years of traffic increase in the
Triangle.
III-7
-------
D. IMPACT EVALUATION
This stage of the analysis is the heart of the evaluation process.
In this evaluation, the total impact of the various control alternatives
is broken up into a spectrum of sub-impacts. Criteria relevant to each of
these sub-impacts are derived and applied. Based on the application of
such criteria, an overall ranking of the alternatives is developed.
The following sections describe the major elements in the
evaluation procedure.
»
1. Technical Effectiveness
Table III-l ranks each control strategy from one through
five in each of three categories. The three categories are: 1) effective
reduction of the rate of emissions in grams per vehicle mile; 2) effective
reduction of vehicle miles of travel (VMT) in the analysis area; and 3} ef-
fective geographical or temporal shift of vehicle miles of travel for the
area analyzed.
The rankings for each criteria are relative, and the degree
of effectiveness increases to a maximum value of 5. Least effective
strategies would have a ranking of 1. The final ranking of each control
strategy represents effectiveness in reducing emissions. A final ranking
of 1 represents an expected reduction of VMT or emissions between 0 and 1
percent. Final rankings 2 through 5 represent 1-4 percent, 5-8 percent,
9-19 percent, and 20-100 percent expected VMT or emission reductions,
respectively-
III-8
-------
TABLE III-1.
RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
TECHNICAL EFFECTIVENESS
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate '
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
Rating*
Emiss-
ion Red'n
2
1
2
1
4
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
5
2
1
1
**
**
**
**
2
2
2
1
2
VMT
Red'n
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
1
5
2
2
1
**
##
#*
**
1
2
2
2
2
Travel
Shift
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
5
1
1
1
**
**
**
**
1
2
2
2
2
Total
2
1
3
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
4
3
2
5
2
2
1
**
**
**
**
2
2
2
2
2
* Ratings based on findings in this section.
** Strategy rated previously in this table.
III-9
-------
The evaluation of each strategy was based upon the probable
and reasonable degree of implementation that could be accomplished by 1977
without major expenditures of capital. For particular control strategies,
the effectiveness of reducing emissions is very sensitive to the degree
to which the strategy is implemented. Therefore, the rankings for those
control strategies are not rigid, e.g., increasing parking costs in the
CBD by 50 cents per day would be less effective in reducing emissions than
a $1.50 increase.
It should be noted that the estimated VMT and emission reduc-
tions are applicable on a zonal basis. Retrofit, increased fuel tax, and
inspection and maintenance estimated reductions are the only figures that
are applicable on a regional basis. All other control strategy reductions
are geographically and temporally specific. In particular, the control
strategies were predominantly analyzed with respect to the CBD. In order
to reduce emissions on a regional basis by more than 5 percent by 1977,
retrofit and inspection and maintenance programs should be pursued.
Presently, it is known that approximately 50 percent of the
vehicle trips in Zone 1 are local trips. Local trips are defined as
trips which begin or end or begin and end in the zone being analyzed.
The remaining trips which travel in Zone 1 are defined as through trips.
It is estimated that in 1972, 50 percent of the vehicle miles travelled
in Zone 1 are generated by local trips. In 1977, there are 241,600 pro-
jected auto person trip ends in Zone 1. Since this is approximately the
same number of trip ends as exists in 1972, the VMT growth from 1972 to
111-10
-------
1977 is expected to be caused by through trips. Under this assumption
45 percent of total travel in Zone 1 in 1977 will be generated by local
52
trips. In 1977, it is projected that there will be a total of 193,000
transit attractions with 30 percent of this total being choice transit
users and the remaining 70 percent being captive users. These projections
are used in the following analyses when local and overall reductions are
estimated. The following sections describe each strategy.
a. Retrofit
Assuming the same age mix of operating cars that existed
in 1971 for the Southwestern Pennsylvania region would exist in 1977 gives:
5.4 percent of all operating cars would be pre-1968 models
39.9 percent of all operating cars would be 1968-1972 models
22.0 percent of all operating cars would be 1973-1974 models
61.9 percent of all operating cars would be 1968-1974 models
32.7 percent of all operating cars would be 1975-1977 models
Appendix F shows the contribut ion of total vehicle miles of travel by each
*
model year.
The following references to emission rate reductions
apply to gas powered light duty motor vehicles except motorcycles. In
estimating emission reductions for the region for 1977, the preceding age
mix was assumed and gas powered light duty vehicles were estimated to
generate 96 percent of the vehicle travel in the region.
*See Appendix F for the source of the age mix and vehicle miles of travel
by model year.
111-11
-------
It is estimated that retrofit of pre-1968 vehicles (pre-
controlled vehicles) could reduce their emission rate by 12-68 percent for
hydrocarbons, 9-63 percent for carbon monoxide, and 0-48 percent for nitro-
gen oxides, depending on the the retrofit device used. This rate reduction
would reduce emissions for the region in 1977 by approximately 0.28-1.56
percent for hydrocarbons, 0.2-1.45 percent for carbon monoxide, and 0-1.10
percent for nitrogen oxides. For controlled vehicles with model years
between 1968 and 1972, exhaust gas recirculation could reduce the nitrogen
oxide emission rate by 40 percent, which would reduce the amount of nitro-
gen oxide emissions for the region by 14.7 percent. For controlled vehicles
with model years between 1968 and 1974, an oxidizing catalytic converter
could reduce the emission rate of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons by 50
percent, which would result in a 31.5 percent reduct on of carbon monoxide
53
and hydrocarbon emissions for the region. If the most effective retrofit
devices were implemented, the 1977 regional emission reductions would be
33.1 percent for hydrocarbons, 33.0 percent for carbon monoxide, and 15.8
percent for nitrogen oxides. If one-fourth of the maximum reductions were
achieved due to cost, deterioration, or quality control, then the estimated
reductions would be 8.3 percent for carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons and
4.0 percent for nitrogen oxides.
b. Inspection and Maintenance
The implementation of an inspection and maintenance
program using a loaded emissions test has been estimated to reduce initial
emissions 25 percent for hydrocarbons, 19 percent for carbon monoxide and
*
See Appendix F.
111-12
-------
0 percent for nitrogen oxide. Assuming twelve month periods between checks
and a. Linear deterioration rate will result in an average of 12 percent
reduction in the rate of emission for hydrocarbon and 10 percent and 0
percent reductions for carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides, respectively.
These average reductions in the rate of emission for each pollutant are
applicable to gas powered light duty motor vehicles, and since these
vehicles generate approximately 96 percent of all vehicle travel in the
region, emission reductions would be slightly less than the rate reduc-
tions.
c. Fuel Conversion
Gaseous fuel conversion from gasoline to liquified
petroleum gas, compressed natural gas, or liquified natural gas could
reduce the emission rate of carbon monoxide significantly for light duty
vehicles which do not meet the stringent Federal standards in 1975.
Although the magnitude of reduction is significant, three constraints
reduce the effectiveness of this control strategy. The first constraint
is the limited supply of natural gas or petroleum gas. As long as new
deposits of these fuels are not discovered, the conversion to these fuels
will be limited. The second constraint is the possible prohibition of
vehicles using or transporting these gaseous fuels through tunnels and
on bridges. The last constraint is the problem of distributing the fuel
to consumers. For these reasons, the probable use of this control strategy
would be confined to fleets of vehicles. The reduction in regional emis-
sions by 1977 would not be substantial; however, the reduction of emissions
in small areas such as a CBD, could be significant.
111-13
-------
It has been estimated that in Manhattan, the conversion
of fleet taxis could reduce the emission rate of carbon monoxide by 85.3
percent initially- In Pittsburgh's CBD, approximately 5 percent of the
vehicle trip ends are generated by taxis. Since local travel is approxi-
mately half of the total travel in the CBD, the travel generated by taxis
is approximately 2.5 percent of the total travel. Based on the assumptions
above, the conversion of taxis in the CBD of Pittsburgh could reduce carbon
monoxide emissions by 2.1 percent daily. In order for this plan to work
properly, it is assumed that these converted taxis would be able to use the
tunnel that must be traveled when going to the Greater Pittsburgh Airport
from the CBD.
d. Upgrading the Existing Streets
The upgrading of the existing street system by decreasing
delay time and increasing agerage vehicle speed by improving the signal
system and the physical characteristics of roadways and intersections would
decrease emissions per vehicle mile for carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons.
These improvements generally come under TOPICS programs. Figure III-2
depicts the expected percent decrease in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
emission rates expected for average speed increases between 15 and 30
miles per hour.
In the core area of Pittsburgh, average speed increases
*
of 10 percent on the street system affected by TOPICS could be realized
during the peak 12 hour period. The TOPICS program could have an effect
III-L4
-------
Note: Applicable for speeds 15-30mph
30 "40 50 60 70 80
CHANGE IN SPEED, Percent
Figure III-2. Emissions Reduction Vs. Speed Increase
111-15
-------
on approximately 20 percent of vehicle travel during the peak 12 hour
period, and thus would have an overall effect of increasing speed by 2.0
percent.
Based on these assumptions and Figure III-2, the rate
of carbon monoxide emissions and hydrocarbon emissions during the 12 hour
period would decrease by approximately 1.5 percent. For a daily period,
carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions would decrease approximately
1.0 percent. During a short time period, the increase in speed on facili-
ties is not liable to attract more users. If this did occur, then the
decrease in emissions due to speed increases may be offset.
e. Loading Zones
The major advantages of controlling commercial use of
on-street loading zones are to increase capacity of the street and to
increase speed. Emission rate reductions can be estimated using Figure
III-2 after an estimated speed increase is determined. Capacity increases
can be estimated through standard highway capacity analysis. Although
increasing capacity is usually desirable in traffic engineering, it would
be undesirable in reducing total emissions for a particular area. The
impact of this control strategy would also be limited in that the controls
would be applied to particular facilities and in most conditions would
affect a small percentage of the total problem. The expected reduction
in emissions for Pittsburgh a CBD would be less than 1 percent due to
improved controlling of loading zones.
111-16
-------
f. Metering
The reduction in emission rates due to freeway metering
is treated in a manner similar to the previous control strategy. A major
improvement would be the increase in average speed by controlling the
density of traffic on the facility. This strategy, if instituted, could
be used to strictly control the volume of traffic on the facility and
consequently stabilize or reduce vehicle miles of travel. If it is used
for this purpose, alternative transportation facilities such as a viable
transit alternative must be available. Closing an exit ramp to a CBD to
private automobiles while allowing buses to freely use it is a strong
example of metering traffic. The effect in the reduction rate of emissions
can be measured by using Figure III-2, and by estimating an average speed
increase. The reduction due to effective metering could range from 5 to
8 percent.
g. Information Systems
This strategy is similar to all traffic flow improvement
strategies in that one goal of the strategy is to increase average speed
for a portion of the auto users. By doing so, Figure III-2 could be
used. In order to reduce the rate of emissions by 5 percent or more, the
average speed for the entire day far all vehicles in the area must be
increased by 5 percent or more. It is estimated that a 1 percent decrease
in emissions using this control strategy is maximum for most systems.
111-17
-------
h. Four Day Week
The maximum reduction in work trips per day that could
be expected due to the institution of the four day week is 43 percent.
This assumes the reduction of present work trips from ten trips per week
to eight trips per week spread equally over seven days a week. A more
reasonable maximum reduction in daily work trips is 20 percent, based on
spreading the eight trips equally over five days. An additional benefit
realized by reducing work trips is increased average speeds. It is esti-
mated that decreasing work trips by 20 percent during the peak period
(assuming auto occupancy and modal split remain constant), would increase
average speed by approximately 20 percent on facilities which were carry-
ing volumes near capacity during the peak period. This would reduce
carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon rates of emissions by approximately 12
to 15 percent. Since work trips comprise approximately one-third of all
trips for the region, they contribute at least 33 percent of the vehicle
miles of travel. Therefore, a 20 percent reduction of work trips per day
would reduce vehicle miles of travel by approximately 6.6 percent. The
emission reduction due to increased speeds would contribute another 0.12 x
0.20 = 2.4 percent (the 0.20 represents the percent of trips occurring
during the peak periods). Thus, a 20 percent reduction in work trips per
day would cause an approximate 9 percent decrease in emissions
Since Pittsburgh's CBD experiences a greater percentage
of work trips than the regional average, emissions produced by local
vehicle trips would be reduced by approximately 12 percent. It should be
111-18
-------
noted here that overall auto occupancy and modal split may decrease but
losses should be relatively small, especially for modal split where a
majority of transit useres are captives. Even if all workers went to a
four day week by 1977, the resulting reduction in.emissions anticipated on
particular days could be insignificant if the scheduled days off were not
spread equally. For example, if all employees were on a four day week,
and half were off on Mondays and half on Fridays, the implication would
be that work trips would be halved on Mondays and Fridays, and no reduc-
tion in emissions would result on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. If
the meteorological conditions were unfavorable on a Tuesday, Wednesday,
or Thursday, then the control strategy would not be of any help. Switching
to a four day week would reduce emissions on particular days, but proper
scheduling of the individual's day off is crucial in reducing emissions
for all days. Since meteorological conditions are random, the optimal use
of the strategy is to spread the reduction equally over all days. Assuming
that 25 percent of the CBD work force is on a four day week, and assuming
optimal scheduling, the resultant decrease in total emissions would be 1.5
percent. In Pittsburgh's CBD, approximately 15 percent of the workers are
government employees. If these workers were on a four day week by 1977,
and optimal scheduling were implemented, an overall emission reduction of
0.9 percent would result.
i. Short Term Transit Improvements
The basic short term improvement that can be accomplished
is the reduction of transit travel time. The modal split model developed
111-19
-------
by SPRPC for the region is divided into two parts. The first part esti-
mates captive transit users. The travel time was not found to appreciably
affect captive modal split. For this reason, short term transit improve-
ments measured in transit travel time reduction were not assumed to affect
captive modal split. The second part of the model estimates choice transit
usage, which was found to be sensitive to transit travel time reduction.
The estimation of choice transit usage was further divided into two
equations.
The first equation estimates choice transit usage for
those trips made exclusively on buses in mixed traffic. In this case, modal
split varies inversely with the excess travel time ratio. As can be seen
in Figure III-3, the excess travel time ratio does not affect choice modal
split unless the ratio is less than 0.5. This ratio is difficult to
achieve during a short time period. The transit system headways would need
to be decreased significantly, transfers would have to be reduced, and
coverage would have to be extended so as to practically provide door-to-
door service.
For example, let's assume a user's trip takes 40 minutes
by transit and 25 minutes by automobile. Furthermore, assume the transit
trip time is comprised of 6 minutes walking, 6 minutes waiting, one transfer
which is penalized 9 minutes and 19 minutes running time. Let the highway
trip be comprised of 10 minutes terminal time and 15 minutes running time.
Then the existing excess time ratio is (6 + 6 + 9)/10 = 2.1. In order
to have a significant increase in usage, the excess transit time must be
111-20
-------
50?
0>
o
00
ii
H
H
H
W
a
o
K
U
40
30
20
10
-10
Constant = -0.593
O Mean Data Point
GJ 2 Standard Deviations from Mean
1 L
1 2 3 ^45
EXCESS TIME RATIO
Figure III-3. Percent Choice Bus Transit Trips Sensitivity Analysis
-------
reduced from 21 minutes to 5 minutes. To do this, the transfer must be
eliminated so that excess time would now be 21 - 9 = 12 minutes. If the
waiting time is reduced by half to 3 minutes, then the headways on the
bus routes must be halved also. This means doubling the number of buses
which are servicing the area. This would now bring the excess time to
12 - 3 = 9 minutes. To reduce the excess time to 5 minutes for transit,
the bus stop must be moved 4 minutes closer to the user's home. Since
the original total walking time was 6 minutes (0.1 hour), the approximate
total distance the user walked was 0.1 hr x 3 mph = 0.3 miles. Hence,
reducing walking time to 2 minutes would result in reducing the total
distance walked from 0.3 miles to 0.1 mile. The implications are clear
from this example that in order to increase modal split for choice bus
users significantly, large investments must be made in the transit system.
The second equation estimates choice transit usage for
those trips where a rapid transit mode is used. In this case, Figure III-4
shows that the model is sensitive to travel time ratios approaching unity.
The model was calibrated for trips originating in South Hills and destined
for the CBD. These trips were served by trolleys on predominantly exclu-
sive rights of way. In 1967, approximately 9 percent of all choice transit
trips to the CBD were made on the trolleys. Sensitivity analysis showed
that for representative data, choice modal split for rapid transit users
could be doubled by increasing the running speed from 15 to 30 mph, while
keeping other inputs constant. Reducing the headway from 8 to 2 minutes
could further increase modal split by an additional 10 percent.
111-22
-------
H
M
H
NJ
U)
Constant=6. 824
2 3 4
TRAVEL TIME RATIO
Figure III-4. Percent Choice Rapid Transit Trips Sensitivity Analysis.
-------
Figure III-5 and III-6 relate travel time ratios and employment density
to modal split.
By increasing running speed 100 percent, and by reducing
headways significantly, the maximum modal split increase would be 0.15
for rapid transit choice users. This would decrease local vehicle miles
of travel by 25 percent and total travel by 11 percent in the CBD. If
this transit service increase affected 33 percent of the trips attracted
to the CBD by 1977, than a 3.67 percent decrease in total travel would
result.
j. Transit Fares
The effect of changing the transit fare on transit
58
usage can be estimated based in the following equation:
% A M.S. = -0.33(7o T.F.)
where:
% M.S. = Percent change in transit usage or modal split
7. T.F. = Percent change in transit fare.
The reliability of this equation has been verified under
different conditions. As an example of its use, if the present transit
fare is 40 cents and it is to be reduced by 100 percent, then the percent
increase in transit usage would be 33 percent. If the initial modal split
were 50 percent, then modal split would be 58.2 percent after the fare is
111-24
-------
Legend:
XX%: Modal Choice
Variation
0-8 1-0 1-2 14 1-6
TRAVEL TIME RATIO
Figure III-5. Isovalue Contours, 15-27% Modal Choice Variations
Employment Density and Travel Time Ratio
600
0-4
0-6
0-8 1-0 1-2 1-4 1-6
EXCESS TIME RATIO
Figure m-6. Isovalue Contours, 15-27% Modal Choice Variations
Employment Density and Excess Time Ratio
111-25
-------
reduced.. Based on data from Atlanta, a 12 percent increase in transit
patronage was experienced during the peak periods, and a 30 percent increase
59
was experienced during the base period. Assuming that the peak period
increase was due to persons switching from the automobile mode to transit,
and that the base period increase was due to new ridership would indicate
that approximately 44 percent of the ridership increase was diverted from
automobiles.
For 1977 in Pittsburgh's CBD, daily transit attractions
will be approximately 193,000. Therefore, a 100 percent reduction in
transit fare would increase daily transit attractions to 256,000, of which
approximately 28,000 would have been diverted from automobiles. This in-
crease in ridership would decrease local vehicle miles of travel by approx-
imately 11.6 percent and total travel by 5.2 percent. Figure III-7 shows
VMT reduction as a function of fare reduction in the CBD.
k. Tolls
The effect of tolls and road pricing on bridges or
streets can be useful in persuading automobile users to use transit or to
car pool. One method which could be used to measure the effect of tolls
is to relate the toll charge to travel time. It has been estimated that
for work trips, users value their time at 5 cents per minute. Therefore,
a toll charge of 25 cents- per trip would have the effect of increasing
travel time by 5 minutes. Applying this revised travel time to the
choice modal split and traffic assignment models would result in a higher
111-26
-------
o
CD
O
O
O
LU
DC
t-
z
LU
O
DC
LU
0.
5 -
11.6
PERCENT REDUCTION IN FARE
Figure III-7.
Percent VMT reduction as a function of
transit fare reduction for District I
111-27
-------
modal split and lower volumes of through traffic. The effect of this
increase in travel time on modal split has already been discussed in the
section on short term transit improvement. If 50 cent tolls were insti-
tuted on all accesses to the CBD, then the highway travel time would in-
crease by 10 minutes for work trips. This would reduce the travel time
ratio significantly for rapid transit users. The choice modal split would
increase by 27 percent for rapid transit users. If rapid transit were
available to 33 percent of the CBD attractions, then this would result in
a 2.1 percent reduction in local vehicle miles of travel, or approximately
1 percent of total travel in the CBD. An additional reduction could be
realized by the diversion of through trips. If one out of every 20 through
vehicle trips were diverted, the total vehicle miles of travel would be
reduced by an additional 2.75 percent.
1 . Parking Time and Charges
The effect of parking charge on choice modal split,
assuming employment density is held constant, is estimated in the following
61
equation:
M.S. = 0.685 (P.C.)
where:
M.S. = Change in percent choice transit trips
P.C. = Change in long term parking cost, cents/hour
111-28
-------
For example, if a 9.7 cents per hour increase in Long
term parking cost were instituted, then choice modal split would increase
by 6.6 percent. This would represent an 87 cent increase in daily parking
cost, or approximately $17.50 per month. The existing average daily rate
is $2, or $40 per month. Therefore, an increase to $57.50 per month could
increase choice modal split 6.6 percent and reduce local vehicle miles of
travel in Pittsburgh's CBD by approximately 5.3 percent, and total vehicle
miles of travel in the CBD by 2.4 percent. A significant number of these
transit users who used to park in the CBD would probably park in fringe
parking areas such as the stadium complex, and then utilize shuttle transit
service to arrive at the CBD. An increase in car occupancy would also be
experienced, but due to the lack of any reliable data, this impact is
presently not known.
m. Parking Restriction and Modifications
Restricting on-street parking during peak and off-peak
hours effectively increases capacity substantially and increases average
speed. It is questionable, however, whether a significant reduction in
emissions would occur due to the probable increase in traffic volume. If
a net reduction did occur, its effect would not be substantial unless the
strategy were applied to many facilities throughout the district. This
is highly unlikely in a CBD, since the probability of having many facili-
ties which still allow on-street parking, especially during peak periods,
is low. Time limit restrictions on parking spaces can significantly
reduce the supply of long term parkers. Again, this strategy would
111-29
-------
probably have limited effects in a CUD, since most on-street long term
parking has already been banned. Figure III-2 can be used to estimate
rate reductions due to speed increases.
n. Vehicle Free Zones
The effectiveness of reducing emissions in the area
where vehicles are prohibited would be 100 percent. However, the effect
of redistributing the eliminated travel in adjacent zones could be serious
and roust be examined. This strategy would not have to be implemented for
environmental reasons unless emission reductions needed to meet ambient
air quality standards were too large to be met by less drastic strategies.
o. Reserved Bus Lanes
The reduction in vehicle miles of travel and emissions
due to the implementation of reserved bus lanes can be estimated by deter-
mining the reduction in transit travel time and increased highway speeds.
The SPRPC choice modal split model for rapid transit usage could be used
as discussed earlier. The model does incorporate increases in transit
operating speed to estimate corresponding increases in modal split. Under
existing conditions in several corridors to the CBD, substantial increases
in transit usage could be realized by increasing running speed to 30 mph.
According to the choice modal split for rapid transit
usage, instituting reserved bus lanes into the CBD could reduce the appro-
priate travel time ratio from approximately 1.7 to 1.08. This decrease
111-30
-------
in travel time would increase transit usage by 0.1435. If rapid transit
were available to 25 percent of the non-captive trips to the CBD, then
local vehicle miles of travel would be reduced by 3.75 percent, and overall
travel would be reduced by 1.69 percent in the CBD.
p. Increase Fuel Tax
The effect of reducing vehicle miles of travel and emis-
sions by increasing fuel tax would not be significant unless the fuel tax
were substantial. The increase in cost per gallon of gas could be trans-
formed into an increase in cost to the automobile user per vehicle mile
driven. For example, a 25 cent increase in cost per gallon of gas could
be equated to an additional user cost of 2 cents per mile. Thus, if the
average trip length is 7.5 miles, then the added user cost would be 15
cents. As has already been observed, the impact of a 25 cent fuel tax
per gallon of gas would not substantially reduce automobile travel. The
15 cent additional cost per 7.5 mile work trip could be equated to a 3
minute increase in travel time. A 3 minute travel time increase for an
automobile user would barely affect transit usage according to the choice
modal split model. This does mean, however, that a fuel tax of the magni-
tude of 50 cents or more could be as effective as instituting tolls and
road pricing, and this strategy would have a regional effect on reducing
vehicle miles of travel. A substantial fuel tax would also provide auto-
mobile users a greater incentive to car pool.
111-31
-------
As was shown in the discussion of tolls, a 50 cent toll
could decrease total travel in the CBD by 2.75 percent. Thus, under the
assumptions previously listed, an 83 cent per gallon increase in fuel tax
would be needed to reduce travel by 2,75 percent in the CBD.
q. Car Pools
The voluntary use of car pooling to increase automobile
occupancy has not been successful on a large scale basis. The most common
used to promote voluntary car pooling is to gather information on origins,
destinations, starting and returning times for possible users to eventually
try to match driver travel patterns. A recent one-day program in Los
Angeles was initiated to promote car pooling and transit usage. Over 100,000
handouts were distributed to the public that informed them of the effort.
The use of a computer was offered to companies that wished to set up car
pools. Three freeways were monitored before, during and. after the program,
f\ 9
and no measurable change was recorded. Although this program was based
only on one day, it is probable that voluntary car pooling may not in
itself increase automobile occupancy significantly. It is felt that
simultaneous programs such as increased parking costs in the CBD, or road
pricing, should be implemented.
r. Staggered Hours ,
If the air quality standards are being exceeded during
the peak hour, then staggering work hours could reduce emissions greatly
during the peak hour. Not only would vehicle miles of travel be reduced
111-32
-------
during the peak hour, but average speeds would increase. By staggering
work hours, the vehicle miles of travel during the peak hour could be
reduced by 20 percent, and average speed could increase by 20 percent.
This would result in an approximate 12 to 15 percent reduction in emis-
sions. However, if the reduction in emissions is needed in the peak 12
hour period, then staggering work hours would not reduce vehicle miles
of travel for the 12 hour period greatly, and the reduction in carbon
monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions over the period due to peak hour speed
increases would be approximately 2 to 3 percent.
s. Fringe Parking
The development of fringe parking is usually implemented
r n
in conjunction with bus service or with a fixed rail rapid transit system.
In either case, the goal is to gather users at high volume stations where
transit vehicles running on frequent headways can transport the high volume
of riders to concentrated destinations. The transit service can conse-
quently run on tight headways and minimize wait time. The fringe parking
lot allows potential users to drive to or be dropped off at these stations
so that the user has convenient access to transit. Fringe parking in sub-
urban areas which lack extensive feeder service due to low population
densities and transit usage affords a potential transit user the opportun-
ity to still utilize the transit system. Fringe parking can also be
developed near concentrated areas where emissions need to be reduced.
The automobile user could park in the lot and walk or use a shuttle
transit service into the dense area. This is applicable in Pittsburgh,
111-33
-------
for example, in the stadium complex where parking could be utilized by
workers in the CBD. It is important to note that the district in which
the stadium is located is not projected to experience any increase in VMT
since it is assumed that parkers formerly traversed the district on the
way to the CBD.
The average existing daily parking cost in Pittsburgh's
CBD is $2. If fringe parking were created at nominal cost, then based on
the value of time already estimated for work trips, a $2 savings per day
could be transformed into 20 minute time savings per trip. It is approx-
imated that the average transit travel time from the fringe lot to the CBD
would be 10 minutes. This would result in a net time savings of 10 minutes.
The choice modal split model for bus users is not sensitive to transit travel
time unless the excess time ratio is reduced. Since the excess time ratio
is not reduced by this strategy- the choice modal split for bus users is not
expected to change. In 1967, approximately 9 percent of all choice transit
trips attracted to the CBD used rapid transit. The choice modal split
model for rapid transit users is sensitive to transit travel time. The
approximate travel time ratio for rapid transit in 1977 was 1.7. Due to
the 10 minute travel time reduction estimated, the travel time ratio for
rapid transit would decrease to 1.4. The associated increase in choice
modal split for rapid transit users would be approximately 27 percent.
If 33 percent of the trips attracted to the CBD could
use rapid transit in 1977, then choice transit usage would increase by
9 percent. This increase in choice transit usage would result in reducing
111-34
-------
local vehicle miles of travel by 2.1 percent and overall travel by 1
percent.
t. Night Goods Delivery
The vehicle miles generated by heavy trucks in the CBD
area account for approximately 7 percent of its total vehicle miles. If
half of these trucks were to be allowed into the CBD only during the night
or on weekends, then a reduction in emissions of slightly more than 3.5
percent could result during the peak 12 hour period. Although the vehicle
miles of travel during the day would not be affected, there would be a
redistribution of vehicle miles of travel temporally. Hence, implementing
night goods delivery could be effective in reducing local VMT during the
12 hour period by 3.5 percent, but would be ineffective in reducing local
VME for a 24 hour period.
u. Location of Government Offices
The location of government offices could be critical
on a short term micro analysis basis or on a long term large area basis.
It is known that additional public employment in a district increases the
number of work trips which then adds vehicle miles of travel to the system.
In the CBD, changes in vehicle miles of travel are highly related to
changes in public employment. The location of government offices can be
effective in controlling the growth of vehicle miles of travel and can
be used to reduce vehicle miles of travel by relocating public office
activities from districts which have high vehicle miles of travel, to
111-35
-------
ones which do not. In Pittsburgh, approximately half of all person trips
produced or attracted to the CBD are work trips. This means that approx-
imately half of the vehicle miles of travel generated by trips beginning
or ending in the CBD are caused by work trips. The maximum reduction in
local VMT by relocating all existing public offices in Pittsburgh's CBD
over the next five years would be approximately 7.5 percent. Thus, if
20 percent of the public employees were relocated outside the CBD by 1977,
then a 1.5 percent reduction in local VMT could occur.
v. Zoning
Zoning is an important tool in controlling travel within
the area. Unlike the strategy of locating government offices, zoning can
have a sizable impact in reducing emissions in a short time period. Trip
generation projections have been based in large part on expected land use
growth. In Pittsburgh's CBD, the control of office space, employment
density, and commercial use can affect 75 percent of the local trips. By
not allowing further employment and commercial development in the CBD over
the next five years,vehicle miles of travel could be reduced 2 to 5 percent.
If the growth were cut in half, a 1 to 2.5 percent reduction could occur.
Another zoning restriction would be to restrict further parking structures
to be built which would drive parking costs up and increase modal split
and car pooling.
111-36
-------
2. Economic Impact
This stage of the analysis assesses the cost of the
various emission-reduction measures in "traditional" economic terms.
Major criteria in the evaluation of. economic cost are:
(1) Public capital cost
(2) Public operating and maintenance cost
(3) Private capital cost
(4) Private operating and maintenance cost
(5) Other public and private economic costs directly
traceable to measure.
The rating of the alternative strategies with respect
to economic cost is presented in Tables III-2 and ux-3.
3- Non-Economic Impact
The alternative emission control strategies were also ranked
on the basis of other impacts not readily convertible to economic terms.
Four such non-economic impacts were examined: social, administrative,
legal and technical. The detailed ratings and criteria for the four
impacts are listed in Appendix D. Discussions with representatives of
local agencies were used to determine various rankings.
Major criteria are:
(1) (Social) compatibility with expressed community
objectives
111-37
-------
TABLE III-2.
RATING OF ALTERNATIVE'STRATEGIES
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle -Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
Rating
5
2
3
2
2
2
2
5
4
2
3
3
4
1
3
3
4
* *
**
##
**
3
3
2
2
3
Comments
** Strategy rated previously in this table
111-38
-------
TABLE III-3. ECONOMIC CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Highly cost effective on basis other than emissions
reduction. Benefit/Cost ratio on basis other than
emissions reduction of greater than 2. 0.
Substantial cost effectiveness on basis other than
emissions reduction. Benefit/Cost ratio on basis
other than emissions -reduction between 1. 0 and 2. 0.
Ques'tionable cost effectiveness on basis other than
emissions reduction. Benefit/Cost ratio assumed to
be in the vicinity of 1. 0
Not cost effective on basis other than emissions r
reduction. Cost per percentage area wide emissions
roll-back between 0 and $3 million.
Measure generates almost no benefits other than
emissions reduction. Cost per percentage area
wide emissions roll-back greater than $3 million.
-------
(2) (Social) compatibility with implied community
objectives
(3) (Administrative) ability to administer proposed
controls with existing agencies and procedures
(4) (Administrative) ability to implement proposed
controls with existing manpower
(5) (Legal) difficulty of overcoming legal obstacles
to the implementation of the proposed control
strategies
(6) (Technical) probability of alternative being
operational technically
The final ration of the alternative strategies with respect
to all four non-economic impacts is presented in Table III-4.
4. Political Feasibility
The political feasibility of the various strategies is
examined in a separate stage. It is acknowledged that political feasi-
bility may appear to be a surrogate measure for other impacts, such as
economic, social, or institutional impacts. However, it is stressed
that, in reality, political feasibility can represent an entirely inde-
pendent dimension which should be separated from other quantifiable
impacts. For example, it is likely and perhaps to be expected that cer-
tain measures appearing to be highly cost effective in terms of all
other observable benefits and costs may still be highly infeasible
politically. Examples of this situation are being furnished currently
in many states by "no-fault" automobile insurance controversies. Of
course, the opposite situation may also prevail; measures that are highly
111-40
-------
TABLE IJI-4. RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIPS
SUMMARY RATING: NON-ECONOMIC IMPACT
Strategy
11111 __
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions,
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
=3======;
_ Individual Ratin
Social
5
4
4
2
3
3
5
5
5
3
4
4
2
4
4
4
#*
#*
**
#*
3
3
3
2
2
Ad mini
strative
4
2
1
2
2
3
2
5
3
3
1
4
3
1
1
5
4
##
##
##
**
4
3
4
4
3
Legal
5
5
2
4
I
2
1
1
5
2
1
5
4
3
3
3
1
#*
##
**
**
1
5
2
3
3
" -^^
e!
Tech-
nical
5
5
3
2
2
4
2
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
3
5
4
**
**
*#
**
4
4
3
4
4
Final Rating
Non-
Economic
Rating
4.8
4.5
2.5
2.0
1.8
3.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
3.8
2.5
4.5
4.0
2.0
2.8
4.3
3.3
**
**
**
*#
3.0
3.8
3.0
3.3
3.0
* From Tables in Appendix G
** Strategy rated previously in this table
111-41
-------
attractive on a total benefit/cost basis may also be politically attrac-
tive.
Major criteria used in the rating of political feasibility:
(1) Degree of endorsement by political leadership
(2) Degree of public acceptance
The rating of the alternative strategies with respect to political feasi-
bility is presented in Tables I1I-5 and m-g.
5, Evaluation Matrix
Table III-7 summarizes the ratings obtained with respect
to effectiveness, economic costs, non-economic impacts and political
feasibility. Also in this table, these ratings are accumulated and the
strategies are ranked on the basis of total rating.
Note that on this basis, the strategies of upgrading existing
streets, short term transit improvement, increasing parking charges, imple-
menting fringe parking and requiring inspection and maintenance emerge as
the most attractive control strategies. The only other strategy achieving
a final rating greater than 3.0 is the four day week. The effects from
this strategy depend on voluntary actions,and since the degree to which
it would be implemented in 1977 is not predictable, the strategy was not
recommended. If a significant voluntary effort does occur by 1977, then
the degree to which the recommended program is implemented could be
reduced.
111-42
-------
TABLE III-5. RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES ON
BASIS OF POLITICAL CRITERIA
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
1 ^a.
"^^MM
Rating
5
2
2
3
2
4
3
3
4
3
2
4
1
1
4
2
3
3
4
3
1
2
Comments
in j
Underway, well accepted
Minor but very vocal opposition
Inconsistent with CBD goals
No apparent opposition
Believed regressive, costly
Outgrowth of present inspection
No reaction, jurisdiction unclear
Neutral if voluntary
Favored in principle
Mixed positions
Implied opposition, CBD goals
Rates already changing
Opposed without transit
Large latent opposition,
Acceptable in principle
Unlikely; legislative problem
Indifference; considered ineffective
Hesitant to require
Moving in this direction
Acceptable as voluntary measure
Incompatible with CBD goals
Conflict with CBD goals
* Criteria defined in Table III-6
** Strategy rated previously in this table
111-43
-------
TABLE III-6. POLITICAL CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Actively endorsed by all levels of public officials.
Wide public acceptance. Previous public accep-
tance of similar measures.
Endorsed by some levels of government officials.
Generally favored by elected officials. General
public acceptance likely. " Generally favorable
reaction to similar adopted measures.
Position not taken. Public official reaction mixed
between endorsement and lack of position. Public
reaction indifferent and/or mixed.
Publicly opposed by some levels of government
officials. General political endorsement not
probable. Substantial public opposition. Opposition
to similar adopted measures.
Actively opposed by most levels of government
officials. Wide public opposition. Widespread
public dissatisfaction with similar measures
previously adopted.
111-44
-------
TABLE IH-7.
FINAL RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
ALL CRITERIA
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle -Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
Sub-Ratings
Tech.
Effec-
tiveness
2
1
3
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
4
3
2
5
2
2
1
##
**
#*
2
2
2
Econ-
omic*
5
2
3
2
2
2
2
5
4
2
3
3
4
1
3
3
4
##
**
**
**
3
2
2
Non
Econ*
4.8
4.5
2.5
2.0
1.8
3.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
3.8
2.5
4.5
4.0
2.0
2.8
4.3
3.3
**
##
**
**
3f\
. u
3.8
3.0
3.3
3n
*j
Poli-
tical*
5
2
2
3
2
4
3
3
4
3
2
4
1
1
4
2
3
**
**
**
4
3
1
2
Final
Rating
4.2
2.4
2.6
2.0
2.2
3.2
2.3
3. 5
3,6
2.9
2.8
3.6
2.8
2. 3
3.0
2.8
2rt
. 8
**
**
O Q
£t . U
3.2
2.3
2.1
2r-
. 5
* Summarized from Tables
** Strategy rated previously in this table
111-45
-------
IV. RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION CONTROL PROGRAM AND IMPACT OS AIR QUALITY
A. RECOMMENDED PROGRAM
Based on the results of the four ratings developed for each con-
trol strategy and the 15.9 percent carbon monoxide emission reduction
required in the Golden Triangle, Zone 1 for 1977, the following four
part transportation control program is recommended.
The first control strategy is the implementation of an inspection
and maintenance program which- is estimated to reduce carbon monoxide emis-
sions by approximately 9 percent. Although not rated high in the cost
ranking, its effectiveness is reducing CO emissions in the CBD was sur-
passed only by creating a vehicle free zone. This strategy was also
recommended because it would not only be instrumental in achieving the
1977 air quality standards, but would be vitally needed in the long-term
air quality program. The expected benefits derived from the significant
national investment,which will be incurred when producing and installing
vehicle anti-pollution devices, could be substantially reduced if these
devices are allowed to deteriorate, to be disconnected or to be improperly
used. If this strategy were not implemented, the consequences of achieving
the 1977 air quality standards would be monumental in limiting urban mo-
bility in the CBD. An alternative program to meet the 1977 standard in the
CBD without inspection and maintenance would require significant transit
improvement in terms of busways and overall travel time reductions which
would increase transit usage by approximately 44 percent, reduct transit
IV-1
-------
fares by 100 percent, increase daily parking costs in the CBD by $2.34,
reduce parking demand by 33 percent, and require the development of exten-
sive fringe parking.
The second transportation control strategy in the recommended
program is to continue aggressively with upgrading the existing street
system, in the form of the TOPICS program and its probable successor. A
12 hour and daily overall speed increase of 2 percent is estimated to
occur by 1977 due to these traffic flow improvements. The expected reduc-
tion in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions would be approximately
1.4 percent for the 12 hour and daily periods.
The third transportation control strategy would be to increase
long-term parking costs by $1.45 per day. This 16.1 cent per hour increase
would increase choice modal split by 11 percent. This results in reducing
local vehicle miles of travel by 8.4 percent and total travel by 3.8 percent.
The reduction in parking demand would be approximately 8.4 percent less
than the existing demand. Since the parking authority presently has con-
trol over approximately 6,000 spaces in the CBD, strong upward pressure
would be exerted on rates at the remaining privately owned facilities,
and these rates would tend to follow the authority's. Parking demand
elasticity suggests that no revenue loss would be experienced by private
facility owners.
Besides increasing transit usage, a $1.45 increase in the daily
cost would also encourage all day parkers in the CBD to park their cars
IV-2
-------
in the fringe lots. This increase in parking costs would reduce VMT in
Zone 1 by 1.7 percent and reduce parking demand in the CBD by approximately
3.6 percent. The two existing fringe parking areas are located at the
stadium and civic arena complexes.
Together, their existing parking supply would be adequate to meet
the demand diverted from the CBD. Frequent transit shuttle service could
be implemented to link the fringe lots to the CBD. The creation of fringe
parking lots was not considered at this point since it was believed that
these high initial cost projects should be planned with long range transit
improvements. It was felt that construction of close-in (1-3 miles) fringe
parking lots could prove to be inconsistent with the long term goal of
rapid transit.
Although the total reduction in parking demand is projected to be
12 percent, this does not imply that parking supply could be reduced by
12 percent. The present parking demand-to-supply ratio is approaching a
value of one. In order to properly and efficiently provide parking for
users, this ratio should be in the vicinity of 0.85. Therefore, a 12-
percent reduction in parking demand would reduce the parking demand-to-
supply ratio to an acceptable level in the CBD and would not necessitate
reducing the parking supply- Also, the parking demand reduction would
probably reduce the number of illegal parkers and therefore improve traf-
fic flow.
The last transportation control strategy in the recommended pro-
gram is the improvement of the transit system. An increase in modal split
IV-3
-------
100
1977 PEAK HOUR VMT DENSITY BEFORE THE
PROGRAM IS IMPLEMENTED
1977 PEAK HOUR
VMT DENSITY AFTER
THE PROGRAM IS IMPLEMENTED
DISTANCE FROM CBD (MILES)
Figure IV-1, Peak Hour VMT Density (1000/mi ) vs. Distance from
CBD (miles) Pittsburgh.
IV-4
-------
TABLE IV-1
PROJECTED VMT REDUCTIONS FOR 1977
AFTER THE RECOMMENDED CONTROL PROGRAM IS INSTITUTED
(PERCENT REDUCTION)
Districts Daily Peak 12 Hours Peak Hour
1 5.5 7.3 18.3
2-20 1.5 1.9 4.9
21-51 .4 .5 1.3
52-72 .08 .11 .27
Region .43 .57 1.44
IV-5
-------
of 5 percent to the CBD was assumed in the initial determination of 1977
vehicle miles of travel. This is based on the assumption of increased
employment density in the CBD and some non-capital intensive improvements
in the transit system. In order to increase modal split over the next
five years, it is recommended that express bus service be instituted to
the CBD and that maximum use of traffic engineering techniques (bus priority
signal systems, one-way streets, etc.) be pursued.
Figure IV-1 shows a linear approximation of the 1977 peak hour
VMT density as a function of the zone's distance from the CBD before
and after the control program is instituted. Table IV-1 summarizes the
approximate 1977 VMT reductions projected after the Recommended Control
Program is implemented.
B. IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY OF RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES
(1) The reductions expected from the several strategies are as
follows:
1972 CO emissions from motor vehicles, Zone 1 27,543 kg/day
Less expected reduction from FMVECP (49.8
percent of baseline)
1977 "no strategy" emission rate of CO, Zone 1
only
Less 1.4 percent reduction expected from traffic
flow improvements
Less 5.5 percent reduction expected from parking
strategies and improvements in short-term mass
transit
IV-6
-------
Less 9.0 percent reduction expected from inspection 1 159
and maintenance program *
11,716
Less 8.2 percent reduction expected from retrofit 951
program (oxidizing catalytic converters on 1968-
1974 model year cars)
10,755 kg/day
(2) The net emissions resulting from the above combination of
strategies represents a 22.3 percent rollback from the expected 1977 "no
strategy" emission rate. Since a reduction of only 19.6 percent from the
1977 vehicular emission rate is required to meet the Federal standards,
the combination of strategies listed above represents an "overkill" of
some 2.7 percent. In this connection, it should be pointed out that our
contract and instructions from the EPA call for a transportation control
program that will meet the standards for CO and Ox by 1977. If it is
deemed advisable, in light of the considerable degree of uncertainty sur-
rounding all the numbers in this report, to try for a level which will
exceed the standard, then the above program will provide such a cushion.
(3) The above strategies are not listed in order of desirability.
The priority listing is as follows:
(a) Inspection and maintenance (mandatory program):
(No decrease in VMT) 9.CK, decrease in
CO emission
(b) Traffic flow improvements through the upgrading
of existing streets (no decrease in VMT) 1.47= decrease in
emissions
(c) Increase parking rates, fringe parking, and
improved short-term mass transit (does
decrease VMT) 5.5% decrease in
emissions
(d) Retrofit program - oxidizing catalytic con-
verters on 1968 to 1974 model year cars 8.2% decrease in
(no decrease in VMT) emissions
IV-7
-------
(4) The interested reader is referred to the draft amendments to
40 CFR 51, Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Imple-
mentation Plans ~ Transportation Control Measures, the latest version of
which is dated 14 November 1972, for further information on the inspection
and maintenance and retrofit options listed above.
IV-8
-------
V. IMPLEMENTATION OBSTACLES
The following agencies participated in meetings and discussions con-
cerning implementation obstacles:
Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
Pittsburgh Department of City Planning
Pittsburgh Public Parking Authority
Port Authority of Allegheny County
Allegheny County Transportation Department
A. INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
Legislative action on at least a regional basis is required for
the effective implementation of an inspection and maintenance program.
The most likely form of such action is the adoption of a uniform mainte-
nance and inspection measure by all counties in the SPRPC region, or
perhaps in western Pennsylvania. In the absence of total regional agree-
ment to proceed with a program, legislation could be adopted by individual
counties, and even by the City of Pittsburgh. However, exceptions to a
uniform regional policy would seriously erode the effectiveness of the
measure.
The possibility of State or even Federal adoption of an inspection
and maintenance program is a factor influencing the use of such measures at
a more local level. Transitional problems should be anticipated in the
adoption of measures at a local or regional level.
V-l
-------
The overlaying of a regional inspection and maintenance program
on the existing inspection mechanisms will require substantial planning
and legislative effort.
Technical procedures required for an inspection and maintenance
program represent "off the shelf" capabilities, and no further technical
development is foreseen. It is expected that the program will function
as an extension of the current vehicle inspection procedures. A technical
implementation time of one year (from completion of legislative and planning
activity to commencement of inspection) is projected.
It is anticipated that the program will involve an increased admini-
strative effort on a permanent basis. The incorporation of this additional
administrative effort into the existing state inspection administrative
machinery requires careful planning and legislation. Similarly, allocation
of the costs of additional administration will require detailed planning.
Uniform legislation throughout the region will be necessary to initiate
any additional administrative machinery.
It is likely that objections will be made to any inspection and
maintenance program on the grounds that its cost to motorists is regres-
sive with respect to personal income. If these objections become serious
enough to jeopardize the adoption of the program, then it will be necessary
to devise methods of reducing or eliminating the "user cost" aspect of the
program. This could be accomplished by additional fuel taxes, local regis-
tration fees, etc., applied to all motorists in the region.
V-2
-------
Potential political obstacles involve the generation of support,
on a regional basis, for problems that are identified on a subregional
basis. Another potential source of political resistance may arise from
the out-of-pocket costs associated with the program. However, experience
with out-of-pocket costs for safety related automobile equipment indicates
that objections diminish as the control becomes more widespread.
The primary economic obstacle is the capital expenditure required
to plan and initiate the measure. Specific funding sources (if any) for
this type of program are not clearly identified. In estimating capital
costs required to implement an inspection and maintenance program, these
assumptions were made: A 20-minute inspection time, 60-hour week, $35,000
per lane for equipment, approximately 1.5 million vehicles to test in 1977,
$145,000 per lane for land and building capital costs, and an 80 percent
utilization factor. Utilizing the assumptions above, approximately 210
lanes would be needed at an approximate capital cost of $180,000 per lane.
The approximate capital cost for the program would therefore be $38 million.
B. UPGRADE EXISTING STREETS
It is expected that this strategy can be implemented with little
resistance. Legislation has already been provided for this type of program
and it is expected that additional programs will, in the near future, supple-
ment existing programs for the upgrading of urban streets. It is also
anticipated that Federal allocations for this type of improvement program
will increase significantly in the near future.
V-3
-------
Administrative difficulties in the implementation of future urban
street improvement programs are expected to receive attention at the State
and Federal levels. Significant administrative capacity for this type of
program already exists at the local level.
Street improvement programs typically are estimated to yield a
benefit/cost ratio of 2.0 or greater, based on delay and accident reductions.
Since the costs of this program are already justified on a delay and acci-
dent reduction, the cost for emission reductions would be minimal.
C. PARKING RATES AND FRINGE PARKING
The public parking program in Pittsburgh affords opportunities to
implement some emission control strategies with a minimum of risk due to
obstacles that jeopardize other measures. The Authority has demonstrated
a capability for aggressive implementation of programs and a willingness
to support its programs against various pressures.
No serious legislative difficulties are foreseen in the imple-
mentation of the recommended measures of parking rate changes and fringe
parking. The legal capability to undertake both of these measures exists
and has been exercised previously.
Additional studies of demand elasticity, fringe parking availability
and accessibility, and triangle parking rate structure will be required.
Depending on the scope of these studies, temporary supplementation of the
Parking Authority's planning capability may be required. Control of the
V-4
-------
ongoing parking program should not add materially to the Authority's
responsibilities, however.
Any effort to contain the parking supply in the Triangle will draw
opposition on the grounds that such measures conflict with the stated
ofjectives of maximum physical growth in this area. Thus, it is important
that proper attention be given to the infrastructure necessary for the
successful diversion of long-term parking from the triangle area (shuttle
transit, pedestrian routes, escalators, etc.).
The economic impact of the recommended control strategies will
require careful analysis. In particular, the effect on net parking
revenues resulting from the proposed rate changes will need careful evalu-
ation. .A decrease in such revenues, while relatively small in comparison
to the total costs of other recommended emission control strategies, could
have a major impact on the operation of the Authority, and this possibility
must be explored in depth.
Vocal opposition from affected parking facility users can be
expected and should be met with a public relations type of program ex-
plaining the need for the measures and the consequences of alternative
measures.
D. SHORT TERM TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS
Implementation of any capital-intensive transit improvements is
considered infeasible due to time limitations and legal complications.
However, it is expected that short range transit improvements with low
V-5
-------
capital costs can proceed by 1977. No legislation or resolution of legal
problems is necessary for improvements such as express bus service, shuttle
service to parking areas or utilization of traffic engineering techniques
to improve bus operations.
The planning of short range improvements presents some difficulties
and will probably involve a detailed study of alternatives. Technical
obstacles are minor, since short term operation changes do not represent
a significant departure from existing technology.
Some political opposition to short term transit improvements is
probable, either on economic grounds or because even short term measures
are closely identified with controversial long range transit issues in
Pittsburgh. It is possible that this opposition may be reduced by "outside"
funding of improvements and by careful efforts to dissociate short term
programs from existing transit proposals.
The funding of short term transit improvements appears to be a
significant obstacle which is best overcome by careful review of available
capital improvement programs and timely action toward such funding. Approx-
imately 16,200 additional transit users are estimated to arrive in District
1 during the peak hour for 1977. Assuming a load of 50-70 passengers per
bus would indicate a need for approximately 290 buses. Assuming $40,000
per bus would result in an $11.6 million capital cost.
V-6
-------
VI. SURVEILLANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
A. INTRODUCTION
This section deals with the establishment of the schedule for
implementation and surveillance of the recommended control strategy pro-
gram. An implementation schedule assuming existing conditions is developed
first. Serious potential inadequacies arising from the application of a
static program are then identified. A methodology for overcoming these
difficulties is suggested, and its application to the recommended air
quality improvement program is outlined.
B. SURVEILLANCE AND IMPLEMENTATION: CURRENT CONDITIONS
Figure VI-1 indicates a schedule for the implementation of the
recommended control strategy program (see Section IV). Implementation of
the program is staged to achieve the target percent reduction in
emissions (see Chapter II). Projected implementation times for various
control measures represent a schedule designed to meet 1977 air quality
standards, with reasonable slack times (10 to 20 percent) incorporated
for all stages of implementation. Hence, the schedule is developed by
"working backwards" from the 1977 deadline and programming the implementa-
tion of improvements on this basis.
It should be noted that a "crash program", oriented toward maxi-
mum emission reductions within a minimum time period, could result in a
more condensed schedule, with nearly simultaneous undertaking of control
measures at the outset of the improvement in the immediate future. However,
VI-1
-------
it should also be recognized that this type of programming of emission
reduction control measures would involve higher implementation costs,
reduced cost/effectiveness and public acceptance problems not accounted
for in the rating of strategies that accompanied the analysis in this
report.
The PERT chart (Figure VI-1) indicates that, of the four major
strategies recommended in the emissions reduction program, two are inde-
pendent in the sense that the critical paths of their implementation
processes are not a function of the implementation of other measures.
Specifically, the implementation of the arterial street improvement pro-
gram and the maintenance and inspection programs are not related to pro-
gress on the other recommended strategies. However, the recommended
strategies of parking rates, fringe parking and short term transit improve-
ments are closely related, and the critical task for the implementation
of the entire subpackage of improvements is derived from elements in the
implementation phases of each of the various individual strategies.
The activities and events outlined in the chart in Figure VI-1
are discussed in further detail in the section of this report dealing with
implementation obstacles.
C. INADEQUACIES OF A STATIC SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
The PERT approach has long been established as a useful tool for
the planning and execution of complex programs. Adaptations of this
methodology have also proven useful in circumstances where only sparse
VI-2
-------
firking.
Itio.lt
an at
1001 of
i*t<
Short T*ra
Truult
M«o
taprovti.
».3l Hod*
COKlt
301
IXUtlDf
trottmm
Up t«nt
C1B Itrot
(»Mt 1mm-
Comfltte,
Mlciro-Kod.l
X
CfMBlt 100
KacUtiot Pro
at 6OX
Total
Str««t plwi
CoHBie SDK
fourc*t
Op«r«t«
for Input*
X
-
,
/
X
^ /
7
taplMnt
BOX CU
Strxt
Camlt
loot M. /
^ Sourcu
/
c
LegliUtlon
Ceaplvt*, Ad»ia
i*tratloa
Planiud
Co^Ut* /
Ticholc.l
ItudUi
S.
/
/
f
tmttit
B*fl>
lutalUttaii
iOl IttK-
CiVCMM
teiolUttoB
Covplvta,
1001 Iff.c-
t !*&
1974
Figure VI-1.
Implementation schedule for the
recommended transportation control
program.
VI-3
-------
data is available with respect to activity execution time. However, two
serious limitations of the PERT approach emerge as the approach is con-
sidered for the Pittsburgh emissions reduction program:
* The PERT process assumes a known objective. Although
quantitative variations in the objective can be accom-
modated under the process, the complete substitution of
one objective by another objective cannot be systematic-
ally accommodated by a single PERT process.
The PERT process depends on known activities (i.e., the
"lines" connecting the event nodes of the PERT network).
As noted earlier, the PERT process can function with
nothing more than estimates of the times required for
these activities. However, the PERT process does not
systematically accommodate the removal of an activity
entirely, nor its replacement by other activities.
It is highly probable that the objectives of any emission reduc-
tion program will, by 1977, vary significantly from objectives now adopted
or adopted in the near future. At least two significant factors contribute
to this likelihood:
The definition of the problem may change. As surveil-
lance devices and techniques are improved, entirely new
parameters of air quality may be defined. For example,
it is expected that very localized measurements of air
VI-4
-------
quality will be routine in the near future. The mere
disaggregation of the geographic area considered as a
single unit for the measurement of air quality will
change the nature of any air quality improvement objec-
tive drastically. Thus, it is possible that air quality
may eventually be defined on the basis of areas smaller
than a conventional city block, rather than on the
presently used zones of more than a square mile.
The programmed activities may not occur, and activities
not programmed at present may be included. Some uncer-
tainty must be assumed along with most activities in the
implementation program for Pittsburgh. These uncertain-
ties arise primarily from the fact that the technical
effectiveness of most suggested strategies is not accu-
rately known at this point. Hence, the assumption of a
certain reduction in emissions as a result of the adop-
tion of a strategy is only an estimate at this point.
In addition to uncertainties concerning technical
effectiveness, there are also uncertainties involving
the political feasibility of adopting any recommended
measure.
As noted earlier, it is also possible that air quality improvements
measures not now considered may prove to be feasible in the future. Further-
more, it Is also possible that measures not presently known or considered as
emission control strategies will be developed by 1977.
VI-5
-------
' REFERENCES
-------
LIST OF REFERENCES
1. Air Management Services, Department of Public Health, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, Control of Vehicular Air Pollution in a Comprehensive
Program. 3 November 1972.
2. Allegheny County Board of Commissioners, Official Information Mao.
1971.
3. Allegheny County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC), records of
air quality data for four locations in Allegheny County, 1971-1972.
4. BAPC, Allegheny County Emission Inventory. 1971.
5. , Allegheny County Emission Inventory. 1972.
6, BAPC Staff members, informal communications regarding the Air Quality
Network in Allegheny County-
7. Anonymous, thesis on automobile emissions in Pittsburgh, undated, 30 pp.
plus appendices, tables, and Fig. 1, Map of Allegheny County.
8. Anonymous, "Private Cars Inside City Target of State Environmental
Board," Pittsburgh Press, 13 December. 1972.
9. Calcagni, John, "Preliminary Assessment of the Oxidant and Carbon
Monoxide Problem in Metropolitan Boston1,' GCA Corporation, Bedford,
Massachusetts, 24 October 1972.
10. Commercial Atlas and Marketing Guide. Rand McNally and Co., 1956.
11. Costello, Mary, "Would Free Mass Transit Tempt Drivers?" in Charlotte,
North Carolina, newspaper for 13 December 1972.
12. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Guidelines; Air Quality
Surveillance Networks. OAP Publ. No. AP-98, May 1971.
13. EPA, Sampling Location Guidelines, November 1971
14. , National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards
(40 CFR 50), 25 November 1971.
15. . Requirements for Preparation. Adoption, and Submittal of Imple-
mentation Plans (40 CFR 51), 25 November 1971, amended 17 December
1971 and 30 December 1971.
16 , Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans (40 CFR 52),
3 February 1972, amended 31 May, 27 July, 22 September, 26 September,
and 28 October 1972.
-------
17. EPA, Air Quality Control Regions. Criteria, and Control Techniques
(40 CFR 81), 25 November 1971.
18. , Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles and New Motor
Vehicle Engines (40 CFR 85), 25 November 1971, amended 15 January,
8 September (effective 8 October), and 15 November 1972.
19. ---, "Ambient Ozone Measurements, July through September 1971,"
January, 1972.
20. , Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (revised), OAP
Publ. No. AP-42, February, 1972.
21. , Evaluating Transportation Controls to Reduce Motor Vehicle
Emissions inMajor Metropolitan Areas -- An Interim Report. 16 March
1972.
22. EPA, Guide for Compiling a Comprehensive Emission ..Inventory, Publ. No.
APTD-1135, June 1972.
23. , "Transportation Control Strategies for State Air Quality Imple-
mentation Plans," information on the EPA Contract for Transportation
Control Strategies, undated.
24. , minutes of the meeting held in Pittsburgh on 28 September 1972
on the project to develop transportation control strategies for
Pittsburgh, Pa. Minutes were dated 2 October 1972 and were addressed
to Mr. Wassersug from Mr. C. C, Miesse.
25. , 40 CFR 51, Requirements for Preparation. Adoption, and Submittal
of Implementation Plans -- Transportation Control Measures (Draft),
14 November 1972.
26. , Control Strategies for In-Use Vehicles. 29 November 1972.
27. Fox, Raymond D., Development of Transportation Control Strategies
for State Air Quality Implementation Plans (Proposal), GCA Corporation,
Bedford, Massachusetts, 7 July 1972. (Also Statement of Work)
28. Frohliger, John 0., "Study of the Air Quality in the East Street Valley,"
1 August 1972.
29. Godin, Gaetan, et al. "Urban Exposure to Carbon Monoxide," Archives of
gnyironmental Health, vol. 25, November 1972, pp. 305-313.
30. Goode's World Atlas (llth ed=), edited by Edward B. Espenshade, Jr.;
Chicago, Illinois, Rand McNally and Co., I960.
31. Graham, J. Donald, P.E., Air Pollution Engineer, BAPC, personal
communication, 6 December 1972.
R-2
-------
32. Grosset Road Atlas of the United States. Canada, and Mexico. St. Louis,
Mo., Diversified Map Corp., 1972.
33. Kircher, David S., and Donald P. Armstrong, An Interim Report on Motor
Vehicle Emission Estimation (draft EPA paper), October 1972.
34. Lynn, David A., "Preliminary Assessment of the Carbon Monoxide and
Oxidant Problem in the Baltimore Region," GCA Corporation, Bedford
Massachusetts, 5 October 1972.
35. National Air Pollution Control Administration (NAPCA), Calculating
Future Carbon Monoxide Emissions and Concentrations from Urban Traffic
Data, by Wayne Ott, John F. Clarke, and Guntis Ozolins, June 1967.
36. NAPCA, Report for Consultation on the Metropolitan Pittsburgh Intra-
state Air Quality Control Region, February 1969.
37. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Environmental
Data Service, Local Climatological Data -- Annual Summary with Compara-
tive Data, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 1971.
38. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, The Vehicle Code, PL 58 of 1959, amended
by PL 590 of 1970 and PL 154 of 1972 (Sections 834(a) and 850, approved
16 June 1972, deal with emission control devices on motor vehicles).
39. f Air Pollution Control Act. 8 January 1960, amended 26 October 1972.
40. , Air Quality Implementation Plan. January 1972, (several components
thereof, as follows):
A. "Information Concerning the Implementation Plan," Allegheny County
Health Department, Bureau of Air Pollution Control, 18 November 1971.
B. Letter, 14 January 1972, to Mr. Ruckelshaus from Mr. Gilbertson,
requesting a two-year extension for compliance with that section of
the law dealing with control of CO and oxidants in the Pittsburgh
region.
C. "Control Strategy Evaluation for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,"
31 January 1972.
D. "Air Basin Growth Rate Analysis," prepared by IBM for the EPA,
23 February 1972.
E. "Additions and Clarifications to Pennsylvania's Implementation
Plan," 4 May 1972.
F Letter, 5 May 1972, to Mr. Ruckelshaus from Governor Shapp, stating
the requirement for transportation control strategies to achieve
the federal standards for CO and HC by 1977, and the plans for same.
R-3
-------
G. Letter, 3 July 1972, to Mr. Triplett from Mr. Chleboski, giving
additional information on the Allegheny County Air Pollution
Control Program as it relates to the Pennsylvania Implementation
Plan.
H. Letter, 1 August 1972, to Mr. Triplett from Mr. Chleboski, stating
that the Allegheny County Air Pollution Control Regulations now
have the force of law, (in the form of an Ordinance by the Board
of Commissioners of Allegheny County).
I. "Addendum to Pennsylvania's Implementation Plan," undated.
f
J. Other correspondence among various government agencies, some of
which was incorporated as part of the Implementation Plan.
41. Pittsburgh Regional Planning Association (PRPA), Prelude to the Future.
the PRPA Annual Report for 1968.
42. PRPA Annual Report for 1970.
43. Record, Frank A., "Preliminary Assessment of the Oxidant and Carbon Mon-
oxide Problem in Salt Lake City," GCA Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts,
22 September 1972.
44. Road Atlas, United States, Canada, Mexico, Rand McKally and Co., 1963.
45. Schuck, E.A., et al. "Relationship of Hydrocarbons to Oxidants in
Ambient Atmospheres," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association
(JAPCA), vol. 20, no. 5 (May 1970), pp. 297-302.
46. Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (SPRPC), SPRPC
Reports. Annual Report Issue, September 1971
47. SPRPC, Transportation Planning -- Cycle I (revised 10 July 1972).
48. SPRPC Staff members, informal communications regarding the plans for
control of emissions from both vehicular and non-vehicular sources of
air pollutants.
49. Voorhees, Alan M., and Associates, Inc., correspondence with staff mem-
bers on matters pertaining to traffic data and transportation control
strategies.
50. Williams, Jonathan, "Improved Mass Transit Viewed Pollution Cure,"
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 14 December 1972.
R-4
-------
51. Memorandum Report Recommendations for the Pittsburgh Transportation
Development Program. Alan M. Voorhees and Associates. McLean, Vir-
ginia. May 1972. 20 pages.
52. Development of Trip Generation Models for the Southwestern Pennsylvania
Region. Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. May 1972. 100 pages.
53. Environmental Protection Agency Preliminary Draft. Transportation
Control Measures. October 26, 1972.
54. Environmental Protection Agency Preliminary Draft. Transportation
Control Measures. October 26, 1972.
55. Evaluating Transportation Controls to Reduce Major Vehicle Emissions
in Major Metropolitan Areas. Institute of Public Administration.
Washington, D.C. March 1972. Pages 2-1-2-24.
56. Desimone, V. R. The 4-Day Work Week and Transportation (Joint ASCE-
ASME Transportation Engineering Meeting. Seattle. July 26-30, 1971.)
21 pages.
57. Modal Split Model for Southwestern Pennsylvania. Southwestern
Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
April 1972. 53 pages.
58. Curtin, J. F. Effect of Fares on Transit Riding, Highway Research
Record. 213: 8-20, 1968.
59. Atlanta's Reduced Transit Fare Experience. Metropolitan Atlanta
Rapid Transit Authority. (Urban Mass Transportation Administration
UTPS User Symposium. July 27-28, 1972.) 6 pages.
60. The Hampton Roads Joint Transportation Study. Alan M. Voorhees and
Associates and Hammer, Greene, Siler, Associates. McLean, Virginia,
October 1970. 77 pages.
61. The Hampton Roads Joint Transportation Study. Alan M. Voorheea and
Associates and Hammer, Greene, Viler, Associates. McLean, Virginia.
October 1970. 77 pages.
62. Meyers, P., J. Walker. The Effects of "Share A Ride Day" on Los
Angeles Freeways. Traffic Engineering. 42(11): 35-37, August 1972.
63. Deen, T. B. A Study of Transit Fringe Parking Usage. Alan M.
Voorhees and Associates. Washington, D.C. 40 pages.
64. Development of Trip Distribution Models for the Southwestern Penn-
sylvania Region. Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Comm-
ission. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. April 1972. 54 pages.
R-5
-------
65. An Analysis of Urban Highway Public Transportation Facility Needs.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington, D.C. Volume I.
January 1972. 92 pages.
66. Capelie, D. G. Feasibility and Evaluation Study of Reserved Free-
way Lanes for Buses and Car Pools. Alan M. Voorhees and Associates.
Los Angeles, California. January 1971.
67. Goldenberg, M., R. Keith. The Effect of Land Use Planning and
Transport Pricing Policies in Express Transit Planning. Highway
Research Record. 305: 146-155. 1970.
68. A Guide for Reducing Automotive Air Pollution. Alan M. Voorhees
and Associates, Inc. Ryckman, Edgarly, Tomlinson and Associates.
McLean, Virginia. November 1971. 38 pages.
69. Bellomo, S. J. Providing for Air Quality and Urban Mobility.
(Fifth Annual Summer Meeting Highway Research Board. Madison.
July 31-August 2, 1972.) 51 pages.
R-6
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
APPENDIX A
DAILY MAXIMA OF HOURLY CO CONCENTRATION FOR THE DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH ZONE, WITH MONTHLY MAXIMA
(July 1971 to June 1972)
HOUR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
AVG
MAX
JULY
13
14
12
13
12
13
32
32
20
13
13
13
(se-**)
12
16
19
15
12
11
12
12
13
13
14
6.4
32.2
AUG
12
12
12
11
11
12
21
31
22
34
38
18
19
15
15
13
16
12
12
15
14
18
19
16
8.
37.
SEPT
11
12
4
10
6
15
16
19
17
24
34
20
14
20
13
19
18
13
12
11
11
9
10
10
7.1
34.2
OCT
22
18
13
13
13
13
16
27
24
24
44*
16
15
(-45-)
18
19
23
15
16
22
23
23
23
23
7.S
44.5
NOV
18
11
11
10
9
10
13
20
28
26
34
39**
11
12
7
7
20
17
22
23
23
17
22
15
5.3
. 38.6
DEC
20
16
15
11
It9)
It9)
It9)
Clt9)
(It9)
[It9)
14
14
14
13
13
13
15
16
21
14
23
22
24
25
4.6
24.6
JAN
It9)
It9)
It9)
It9)
It9)
It9)
It9)
11
15
11
21
9
7
7
8
12
16
21
15
19
16
17
16
18
3.6
21.3
FEE
14
10
10
10
10
8
8
11
11
9
11
12
17
22
19
13
17
19
12
17
24
24
25
25
5.6
24.7
MAR
22
17
12
9
9
9
12
18
24
27
23
14
14
16
15
17
19
22
17
18
21
15
12
12
7.5
26.8
APR
15
15
12
11
9
7
9
11
20
14
11
It9)
:it9)
[It9)
[It9)
[U9)
[It9)
Clt9)
(It9)
16
12
13
19
12
8.7
20.0
MAY
16
12
8
8
9
10
15
21
22
14
12
12
20
18
11
14
16
14
10
13
20
16
16
14
6.8
21.5
JUNE
12
10
8
8
9
11
18
23
18
19
17
16
17
17
16
22
19
13
9
10
11
12
16
13
7.2
22.0
MAX FOR
THE HOUR
21.8
18.4
14.6
13.0
13.0
15.1
31.8
32.1
28.4
34.0
44.2*
38.6**
20.0
22.3
19.0
22.0
22.5
22.0
22.0
23,0
24.3
24.3
24.7
24.6
Two bad data points have been lined out.
*highest recorded 1-hour observation durinj
** second highest reading during the periot
«lt9" m less than 9
; the period
ppm
-------
IABLE A-2
AVERAGE VALUES OF DAILY HIGH READINGS OF CO CONCENTRATION, DOWNTOWK PITTSBURGH,
1971-1972, WITH AVERAGE TIME OF OCCURRENCE
HIGH CO OF READINGS
MONTH CONCENTRATION (PPM) OCCURRENCE (HR) FOR THE MONTH
June - 1971
July
August
September
October
November
December
January - 1972
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
14.6
14.0
16.1
15.3
18.1
13.5
11.0
8.8
10.7
13.7
14.8
14.0
12.7
14.1
13.0
1336
1200
1142
1318
1336
1442
1448
1424
1506
1506
1330
1324
1312
1230
1230
20.75 ppm
33.65
34.50
34.65
35.80
35.00
23.85
2C.90
23.30
25.00
21.10
20.85
22.45
27.20
24.15
MONTHLY
AVERAGES
8.24 ppm
6.40
8.09
7.06
7.93
5.34
4.58
3.61
5.57
7.45
8.66
6.79
7.23
8.45
8.38
The data from the two right-hand cchinms have been plotted in Figure TI-5.
The "daily high" and "two highest" averages are based on daily maxima only,
while the "monthly averages" are based on all hourly readings.
The winter minimum is clearly visible in the left-hand and right-hand columns,
but is somewhat obscured in the nej;c-to-right column. A tendency toward earlier
maximum readings during the summer is also noted, with the smaller daily maxima
during the winter months occurring later in the day.
A-2
-------
TABLE A-3
HIGHEST DAILY MAXIMUM CO CONCENTRATIONS (PPM) BY HOUR, WITH DATES
DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH (ZONE 1)
Period of Record: June 1971 to August 1972
HOUR
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
HIGHEST DAILY
MAXIMUM RECORDED
21.5, 1 Kar 72
14.9, 30 Jul 71
16.0, 1 Apr 72
----- (Daily maxima never
occurred at these
-hours)
14.1, 13 Jul 72
20.6, 25 Jul 71
32.1. S Jul 71
26.8. 21 Mar 72
24.2, 27 Sep 71
44.2. 1 Oct 71
38.6. 3 Sov 71
20.8, 22 Jwl 71
35.2. 21 Jul 71
19.5, 26 Apr 72
20.9. 7 Jun 71
23.1. 6 Dec 71
22.1, 29 Mar 72
18.3, 14 Nov 71
15.3, 13 Dec 71
23.2, 2 Oct 71
18.3, 14 Aug 71
23.6. 11 Jul 72
24.7. 23 Feb 72
SECOND
HIGHEST DAILY
MAXIMUM RECORDED
19.9, 15 Dec 71
14.4, 2 Jul 72
10.7, 22 Jan 72
18.3, 6 Jun 72
31.1. 30 Aug 71
22.2, 6 Apr 72
19.8, 1 Sep 71
37.9. 18 Aug 71
17.1, 7 Dec 71
19.5, 30 Apr 72
22.3, 22 Oct 71
15.6, 17 Jul 71
18.9, 9 Sep 71
22.5, 17 Oct 71
20.5. 10 Jan 72
16.8, 21 Oct 71
15.3, 12 Mar 72
23.0, 17 Nov 71
14.3, 19 Aug 72
20.8, 19 Jul 72
24.6. 14 Dec 71
FREQUENCY
OF DAILY
MAXIMUM READING,
BY HOUK*
19
11
2
0
0
1
18
53
35
23
32
11
11
11
13
25
40
29
4
14
19
8
23
26
428 Data Points
* See histogram, Figure II-7.
Underlined values are monthly high or second high readings.
Values underlined twice are the highest and second highest recorded at any time
during the period of record (See also Table II-3.)
A-3
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
APPENDIX B
RUNS OF HIGH HOURLY CO CONCENTRATIONS, PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1 (ppm)
DATE HOURS
^^B MMMMMMMMi
18 Aug 71 03-10
04-11
05-12
06-13
07-14
08-15
09-16
10-17
1 Oct 71 05-12
06-13
07-14
08-15
09-16
10-17
11-18
12-19
13-20
14-21
15-22
2-3 Oct 71 14-21
15-22
16-23
17-24
18-01
19-02
20-03
21-04
22-05
23-06
8-HOUR AVG.
CONCENTRATION DATE
14.4 17-18 Nov 71
18.3
18.3
18.3
18.7
18.1
17.8 18 Nov 71
17.5
16.5
18.1
19.3
20.4
20.2
20.1
20.1 14-15 Dec 71
16.4
16.6
16.5
16.2
16.2
17.2
18.4
19.6 29 Feb-1 Mar 72
20.4
20.9
21.2**
20.2
18.7
17.2
HOURS
17-24
18-01
19-02
20-03
21-04
03-10
04-11
05-12
06-13
07-14
08-15
09-16
10-17
15-22
16-23
17-24
18-01
19-02
20-03
21-04
22-05
15-22
16-23
17-24
18-01
19-02
20-03
21-04
22-05
8-HOUR AVG.
CONCENTRATION
19.8
19.5
18.8
17.4
15.8
15.8
18.4
20.7
20.9
21.27*
20.3
18.7
16.2
17.0
18.4
19.8
20.4
20.4
19.6
19.3
17.4
17.7
18.9
20.4
20.9
20.7
20.7
19.4
17.0
* Highest recorded for the period.
** Second highest recorded for the period.
B-l
-------
RUNS OF HIGH HOURLY CO CONCENTRATIONS, PITTSBURGH, ZONE 30 (PPM)
14-15 Dec 71 16-23
8-HOUR AVG.
CONCENTRATION
18.4
19.1
19.1
18.9
18.8
18.0
24 Feb 72 11-18 20.0
12-19 19.5
13-20 18.9
14-21 18.8
15-22 19.0
16-23 18.9
17-24 18.4
29 Feb-1 Mar 72 16-23 18.1
17-24 19.9
18-01 20.3
19-02 20.6*
20-03 19.8
21-04 18.0
*highest 8-hour average recorded at Bellevue location during the period
B-2
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YtAR IS 1972
R5&ION NO. 5 PJLLUTANT SPtCICI IS CARBON MUNOXIOF
HOOTl. YEARS CONS1DFRCD IS FROM 19c,0 TO 1973
LENGTH OF TIME PCRI3D IS 24 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE AREA
NO.
(SO. MI I
1 1.260
2 2.070
3 3.850
4 2.890
5 5.820
6 4.230
7 4.540
B 1.960
9 2.550
10 6.990
11 1.520
12 3.060
13 2.270
14 3. £90
15 5.510
16 1.230
17 1.210
10 2.550
19 1.850
20 L.i.90
21 7.170
Z2 24.760
23 3.070
24 3.f90
25 9.190
26 12.200
27 71.500
28 15.420
29 9.020
30 10.340
31 5.130
32 93.150
33 6.770
34 10.990
35 4.790
36 12.P20
37 44.990
38 33.720
39 11.3CO
40 22.870
41 19.5BO
42 13.010
43 50.620
44 20.230
45 34.440
46 20.510
47 5K.340
48 8.280
4? 11.38G
50 25.780
51 13.640
52 25.130
53 1*>9.390
54 339.420
55 239.000
56 38.230
57 251.770
58 375. 25C
59 91.090
60 20.5CO
61 17.290
62 233. 97t
63 513.300
64 173.330
65 62.340
5o 344.910
67 431 . 110
6** 24.400
69 53.6&G
7O 46.990
71 243. H10
72 94.010
L I iHT
EMISSIONS
(KSMI
?4724.P5
14729.28
22244.99
2950.56
8290.42
22841.70
11431.11
2553.17
13641.27
8227.40
4385.58
4839.05
4297.40
21730.57
5367.35
6471.90
5656.31
9313.21
2234.35
3015.11
12357.12
25607.84
7223.39
3404.93
9708.55
7704.05
8235.78
2450.41
2246.12
9666.53
4405.74
17847.54
3174.11
7812.18
4998.13
11203.52
6362.34
7228.39
12621.91
25170.46
6145.77
11036.73
7793.48
27161.34
7336.60
17628.13
14356.13
10007.20
5445.22
51059.28
0973.43
1C128.97
2501».S9
17579.57
16602.44
7296.04
14212.66
13503.15
4»26r,3«
591! -.45
8187.59
31577.23
35690.96
27985.47
31097. fZ
25138.93
31353.86
9432.23
17972.72
23U£>7. 63
17144. »6
6316.43
DUTY
EMISSION
OF.NSITY
(KGM/SO.MI
19621.91
7115.59
5777.92
102C.96
1424.47
5399.93
2517. "6
1302.64
5349.52
1177.02
28S5.25
1581.39
10PP.72
5536.27
974.11
6618.67
4674.64
3654.20
1207.75
17S4.09
1793.18
1033.41
2352.59
875.30
1056.43
631.48
115.89
158.91
249.02
934.37
855.48
191.60
46S.85
710.34
1043.45
73.91
141.42
196.6H
1116.98
1100.59
313.88
34P.33
153.9o
1342.63
213.03
059, *9
2*6 .IS
120-3.00
473 .49
19S0.53
451.41
403.06
132.10
51.79
69.47
190.35
56.45
35.98
529. VO
202.02
473.54
134.96
69.53
160.42
*9f>.«*
73.03
73.91
387.35
334.31
490.91
70.49
66.76
HEAVY
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
2654.71
15^1.47
23SS.40
316.74
390.17
2452.52
1227.3f
274.08
1464.59
833.36
470.63
519. SO
460.37
2333.12
576.34
909.66
607.28
1000.51
239. S5
298.16
724.43
1442.95
407.04
194.07
547.06
434.13
466.88
138.05
126.59
54*. 69
348. 2i
1005.64
173.87
440.19
281.65
631.27
35B.48
407.29
711.20
1418.32
346.30
621. FT
439.10
153C.4S.
413.42
993.29
003.90
563.91
306.85
2977.06
505.67
346.22
H55.12
600.84
567. 4P
662.72
1290.99
1226. 5B
2127.37
350.64
479.55
1149.63
,1090.63
1633.43
1336.31
1082.81
1369.70
407.58
1589.36
2039.89
1516.11
550.59
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGI/SO.MI)
2106.91
"lot .00
i20.J6
109. »>0
152.95
579.79
270.35
13-7.J4
574. J5
126.37
J09.75
109.77
202. PI
599.77
104.60
710.67
501.39
392. i5
129.65
176.43
lr,l. 04
58.23
112.59
49.0
15.10
19.45
71.39
151.65
41 .47
20.02
623.69
46.09
49.56
14.05
13.43
59.62
26.35
106.76
18.93
46.74
29;90
74.03
3" .06
43.25
75.50
152.26
40.04
66.03
47.83
145.81
43.09
105.70
37.52
57. Jl
30.74
306.15
50.43
38.25
93. 6d
65.25
64.07
74.29
144.79
1J7.56
317.52
37. J5
53.7-*
200.61
232 .lii
203.93
164.23
175.4*
157.46
49.35
170.67
223.53
163. li
60.11
EMISSION
OFNilTY
(KGM/S3.MIJ
129.34
49.69
3U.90
6.41
ll. i2
36.il
15.72
7.36
33.97
7.91
19.32
10.74
12.14
4,. 83
6.48
44.46
30.85
25.02
P. 16
11.51
9.9o
6.12
13.51
5.15
67. K7
3.70
0.69
0.95
1.49
5.77
S.12
1.15
2.80
4.25
6.24
5.77
O.«b
1.12
6.08
6 .66
2.05
5.0"
0.95
8.20
1.25
5.16
1.50
6.90
2.70
11.88
2.71
1.52
0.49
0.19
0.27
1.94
0.58
0.3T
3.49
1.P2
3.11
0.86
0.45
1.17
2.6*
0.36
0.39
2.02
3.18
4.76
0.67
0.64
TOTAt
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
27542.52
16413.62
2*7*3.13
3285.84
9231.93
25447.82
12729.85
2842.66
15192.48
9166.03
4885,77
5391.41
4775.32
24238.09
5979.40
9436.46
6300.92
10382.52
2469.30
3332.72
13652.94
27202 »43
7671.90
3619.02
10*79.29
8184.26
8802.22
2603.12
2386.14
10270.83
46*0.32
18959.94
3371.96
8299.10
5309.66
11908.81
675P.K9
7678.93
13408.60
26741.04
6532.11
11724.62
8280.52
28857.63
7793.10
18727.20
15252.54
1062". 21
S782.80
54242.49
9529.53
10513.43
25967.38
1*245.66
17233.98
8033.05
15648.43
14867.29
51413.26
6374.34
8720.88
33627.46
38013.77
29722.87
32598.90
26397.21
33401.08
9939.16
19732.74
2531 1.O4
1882*. 13
6935.13
EMISSION
DENSITY
-------
" CITY OF PITTS6URGH
- RES1ON NO. 5
CALENDAR YEAR IS 1972
POLLUTANT SPECIES IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1960 TO 1973
LENGTH OF TIME ft ~ IS 24 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LI6HT
~ idOe ~~A»SA EMISSIONS
M.
(SO .Mil
1 J.260
2 2.OTO
3 3.850
' 4 2.8*0
5 5.620
6 4.230
7 4.540
8 1.960
9 2. 550 .
10 6.990
11 1.520
12 3.060
13 2.270
14 3.890
15 5.510
16 1.280
17 1.210
16 2.55O
19 l.*5O
20 1.690
21 7.176
22 24.780
23 3.070
24 3.890
25 9.190
26 12.200
27 71.500
28 15.420
2_9 9.020
30 10.340
31 5.150
32 93.150
33 6.770
34 10.990
J5 4,790
36 12.820
37 44.990
38 38.720
39 11.100
40 22.870
41 ~ 19.580
__ 42 13.010
"43 ' 50.620
44 20.230
45 34.440
46 20.510
47 58.340
40 ».2<>0
49 11.380
50 25.780
51 18.640 ""
52 25.130
53 189.390
54 339.420
55 239.000
56 38.230
57^251.770
58 375.250
59 91.090
60 20.500
61 17.290
62 233.970
63 513.300
64 173.830
6$ 62.340
66 344.910
67 431.110
68 24.480
69 53.680
70 46.990
71 24-3.Z10
72 S '-. 610
IKGMI
3392.29
2076.51
3082 .60
397.03
U07_iA3 -
3162.90
1533.56
336.93
1644.87.
1143.55
606.60
676.35
503. 31
3288.64
742.52
1177.53
77*^*8
1307.67
311.54
410.62
2214.44
4597.2O
1277.2.1
609.55
IMS. 30
1392.03
1497.14
442.76
405.85
1766.41
796.06
3224.83
573.52
1411.56
903. 10_
2124.2*
1149.60
1306.06
2280.62
4572.18'
1159.09
1994.20
1426.07
4959.71
1314.23
3191.16
2618.73
176*. "7
957.64
9243.66
"1 575.1 0~~
1899.57
4646.86
3250.75
3131.88
1343.69
2616.05
2487.36
9138.89
1101.60
1548.29
5872.52
6718.59
5585.72
5928.04
4658.82
6057.50
1793.51
3304.87
4285.40
3155.90
1162.68
DUTY HEAVY DUTY
EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY DENSITY
(KGM/SO.NI)
2692.30
10O3.14
600.66
137.36
190.35
747.73
337 .79
171.91
723.46
163 .60
400.40
221.03
256.96
45.41
134 .76
919.95
.644.20
512.81
16* .40
243.09
311.64
(85.52
416.03
156.70
197.53
114.10
20.94
Z6.T1
44.99
171.03
154. 5>
34.62
64.72
128.44
... 1»8.54
165.70
25.55
33.73
201.83
199.92
59.20
153.2"
28.19
245.17
38.16
155.59
44.89
213.63
84.17
356.56
84 .50
75.19
24.54
9.50
13.10
35.15
10.40
6.63
100.33
53.74
89.55
25.10
13.09
32.13
95.09
13.51
14.05
73.26
61.57
91.20
12.98
12 .2<)
(K6MI 7
6357.50
7272.58
6042.68
6288.17
4942.92
6425.63
1902.57
3717.90
4820.24
3550.24
1307.97
(KGM/Sg.MIl
3113.65
1159.65
925.84
158.94
iZ0.24
864.62
390.82
198.93
636.96
189.19
463.03
255.58
297.25
976.34
155.85
1063.84
745 ,U4
542.V4
l**.Tj
2T*.SJ
316.47
JO0.34
44* .39
169.38"
223.30
123.23
22.61
31.01
48.59
164.67
166.94
37.39
91.49
138.71
203.62
176.86
27.60
36.43
217.97
215.90
63.91
165.54
30.44
264.75
41.22
168.03
48.47
23O.77
9O.93
3BT»23
" VT.29
78.82
25.72
1O.04
13.73
39.67
il.74~
7.48
106.59
56.18
96.93
27.17
14.17
34.76
100.87
14.33
14.90
77.72
69.26
102.58
14.60
13.82
C-2
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
REGION NO. * POLLUTANT SPECIES is CARBON MONOXIDE
"MODEL ^YEARS CONSIDERED is FROM 1965 TO 1978
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 24 HOURS
«HKLE.
c.«rutafe».- -
CATEGORY
ZONE AREA
NO.
I SO .Mil
1 1.260
2 2.070
3 3.850
4 2.890
5 5.»20
6 4.230
7 4.540
8 1 . 960
9 2.550
10 6.990
11 1.520
12 3.060
13 Z.270
14 3.390
15 5.510
16 1.280
17 1.210
18 2.550
19 1.S50
20 1.690
21 7.170
22 24.780
23 3.070
24 3.S90
25 9.190
26 12.200
27 71.500
28 15.42C
29 9.020
30 10.340
31 5.150
32 93.150
33 6.770
34 10.990
35 4.790
36 1Z.320
37 44.990
38 38.720
39 11.300
40 22.870
41 1-7.580
42 13.010
43 5C.620
44 20.230
45 34.440
46 20.510
47 58.340
48 0.230
49 11.380
50 25.730
51 19.640
52 25.130
53 189.390
54 33-7.420
55 239.000
56 30.230
57 251.770
5r 375.750
59 91.O90
60 20.?00
61 17.290
62 233.970
63 513.300
64 173.030
t>5 62.340
<>6 344.910
67 431.110
6? 24.430
69 53.530
70 46.090
71 243. ?1Q
7? 44.610
- LISHT
EMISSIONS
(K.GM)
114<>4. 1C
6779.83
10118.42
1331.2?
352.1.21
10527.31
5213.04
1130.54
6283.28
3745.67
1913.55
2042.32
1794.22
10108.20
2272.55
4697.62
2663.40
4192.75
886.65
1567.59
6593.18
12190.81
3516.56
1925.16
5443. S3
4177.26
4526. Zl
1299.28
1144.14
5038.98
2116.92
9837.25
1765.38
3653.57
2ZO&.01
6663.52
3733.60
3737.41
6495.13
12490.07
3436.25
5705.65
4646.64
144-45.94
3686.70
8675.24
7273.82
4758.07
2662.13
25453,34
4269.39
4753. J4
13155.59
9096.24
3537.97
3730.73
7679.18
7054.7C
25055.23
2358.36
3903.63
16619.33
19416.49
14S93.05
1MB6.80
14134.45
17111.61
4573.92
9C92.23
11303.07
9343.30
3195.00
'DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
iKr-M/sg.Mii
9122.30
3275.28
2628.16
460.66
605.02
2400.73
1148.25
602.32
2464.03
535.86
1258.91
667.43
790.41
2598.51
412.44
3670.01
2201.16
1644.22
479.27
927.57
919.55
491.96
1145.46
494 .90
592.35
342.40
63.30
84.26
126.85
484.43
411.05
105.61
260.71
332.44
477.25
520.16
14.10
96.52
574.79
546.1'
175.50
438.56
91.83
714.08
107.05
422.98
I24.&3
574.55
233.93
9S7.33
229.07
139.35
69.46
26. tO
35.72
97.59
30.50
l*.BO
275.06
139.43
226.07
71.07
37.35
T3.95
253.05
41.13
39.69
1.16.34
1(9.38
740.56
31.44
3i.77
HEAVY
EMISSIONS
(KGHI
2157.77
1288.19
1*07.72
247. SO
652.83
1904.46
966.06
217.80
1170.65
705.08
360.40
305.75
335.14
1990.96
427.40
385.29
500.15
793.37
167.33
293.00
722. 3
1359.5.
333.7"
214.21
321.41
467.21
^06. 1';
145.30
127.95
500.20
?36.7.'J
1 ICO. 16
197.43
400.5".
255. 6(,
767.5"
423.16
4 1 7 . 9'j
726.3°
14P1 ."!
393.91
53C.09
523.83
1674.94
410.19
971.12
P17. OJ>
525.1"
293.03
2348.58
469 . 33
323.92
907.05
6Z5.6C
593.92
680. 3C
1400.53
1286.64
2193.2?
335.97
466.62
1966.43
2313.22
1*00.56
1415.92
1727.13
1503.73
4C0.78
1SI2.67
2016.60
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.Mri
1712.51
622.31
495.51
35.64
112.17
469.14
213.23
111.12
459.08
100.98
237.10
126.06
147.64
509.25
77.57
691.63
413.35
311.13
90.44
173.38
100.74
54.87
126.64
b5.07
67.62
38.30
7.08
9.42
14.18
54.10
45.97
11. til
29. 16
37.13
53.37
59. "7
9.41
10.79
64.28
61. 27
20.12
49.05
10.35
30.32
11.91
47.35
14.02
63.43
25.75
U0.50
Z5.18
13.09
4.79
1.84
2.49
17.79
5.56
3.43
32. rs
10.39
26.99
3.4C
4. SI
10.36
22.71
3^49
14.37
JO. 04
12.92
'>.99
OTHER
EMISSIONS
IKGM1
177.30
110.44
159.22
19.63
51.21
165.48
74.39
16.74
93.56
58.82
29.96
32.41
27.02
187.61
35.37
73.76
41.13
67.05
14.00
23.68
03.11
162.97
45.70
25.55
78.35
56.35
61.07
17.53
15.43
67. 5f
28,55
132.73
23.32
49.29
30.84
90.46
51.05
SO. 43
37.64
170.24
50.11
76.99
64.27
198.55
48.90
117.33
99.03
61.50
34.06
344,15
54.41
40.29
110.52
75.82
73.72
85.37
175.81
161.50
360.52
19. 9S
S7.37
237.00
292.86
236.10
109.77
158.67
2TO.92
53.23
194.1P
245. 7fl
199.94
*».33
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.MII
140.72
53.35
41.36
6.79
a. so
39.12
16.03
8.54
36.69
8.42
19.71
10.59
11.90
48. Z3
6.42
57.63
33.99
26.29
7.57
14.01
11.59
6.58
14.39
6.57
8.53
4.62
0.85
1.14
1.71
6.54
5.54
1.42
3.52
4.48
6.44
7.60
1.13
1.30
7.76
7.44
Z.56
5.9Z
1.27
9.81
1.42
5.72
1.71
7.43
2.99
13.35
2.92
1.60
0.5"
0.22
0.31
2.23
0.7C
0.43
4.05
1.95
3.32
1.01
0.55
1.36
3.04
O.46
0.47
2.17
3.62
5.23
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(KOMI
13029.16
3178.49
12185.35
1998.43
4229.24
12677.26
6257.49
1415.08
7547.49
4510.36
2303.91
2460.48
2156.33
12276.79
2735.32
5656.66
3204.66
5053.16
1067.97
1884.27
7398.63
13713.34
3951.03
2164.94
6143.44
4700.82
5093 .47
1462.12
1287.50
5636.75
2382.21
11070.13
1986.62
4111.44
2572.52
7534.55
4257.80
4205.79
7309.15
14061.62
3880.26
6420.72
5236.75
16269.43
4145.79
9763.73
P191.52
5344.74
2969.22
28646.07
4793.63
5IZ7.55
14173.16
9797.66
1205.61
4496. 4O
9295.92
8902.64
'0417.02
3234.29
44V -67
18632.76
22022.76
16629.73
17692.49
15970.24
18616.26
5027.92
10896.99
13566.32
11207.35
363O.34
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.MII
10979.53
3990.94
3165.03
593 . 09
729.99
2996.99
137(1. 30
721.96
2959.80
649.26
1515.73
604.06
949.95
3199.99
496.43
4419.27
2646.50
1981.63
577. If
1114.95
1031.89
5S3.40
1266.96
556.54
666.49
385.31
71.24
94.82
142.74
545.14
462.96
118.84
293.45
374.11
937.06
987.72
94.64
108.62
646.83
614.65
198.18
493.92
103.49
604.22
120.38
476.09
140.41
645. SO
262.67
1111.17
257.17
204.04
74.64
28.67
36.92
117.61
36.76
22.6*
311.97
19T.77
296.37
BO.49
42.90
99.67
Zoj.f 1
49.14
43.69
209.39
203.04
20*. 71
46.00
4O.49
C-3
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
REGION NO. 5 POLLUTANT SPEC IFS IS HY03UCARHUNS
MODEL YEARS CUNSIMR6D IS FROM 1965 TO 197F
LEN'.TH UF TIME PERIOD IS 24 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
tnnr AREA
Nu.
(SO. MI)
1 1.260
2 2. 070
3 3.S50
4 2.890
5 5. 820
6 4.730
7 4.540
S 1.960
9 2.550
10 6.C19C
11 1.5ZO
12 3.060
13 2.?70
14 3.890
IS 5.510
16 1.280
17 1.210
18 2.550
19 1.850
ZO 1.690
21 7.170
22 24. 7^0
23 3.070
24 3.890
25 9,190
26 12. SCO
27 71.500
26 15.42ft
29 9. (.20
30 10.340
31 5.150
32 93. ISO
33 6.770
34 10.990
35 4.790
36 1Z.3ZC
37 44.990
3S 33.720
39 11.300
40 22.87C
41 I9.58P
42 13.010
43 50.620
44 20.230
45 34.440
46 20.510
47 58.340
48 8.Z30
49 11.390
50 25.730
51 18.640
52 25.130
53 189.390
54 339. 4?0
55 239. TOO
54 3S.?JC
57 ^51.770
if 375. ?*J3
>" 9J.090
If SO.iOO
61 I7.?90
62 ?33.V70
41 513. 3CT
64 173.^30
65 oT. 340
>1 14'.. "10
67 4 j 1.1 10
0' .74.430
69 53.o">0
70 46. "9;)
71 ;4i.;'iu
It 94. MO
LIGHT
EMISSIONS
(KGMI
1390.03
433.48
1233.10
158.52
416.83
12"2.7P
619.16
136.29
751.34
458.23
233.82
251.05
215.63
13Z5.77
276.94
574.76
323.54
517.13
108.77
108.62
968.44
1835.92
523.53
239.3"
845.33
632.44
695.29
196.72
173.23
753.39
320.51
1419.41
267.29
55.3.17
346.11
1046.25
572.86
565.87
933.40
1898.51
537. ZP
863.87
710.84
2204.96
554.62
1315.46
1109.27
708.75
395.12
3860.34
632.74
737. SO
2033.11
1401. 09
1334.97
572.38
1179.38
1083.47
3923.45
438.66
612.2*
2572.43
3032.71
23»6.61
253>.li
?.!!">. 14
2691.1?
716.60
130^. «J9
1747. 2S
1414. 9(,
490.41
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGN/SQ.MI)
1103.20
405.0o
3Z0.47
54.85
71.62
303.26
136.33
70.55
294.64
65.56
153.83
12.04
94.99
340.01
50.26
449.03
267.39
202 ."0
58.30
11L.61
135.07
74.09
17C.53
74.39
91.98
51.84
9.58
12.76
19.21
73.35
02.24
15.99
39.43
50.33
72.26
91 .61
12.73
14.61
87.03
83.01
27.44
66.40
14.04
106.99
16.10
64.14
19.01
85.60
34.72
149.74
33.95
29.36
10.74
4.13
5.59
14.99
4.6S
2,n9
43.13
n .40
35.41
10.99
5.91
13.73
40.47
6.34
6.24
.19.37
J5.9B
3 7 . 1 '3
5.90
5.11
HFAVY
EMISSIONS
(KGMI
374.68
226.92
333.04
42.57
111.84
346.26
166.22
37.05
201.92
123.62
63.06
67.76
58,00
362.18
74.66
155.04
87.13
139.6"
29.35
50.75
141. ZZ
269.10
76.53
42.3"
124.75
9Z.76
IOC. 50
2B.85
25.40
111.22
47.00
218.43
39.20
81.12
50.76
154.77
34.02
32.98
144.22
278.71
79.36
126.69
104.43
323.90
31.21
192.97
162.94
103.52
57.67
566.20
92.29
66.00
1*1.74
125.16
119.63
135.91
?79.81
257.06
603.69
67.10
94.07
394.18
465.63
369. 9T
2)0.23
245.51
303.69
60. GO
32?. 01
404.12
131.40
113.;.,
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.MI )
297.36
109.62
86.50
14.73
19.22
1 1.P6
36.61
13.90
79.19
17.69
41.49
22.15
25.55
93.10
13.55
121.13
72.05
54.7"
15.87
30.03
19.70
10.36 '
24.93
10. "9
13.57
7.60
1.41
1.37
2.3.?
10.76
9.13
2.34
5.79
7.3B
10.60
12.07
1.37
2.14
12.76
12.19
4.05
9.74
2.05
16.01
2.36
9.41
2.79
12.50
5.07
21.96
4.95
2.43
0.96
0.37
0.50
3.56
1.11
0.69
6.63
3.27
5.44
1.6B
O.V1
2.13
4,5V
0.71
0.7C
3.30
6. no
l!l6
l.'O
OTHER
EMISSIONS
(KGMI
29.16
18.16
26.19
3.23
8.42
27.22
12.57
2.75
15.39
9.67
4.93
5.33
4.44
30.85
5.82
12.13
6.76
11.03
2.30
3.89
13.67
26.81
7.52
4.20
12.89
9.27
10.04
2.89
2.54
11.12
4.70
21.83
3.92
8.11
5.07
16.19
8.40
8.30
14.41
28.00
P. 2%
12.66
10.57
32. 6A
8.04
19.31
16.42
10.11
5.60
56.61
8.96
6.63
1 P. 1"
12.47
12.13
14.04
28.97
26.56
60.61
6.57
9.44
38. 9i)
46.52
31.21
26.10
33.05
8.76
31.93
4C.4?
32. ''9
11 .24
EMISSION
DENSITY
CKGM/SO.Mt 1
23.14
8.76
6.80
1.12
1.45
6.43
2.77
1.40
6.03
1.38
3.24
1.74
1.96
7.93
1.06
9.48
5.59
4.32
1.24
2.30
1.91
1.03
2.45
1.08
1.40
0.76
0.14
0.19
0.28
1.07
0.91
0.23
0.58
0.74
1.06
1.26
0.19
0.21
1.28
1.22
0.42
O.97
0.21
1.61
0.23
0.94
0.28
1.22
0.49
2.20
0.48
0.26
0.10
0.04
0.05
0.37
0.11
O.C7
0.67
0.3?
0.55
0.17
O.C9
C.?2
0.5C
o.oa
o.na
0.3&
O.H6
0.14
0.1.'
TUIAL
EMISSKINS
IKGM)
1793. P7
1083.57
1593.02
204.3?
537.10
1656.26
797.94
178.09
960 .66
!>91.56
301.80
324.14
278.07
1718.80
357.43
741.93
417.48
667.84
140.43
243.27
1123.33
2131.83
607.56
335.97
982.96
734.49
795.84
228.45
201.17
P80.73
372.21
1729.68
310.40
642.40
401.95
1217.21
665.27
657.14
1142. O3
ZZ05.22
674. £9
1003.22
2561.52
643.88
15Z7.73
1288.64
822.38
458.38
4483,14
733.91
810.43
2233.03
1538.72
1466.73
722.83
14M.ll
1367.10
4592.7^
51?. 3!
715.7 '
3C05.fr>
354* . «*.
2795.42
Z450.77
3027 . «!>
806. 16
?191 . 79
1 7v9 .24
614.01
CMiSSHA
DfcNSlTY
(KoM/SO.M:
1423.70
523.46
413.77
70.70
92.28
391.55
175.76
90.86
379.86
84.63
1V8.56
105.93
12J.50
441 .B5
64.87
579.63
345.02
261.90
75.91
143.94
156.07
86.03
197.91
86.37
106.96
60.20
11.13
14.82
22.30
65.18
72.27
18.57
45.35
58.45
83.91
94.95
14.79
16.97
101.07
96.42
31.91
77.11
16.32
126.62
IB. 70
74.49
22.09
9V. 3Z
40.28
173.90
39.38
32.75
11.79
4.53
6.14
13,91
5.91
3.6'
'.0.4;
41 .4(
I2.B5
6.91
16.08
45. 7o
7. 12
7.02
1? 67
46 . 64
7 40
C-4
-------
CITY OFJ»ITTSBURGH
REGION NO. 5
CALENDAR YEAR IS _1972
POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
EMISSION INDICES AND TOTAL EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR ZONE NO. 1
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
CALENDAR
"YEAR
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
19-65"~
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
LIGHT
INDEX
(GM/MILE)
0.65
0.22
0.40
0.97
2.37
2.73
4.44
5.16
5.06
4.49
4.46
7.26
1.90
0.14
*fb,2L5
DUTY
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
PR56.07
3041.48
5380.85
13208.17
32216.80
37074.35
60291.20
70058.50
68739.50
60976.19
60552.40
98641.63
25794.53
1928.30
y«ffrW-11
HEAVY
INDEX
(GM/MILE)
5.63
0.99
1.18
2.25
2.85
4.59
5.91
8.20
8.64
11.35
12.26
13.81
7.01
0.52
JS.I1
DUTY
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
2537.48
447.9P
533.34
1012.90
1285.99
2070.37
2663.76
3694.21
3891.78
5113.89
5524.60
6225.43
3161.06
232.14
3*344.43
-------
CITY UF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1972
REGION NO. 5 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDF
MOQtL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM I960 TO 1973
L?»JGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 2* HOURS
O
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY
SQ..MI) CK3M) (KQH/SQ.MI)
HEAVY DUTY
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(XGMI IK5H/S0..1I)
JTHES
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(XGM) IKGM/SO.MIl
****** 546759.3d
733.51
33394.91
51.51
3502.90
4.70
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (K6M/SQ.MU
568657.13
789.72
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH
CALENDAR YEAR IS 1972
REGION NO
EMISSION
FOR ZONE
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
CALENDAR
YEAR
1960
T96T
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
. ,,
INDICES AND
NO. 1
LIGHT
INDEX
IGM/MILE1
0.17
0.06
0.10
0719
0.47
0754
0.87
1701
0.70
0783
0.86
0757
0.29
^702
POLLUTANT
SPECIES IS
HYDROCARBC
TOTAL EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
DUTY
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
2276.08
781.66
1382.92
"2598.00
6336.93
7192740
i!859.07
.3780.26
9561.12
11240.44
11610.34
7683.39
3914.64
330.24
HEAVY
INDEX
"IGM/RTCE1
1.41
07Z5
0.30
0.56
0.71
1.1T
1.48
1 .05
1.67
2.19
2.63
3.0T
1.61
o.ri
DUTY
EMISSIONS
133.16
321.07
516.90
665.05
922.32
752.58
988.91
1185.40
1366.58
723.89
51.19
fc.fcl
i^,ls f . \ot>f "7-11
-------
_ _CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1972
REGION NO. 5 POLLUTANT SPFCI^S IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM I960 TO 1»TJ
LENGTH OF TIME PcRIDD IS 2* HOU1S
a
i
00
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY HEAVY
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS
NO." " DENSITY
(SO. MI) (K^.Ml (KGM/SO.MI) (KGMI
DUTY UTHGR
fcMIa'ION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DcNiiTY DcNSITY
(KGM/SJ.'H) (KjMI (KGM/SO.MI)
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KG'HI (KGM/SO.MI)
-------
OF PITTSBURGH
REGION NO. 5
CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
EMISSION INDICES AND TOTAL EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR IONE NO. 1
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
LIGHT DUTY
INDEX EMISSIONS
YEAR (GM/MILE) (KGM)
HEAVY DUTY
INDEX EMISSIONS
(GM/MILE) (KGM)
i
VD
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
0.65
0.22
0.40
0.91
1.91
1.66
3.55
1.87
2.16
2.16
0.57
0.60
0.29
0.02
10083.14
3462.90
6126.40
14108.59
29477.90
25661.10
54826.77
28933.09
33322.38
33321.90
8735.88
9304.17
4446.30
_292.70
24.il 03. 11
5.63
0.99
1.18
2.25
2.35
4.72
5.93
7.97
3.13
5.52
9.27
10.45
5.31
0.39
7».«
2858.33
504.63
600.78
1140.97
1448.59
2396.74
3009. SO
4046.07
4127.58
2800.93
4707.21
5304.35
2693.36
197.80
31 8? 7. 1*
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
R?GION NO. 5 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1«>65 TO 1978
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 2* HOURS
O VEHICLE
^ CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY HEAVY DUTY OTHER TOTAL
O
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY DENSlTr DENSITY DENSITY
(SO.Mil (K&M) CKGM/SO.NI) IKGHI IKGrt/SO.MI) (KGM) 1KSM/SG.MII IKGM) IKGM/SQ.MI)
1 ****** 262102.56 351.63 35837.12 «.8.08 39*7.62 S.30 3018R7.19 405.OO
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH
REGION NO. 5
CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
POLLUTANT SPECIES IS HYDRUCARSONS
EMISSION INDICES AND TOTAL EMISSIONS BY MODEL YEAR
FOR ZONE NO. 1
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
LIGHT DUTY
CALENDAR INDEX EMISSIONS
YEAR (GM/MTLE) (KGM)
HEAVY DUTY
INDEX EMISSIONS
(GM/MILE) (KGM)
1965
1966
1967
19 6 P
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
0.13
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.33
0.30
0.27
0.26
0.30
0.30
0.11
0. 12
0.06
0.00
1983.32
681.14
1205.04
1*11.41
5102.71
4709.11
4099.64
3986.59
4578.42
4634.70
1705.45
1893.83
983.46
69.92
1.41
0.25
0.30
0.43
0.55
0.92
1.17
1.60
1.46
1.02
1.57
1.30
0.9£
0.08
713.63
125.99
149.99
220.64
280.12
466.78
592.94
811.75
739.62
517.91
794.86
914.12
481.69
39.56
-------
CITY OF PITTSBURGH CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
REGION NO. 5 POLLUTAfcT SPECIES IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM I9b5 TO 1970
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 24 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
LIGHT DUTY
AREA EMISSIONS
ZONF AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION
O NO. DENSITY
i iso.Mii CKSMi (KGH/so.Mi) IKSHI
HEAVY OLtTY
EMISSIONS EMI!
DSNSITY
OTHcR
MISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(IT.M) (KSM/SO.MI1
TIS.tff
**«*{£
50.23
6849.61
0*9.3C
0.87
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
44943.57
60.29
-------
APPENDIX D
1972 AND 1977 VMT
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area
Year.
1872
Time Period Peak Hour
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
31
17
13
31
17
13
31
17
13
17
13
17
13
31
17
IS
VMT
LD
7,044
5, 386
29,004
41,434
6, 276
1, 583
--
12. 290
26, 149
1, 234
8, 376
--
22,463
38.073
0
2, 545
--
2, 168
4, 713
0
5,222
--
7,833
13.055
1, 810
6,248
--
2.4, 993
39,051
HD
362
277
1,491
2,130
323
390
__
632
L345
372
430
--
LI 5 4
1J956
0
131
--
111
242
0
268
403
671
401
321
1,284.
2,006
Diesel
136
104
559
799
121
146
--
237
504
139
161
--
4
734
0
49
--
42
91
0
101
--
151
252
151
120
--
482
753
Area
(sq. mi.)
1. 26
2.07
3. 85
2.89
5.82
4. 23
D-l
-------
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
17
13
17
13
17
13
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
VMT
LD
0
8, 711
9.437
18, 148
0
548
--
3,367
3, 915
0
14,094
7, 928
22,022
0
6,463
__
7, 585
14. 049
0
3, 285
4. 180
1, 465
0
4,429
3, 928
8, 357
0
1,262
5, 747
7, 009
HD
0
448
485
933
0
28
173
201
0
724
--
407
1,131
0
332
--
390
722
0
169
215
384
0
228
202
430
0
65
295
360
Diesel
0
168
--
182
350
0
11
65
76
0
272
--
153
425
0
125
--
146
271
0
63
81
144
0
85
76
161
0
24
110
134
Area
(sq. mi. )
4. 54
1.96
2.55
6.99
1. 52
3.06
2.27
D-2
-------
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
31
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
VMT
LD
13,301
23,498
7, 537
44,336
0
3, 632
__
5,447
9,079
0
6, 655
7, 812
14,467
0
3, 322
6, 170
9,492
0
9,409
--
6,813
16, 222
0
1,920
--
1. 920
3,840
0
989
--
3,955
4,944
HD
684
1, 208
387
2,279
0
187
__
280
467
0
342
402
744
0
171
317
488
0
484
--
350
834
0
99
99
198
0
51
--
203
254
Diesel
256
453
145
854
0
70
__
105
175
0
128
151
279
0
64
119
183
0
182
--
131
313
0
37
--
37
74
0
19
76
95
.
Area
(sq. mi.)
3. 89
5. 51
1,28
1.21
2. 55
1.85
1. 69
D-3
-------
District
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
22
36
28
22
28
22
28
22
36
28
28
28
28
28
28
, II !
LD
0
21, 918
11,302
33, 720
1, 162
55, 151
9, 311
71,624
0
15,865
3,722
19, 587
0
8,697
--
756
9,453
10,898
14,138
4,418
29,454
0
19, 155
__
2,612
21,767
0
22,240
__
1, 171
23,411
VMT
HD
0
591
318
909
193
1,488
251
1, 932
0
428
--
100
528
0
235
20
255
294
382
119
795
0
517
..
70
587
0
600
_
32
632
Diesel
0
227
122
349
74
572
97
743
0
165
--
39
204
0
90
8
98
113
147
46
306
0
199
27
226
0
231
12
243
Area
(sq. mi. )
7. 17
24. 78
3.07
3.89
9.19
12.20
71.50
D-4
-------
District
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
28
28
28
25
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
VMT
LD
0
2,562
--
4, 362
6,924
0
2,983
_ _
3,363
6,346
0
27,311
845
28, 156
0
9, 212
3, 236
12,448
0
41,853
8, 572
50,425
0
8, 071
897
8, 968
0
18,982
._
3, 090
22,072
HD
0
69
--
118
187
0
80
91
171
0
737
23
760
0
248
87
335
0
1, 129
231
1,360
0
218
24
242
0
512
- -
83
595
Diesel
0
27
--
45
72
0
31
_
35
66
0
283
9
292
0
96
34
130
0
434
89
523
0
84
__
9
93
0
197
~ -
32
229
Area
(sq. mi.)
15.42
9.02
10. 34
5. 15
93. 15
6. 77
10.99
D-5
-------
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
36
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
36
28
28
44
28
28
VMT
LD
0
6, 920
1, 202
14, 122
17,832
5,594
11, 538
34,964
0
13,481
4, 135
17, 976
0
15, 930
4^493
20,423
0
31, 026
4. 636
35, 662
4, 315
58, 252
9, 349
71. 916
5, 297
10,026
3, 594
18, 917
HD
0
187
194
381
481
151
311
943
0
3, 733
112
485
0
430
--
121
551
0
837
__
125
962
116
1,571
252
1.939
143
270
97
510
Diesel
0
72
75
147
185
58
120
363
0
144
43
187
0
165
__
47
212
0
322
48
370
45
604
97
746
55
104
37
196
Area
(sq. mi.)
4. 79
12.82
44.99
38. 72
11.30
22.87
19.58
D-6
-------
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
44
28
28
44
28
24
28
24
44
28
24
44
28
24
28
24
VMT
LD
0
19,022
-
12.161
31,183
2,036
14,248
6,333
22, 617
13, 314
46, 207
--
18. 796
78, 317
0
17, 299
--
3,053
20, 352
3,498
39,472
--
6,996
49, 966
4, 546
32,239
4,545
41,331
0
16,453
10,520
26,973
HD
0
513
__
328
841
55
384
171
610
359
1,247
--
507
2, 113
0
467
--
82
549
94
1,065
--
189
1,348
123
870
_.
123
1,116
0
444
-
284
728
Diesel
0
197
126
323
21
148
616
235
138
479
--
195
812
0
179
--
32
211
36
410
--
73
519
47
334
47
428
0
171
_ ff*
109
280
Area
(sq. mi. )
13.01
50. 62
20.23
34.44
20.51
58. 34
8. 28
D-7
-------
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
24
44
28
24
28
24
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
VMT
LD
0
7,551
_ _
6, 971
14,522
23, 136
69,408
_ _
52,056
144, 600
0
11,435
__
12,387
23,822
2, 749
23, 522
4,277
30, 548
4,489
60, 597
9, 725
74,811
1,563
43, 772
_ _
6, 774
52,109
8, 187
37,867
5,117
51,171
HD
0
204
,. _
188
392
624
1,872
1,404
3,900
0
308
.-
334
642
45
385
70
500
73
991
159
1,223
26
716
_
111
853
134
620
--
84
838
Diesel
0
78
72
150
240
720
--
540
1, 500
0
119
129
248
17
144
26
187
28
372
_ _
60
460
10
269
__
42
321
50
232
31
313
Area
(sq. mi.)
11. 38
25. 78
13.64
25.13
189.39
339.42
239.00
D-8
-------
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
30
30
30
30
30
30
50
30
30
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
VMT
LD
0
19, 310
2,146
21,456
0
38,467
3,345
41,812
0
36, 547
3, 178
39, 725
28,466
92,889
28.466
149,821
0
14,410
_-_
3.163
17, 573
4,564
16,734
4.057
25,355
6,626
73,832
14,199
94,657
HD
0
840
93
933
0
1,673
145
1,818
0
1,589
138
1, 727
798
2,604
--
798
4,200
0
404
-_
R9
493
128
469
114
711
186
2,070
398
2,654
Diesel
0
328
37
365
0
653
57
710
0
620
54
674
296
965
296
1,557
0
150
33
183
47
174
42
263
69
767
147
983
,
Area
{sq. mi.)
38.23
251.77
375. 25
91.09
20. 50
17.29
233. 97
D-9
-------
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
30
30
VMT
LD
16,433
76,687
- -
16.433
109,553
50,046
30, 797
15,399
96,242
22,494
60, 635
14, 670
97, 799
2, 241
64, 241
8. 217
74, 699
20, 934
67, 787
10, 966
99, 687
5, 288
19, 976
4, 113
29. 377
0
39, 511
13, 170
52,681
HD
461
2, 150
--
461
3,072
1,403
864
432
2,699
463
1,248
.
302
2,013
46
1, 322
169
1,537
431
1,395
226
2,052
109
411
85
605
0
1,672
558
2,230
Diesel
171
796
--
171
1,138
520
320
160
1,000
185
500
_ _
121
806
18
529
68
615
173
558
90
821
44
164
34
242
0
627
209
836
Area
(sq. mi.)
513.30
173.83
62. 34
344. 91
431. 11
24.48
53.68
D-10
-------
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
30
30
30
30
30
30
VMT
LD
4,830
46, 918
17.249
fift QA7
0 '
42,808
_ _
7, 554
50,362
0
15,771
2 783
18,554
TOTAL
2,654,827
HD
204
1,986
730
>. Q?n
' 0
1,812
__
320
2,132
0
668
1 1 R
786
TOTAL
81,069
Diesel
77
745
274
1.096
0
680
__
120
800
0
251
44.
295
TOTAL
0,833
Area
(sq. mi.)
4fi flfl
243.21
94.61
VMT
Total for
All Vehicle
Types
,766,729
D-U
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Ar*a Pittsburgh
Year 1972
Time Period__12_hour
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(niph)
39
19
17
39
19
1 7
39
19
__
17
19
17
19
17
39
19
17
VMT
LD
52,828
40,398
--
217.527
_S 1 0 7 5 3
47, 069
56, 876
--
92, 178
196, 123
54, 253
62, 819
168,469
285, 541
0
19,090
16,262
35. 352
0
39, 161
58, 744
97, 905
58, 578
46,862
187,450
292,890
HD
2,715
2,076
--
11.179
1 f>97f)
2,419
2,923
--
4,739
10,081
£789
3,228
_
&658
14675
0
981
836
1,817
0
2,012
3.019
5,031
3,011
2,408
9,633
15,052
Diesel
1,018
779
--
4193
5,990
907
1,096
--
1777
3,780
1,046
1,211
_..
3,247
5504
0
368
314
682
0
755
1,132
1,887
1,129
903
3,613
5,645
Area
(sq, mi.)
1.26
2.07
3.85
2.89
5.82
4.23
D-12
-------
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
19
17
19
17
19
17
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
0
65,333
70778
136. Ill
0
4,112
25,256
29. 368
0
105,703
59.459
1KB 1 fi2
0
48,469
56,898
105.367
0
24, 635
31, 352
55, 987
0
33, 216
--
29,456
62.672
0
9462
43, 100
52,562
HD
0
3,358
3,638
6.996
0
212
1298
1.510
0
5,432
3JD58
8.4RR
0
2492
__
£924
5416
0
1,266
1,611
2,877
0
1,707
1,514
a22i
0
486
2215
2,701
Diesel
0
}259
1,364
2623
0
80
487
567
0
2,037
LI 46
31 R3
0
934
__
1097
2.031
0
475
__
605
1,080
0
641
568
1209
0
182
832
1,014
Area
(sq. mi. )
4 54
1 96
51 FIR
6. 99
<
1.52
3.06
2. 27
D-13
-------
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
99, 758
176,238
56, 528
332, 524
0
27, 235
40,853
68,083
0
49, 910
58, 589
108, 439
0
24,917
46,274
71. 191
HD
5,127
9057
__
2,906
17,090
0
1,400
2,099
3,499
0
2,565
3,011
5,576
0
1,280
2,379
3.659
Freeway j 0 0
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
22
18
70, 565 I 3,626
i
51,099 2,627
121,664 6,253
22
0 0
14,3991 740
18 14, 399 i 740
Diesel
1922
5397
_ _
1090
6409
0
525
788
1,313
0
962
1,130
2.092
0
480
892
1,372
0
1,360
985
2,345
0
278
278
TOTAL ; 28,798] L480 556
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
'0 i 0 0
22 1 7417 ' 381 f 143
Local 18 i 29,661; 1,524
TOTAL
37,078' 1,905 j
572
715
Area
(eq. mi.)
3.89
5. 51
1.28
1.21
2. 55
1.85
1.69
D-14
-------
.District
21
22
23
24
'
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Loc
-------
District
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
19,212
_.
32, 713
51,925
0
22,371
-.
25,226
47,597
0
204, 836
6335
211. 171
0
69,086
24, 273
93, 359
0
313, 900
64, 293
378, 193
0
60, 534
6726
67, 260
0
142, 367
23, 176
165,543
HD
0
518
_.
882
1,400
0
603
__
680
1,283
0
5,525
171
5696
0
1,863
655
2.518
0
8466
1,734
10,200
0
1,633
182
1,815
0
3,840
625
4,465
Diesel
0
200
_ -
339
539
0
232
_ _
262
494
0
2,125
66
2191
0
716
252
968
0
3,257
657
3,924
0
628
70
698
0
1,477
240
1,717
Area
(sq. mi. )
15.42
9.02
10.34
5.15
93.15
6. 77
10.99
D-16
-------
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
45
36
36
54
36
36
VMT
LD
0
51,897
«
54.015
105,912
133,741
41,958
86. 537
262,236
0
103,811
31.009
134,820
0
119,474
33, 698
153,172
0
232, 691
34, 770
267,461
32, 363
436,893
70,119
539,375
39, 725
75,194
__
26,957
141,876
HD
0
1400
__
1457
2,857
3,607
1,132
2334
7,073
0
2,800
836
3,636
0
3,222
909
4,131
0
6276
__
938
7,214
873
H783
-
;892
14548
1,072
2P28
_ _
727.
3827
Diesel
0
539
560
1,099
1388
'435
898
2,721
0
1,077
322
L399
0
1239
350
1,589
0
2,414
__
361
2,775
336
4£32
_ _
728
5596
413
780
280
1,473
Area
(sq. mi.)
4. 79
12.82
44. 99
38.72
11. 30
22.87
19. 58
D-17
-------
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
35
54
36
36
54
36
30
36
30
54
36
30
54
35
30
36
30
VMT
LD
0
142,661
91, 209
233,870
15,266
106,861
47,494
169,621
99,854
346,553
140,971
587. 378
0
129, 737
22,895
152,632
26, 232
296,043
52,464
374, 739
34,098
241, 789
34.098
309, 985
0
123,397
78, 893
202, 290
HD
0
3,848
__
2,460
asos
412
2,882
__
1,281
4,575
2,6,93
9,347
_ ^
?802
15,842
0
3,499
617
4,116
707
7,985
1,415
10,107
920
6,521
920
8,361
0
3,328
2,128
5,456
Diesel
0
1,480
_ _
947
2,427
158
1,109
__
493
1,760
1,036
3595
j
__
1,463
6.094
0
1,346
_ _
238
1,584
272
ao?i
545
3,888
354
2,508
354
3,216
0
1,280
818
2,098
Area
(sq. mi.)
13.01
50.62
20. 23
34.44
20.51
58.34
8.28
D-18
-------
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
ITcicility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
30
54
35
30
36
30
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
56, 636
52,279
108, 915
173, 520
520, 559
390,420
;084, 499
0
85, 760
92,906
178 666
20,621
176,417
32,076
229, 114
33,665
454,474
72, 940
561.079
11,725
328, 293
50,807
390.825
61,406
284, 003
--
38, 379
383, 788
HD
0
1.528
1410
2,938
4,680
14040
10,530
29,250
0
2,313
2506
4,819
338
2,886
525
3749
551
7436
1193
9180
192
5,371
831
6394
1,004
4,646
__
628
6,278
Diesel
0
587
542
1.129
1,800
5,400
4,050
H250
0
890
964
1854
127
1,082
_
197
1,406
206
2,789
448
3.443
72
2,014
312
239S
377
1,742
--
236
2,355
Area
(sq. mi.
11. 38
25.78
13 64
25. 13
189.39
339.42
239.00
D-19
-------
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL,
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
38
37
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
144,821
16, 091
160,912
0
288,503
25,087
313, 590
0
274, 100
23,835
297,935
213,494
696,665
213,494
J,123r 653
0
108,078
23, 725
131,803
34,228
125,501
30.425
190, 154
49, 695
553, 742
106,490
709, 927
HD
0
6,296
--
700
6,996
0
12,544
1091
13,635
0
11,918
__
1,037
12,955
§986
19532
5,986
31-504
0
3,030
665
3JS95
960
3,519
853
5,332
1,394
15,526
2J986
19J906
Diesel
0
2,457
--
273
2,730
0
4,895
425
5,320
0
4,651
__
404
5,055
2,217
7,235
2,217
11,669
0
1,122
247
1.369
356
1,304
316
1,976
516
5,750
U06
7,372
Area
(sq. mi.)
38.23
251.77
375.25
91.09
20.50
17. 29
233. 97
D-20
-------
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
123,247
575, 154
123,247
821, 648
375, 343
230, 980
115,490
721, 813
168, 702
454, 765
__
110,024
733,491
16,807
481,805
61, 626
560.238
157,007
508,406
--
82,242
747, 655
39,658
149,820
--
30,845
220,323
0
296,333
--
98, 777
395, 110
HD
3,455
16126
3,455
23P36
10,523
6,476
3,238
20,237
3,471
9,357
_ _
2,264
15,092
346
9,914
--
1268
11.528
3230
10,461
--
1,692
15,383
816
3083
--
635
4,534
0
12,543
4.181
16,724
Diesel
1,280
5,972
1,280
8,532
3,898
2,399
LI 99
7,496
1,388
3,743
_ _
905
6,036
138
3,966
--
507
4611
1,292
4.L84
--
676
6,152
326
;233
--
254
1,813
0
4,704
1568
6,272
.
Area
(sq. mi.)
513. 30
173.83
62.34
344.91
431.11
24.48
53.68
D-21
-------
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
36,224
351,887
_.
129,370
517,481
0
321,061
56,658
377, 719
0
118,284
20,873
139, 157
TOTAL
9,911,154
HD
1,533
14895
5,476
21,904
0
13,590
_
2,399
15,989
0
5,007
884
5,891
TOTAL
607,954
Diesel
575
5,586
_ -
2.054
8,215
0
5,096
899
5,995
0
1,878
332
2,210
TOTAL
31, 169
Area
(aq. mi.)
46.99
243.21
94.61
VMT
Total for
All Vehicle
Types
0,750,277
D-22
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Pittsburgh
Y,e ar 1972
Time Period 24-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
19
17
39
19
17
39
19
17
19
17
19
17
39
19
17
VMT
LD
70,437
53,864
--
290,036
414,337
62,759
75,834
122,904
261,497
72,337
83,758
--
224,625
380,720
0
25,453
--
21,683
47, 136
0
52,215
78,325
130,540
78, 104
62,483
--
249,933
390,520
HD
3,620
2,768
--
14,905
21,293
3,225
3,897
6,316
13,438
3,718
4,304
--
11,544
19,566
0
1,308
--
1, 114
2,422
0
2,683
--
4,025
6,708
4,014
3,211
--
12,844
20,069
Diesel
1,357
1,038
--
5,590
7,985
1,209
1,461
__
2,369
5,039
1,394
1,614
--
4,329
7,337
0
491
--
418
909
0
1,006
--
1,509
2,515
1,505
1,204
--
4,817
7,526
Area
(sq. mi.)
1.26
2.07
3.85
2.89
5.82
4.23
D-23
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
19
17
19
17
19
17
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
0
87, 110
--
94,370
181,480
0
5,482
--
33,674
39, 156
0
140,937
--
79,278
220,215
0
64,625
--
75,864
140,489
0
32,846
--
41,803
74,649
0
44, 288
--
39,275
83,563
0
12,615
__
57,467
70,082
HD
0
4,477
--
4,850
9,327
0
282
--
1,731
2,013
0
7, 243
--
4,074
11,317
0
3,322
--
3,899
7,221
0
1,688
--
2,148
3.836
0
2,276
--
2,018
4,294
0
648
2.953
3,601
Diesel
0
1,679
--
1,819
3,498
0
106
--
649
755
0
2,716
--
1,528
4,244
0
1,245
--
1,462
2,707
0
633
--
806
1,439
0
854
--
757
1,611
0
243
_ _
1, 108
1,351
Area
(sq. mi.)
4.54
1.96
2,55
6.99
1.52
3.06
2.27
D-24
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
133,010
234,984
- _
75,371
443,365
0
36,313
--
54, 470
90,783
0
66,546
--
78, 118
144, 664
0
33,222
--
61,699
94,921
0
94, 087
--
68, 132
162,219
0
19, 198
--
19, 199
38,397
0
9, 889
--
39,548
49,437
HD
6,836
12,076
_ _
3,874
22,786
0
1,866
--
2,799
4,665
0
3,420
--
4,015
7,435
0
1,707
__
3,172
4,879
0
4,835
--
3,502
8,337
0
987
--
987
1,974
0
508
--
2,032
2,540
Diesel
2,563
4,529
*m mm
1,453
8,545
0
700
_-
1,050
1,750
0
1,282
__
1,506
2,788
0
640
--
1, 189
1, 829
0
1,813
--
1,313
3, 126
0
370
--
370
740
0
190
--
762
952
Area
(sq. mi.)
3.89
5.51
1.28
1.21
2.55
1.85
1.69
D-25
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
28
45
36
28
36
28
36
23
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
219, 175
--
118,019
337, 194
71, 624
551,509
--
93, 113
716,246
0
158, 652
--
37,215
195, 867
0
86, 968
--
7,563
94,531
108,978
141,377
--
44, 180
294,535
0
191,547
26, 121
217,668
0
222,397
--
11,705
234, 102
HD
0
5,911
--
3, 183
9,094
1,932
14,875
--
2,511
19,318
0
4,279
--
1,004
5,283
0
2,346
--
204
2,550
2, 939
3, 813
--
1, 192
7,944
0
5, 166
_
704
5,870
0
5,998
--
316
6,314
Diesel
0
2,273
--
1,224
3,497
743
5,721
--
966
7,430
0
1,646
--
386
2,032
0
902
--
78
980
1,130
1,467
--
458
3,055
0
1,987
271
2,258
0
2,307
--
122
2,429
Area
(sq. mi.)
7. 17
24.78
3.07
3.89
9. 19
12.20
71.50
D-26
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
28
29
30
31
32
S3
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
.Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
25, 616
--
43, 617
69, 233
0
29,828
--
33,634
63,462
0
273, 114
--
8,447
281,561
0
92, 115
--
32,364
124,479
0
418,533
--
85,724
504, 257
0
80,712
--
8,968
89,680
0
189,822
--
30,901
220,723
HD
0
691
--
1, 176
1,867
0
804
--
907
1,711
0
7,366
--
228
7,594
0
2,484
--
873
3,357
0
11,288
--
2,312
13,600
0
2, 177
--
242
2,419
0
5, 120
--
833
5,953
Diesel
0
266
452
718
0
309
--
349
658
0
2,833
--
88
2,921
0
955
--
336
1, 291
0
4,342
--
889
5,231
0
837
--
93
930
0
1,969
--
320
2,289
Area
(sq. mi.)
15.42
9.02
10.34
5. 15
93. 15
6.77
10.99
D-27
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
45
36
36
54
36
36
VMT
LD
0
69, 196
--
72,020
141,216
178,321
55,944
--
115,383
349,648
0
138,414
--
41,345
179,759
0
159,299
__
44, 930
204,229
0
310,255
--
46,360
356,615
43,151
582, 524
93,492
719, 167
52,967
100, 258
--
35,942
189, 167
HD
0
1,866
--
1,942
3,808
4,809
1,509
--
3, 112
9,430
0
3,733
--
1,115
4,848
0
4,296
--
1,212
5,508
0
8,368
--
1,250
9,618
1,164
15,711
__
2,522
19,397
1,429
2,704
--
969
5,102
Diesel
0
718
--
747
1,465
1,850
580
--
1,197
3, 627
0
1,436
--
429
1,865
0
1,652
-_
466
2,118
0
3,218
--
481
3,699
448
6,043
970
7,461
550
1,040
--
373
1,963
Area
(sq. mi.)
4.79
12.82
44.99
38.72
11.30
22.87
19.58
D-28
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
' Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
54
36
36
54
36
30
36
30
54
36
30
54
36
30
36
30
VMT
LD
0
190,215
121,612
311,827
20,355
142,481
--
63,325
226, 161
133,139
462,071
__
187,961
783, 171
0
172,982
--
30,526
203,508
34,976
394,724
--
69,952
499, 652
45,464
322,385
--
45,464
413,313
0
164,529
--
105,191
269,720
HD
0
5, 130
_
3,280
8,410
549
3,843
--
1,708
6,100
3,591
12,463
--
5,069
21, 123
0
4,665
--
823
5,488
943
10,646
__
1,887
13,476
1,226
8,695
--
1,226
11,147
0
4,437
--
2,837
7,274
Diesel
0
1,973
1,262
3,235
211
1,478
__
657
2,346
1,381
4,793
__
1,950
8,124
0
1,794
--
317
2, 111
363
4,095
--
726
5, 184
472
3,344
472
4,288
0
1,707
1,091
2,798
Area
(sq. mi.)
13.01
50.62
20.23
34.44
20. 51
58.34
8.28
D-29
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
30
54
36
30
36
30
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
75,514
--
69,705
145,219
231,360
694,079
__
520,560
1,445,999
0
114,346
--
123,874
238, 220
27,494
235, 222
__
42,768
305,484
44, 886
605,965
--
97,253
748, 104
15,633
437,724
--
67,743
521, 100
81,874
378,671
--
51, 172
511,717
HD
0
2,037
--
1, 880
3,917
6,240
18,720
--
14,040
39,000
0
3,084
--
3,341
6,425
450
3,848
--
700
4,998
734
9,914
--
1,591
12,239
256
7, 161
--
1, 108
8,525
1,339
6, 195
__
837
8,371
Diesel
0
783
--
723
1,506
2,400
7,200
--
5,400
15,000
0
1,186
--
1, 285
2,471
169
1,443
--
262
1,874
275
3,718
--
597
4,590
96
2,685
--
416
3, 197
502
2,323
314
3, 139
Area
(sq. mi.)
11.38
25.78
13.64
25.13
189.39
339.42
239.00
D-30
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
38
37
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
193,095
21,455
214,550
0
384,671
33,449
418, 1-20
0
365,467
--
31,780
397,247
284,658
928,886
--
284,659
,498,203
0
144, 104
--
31,633
175,737
45,637
167,335
--
40,566
253,538
66,260
738,323
-~
141,986
946,569
HD
0
8,395
__
933
9,328
0
16,725
__
1,454
18,179
0
15,890
--
1,382
17,272
7,981
26,043
--
7,981
42,005
0
4,040
--
887
4,927
1,280
4,692
--
1,137
7, 109
1,858
20,701
--
3,981
26,540
Diesel
0
3,276
_ _
364
3,640
0
6,527
567
7,094
0
6,201
--
539
6,740
2,956
9,646
--
2,956
15,558
-o
1,496
--
329
1,825
474
1,738
--
421
2,633
688
7,667
--
1,474
9,829
Area
(sq. mi.)
38.23
251.77
375. 25
91.09
20.50
17. 29
233. 97
D-31
-------
Pittsburgh - 1Q72 - 24-Hour
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
164,329
766, 872
--
164,329
1,095,530
500,457
307,973
--
153,987
962,417
224,936
606,353
--
146,698
977, 987
22,409
642,407
--
82,168
746,984
209,343
677,874
--
109,656
996, 873
52,877
199,760
--
41,126
293,763
0
395, 110
--
131,702
526,812
HD
4,607
21, 501
__
4,607
30,715
14,031
8,635
--
4,317
26,983
4,628
12,476
--
3,018
20, 122
461
13, 218
__
1,691
15,370
4,307
13,948
--
2,256
20,511
1,088
4, 110
--
846
6,044
0
16,724
5,575
22,299
Diesel
1,706
7,.963
__
1,706
11,375
5, 197
3,198
--
1,599
9,994
1,851
4,990
--
1,207
8,048
184
5,287
--
676
6,147
1,723
5,579
--
902
8,204
435
1,644
--
338
2,417
0
6,272
_. _
2,091
8,363
Area
(sq. mi.)
513.30
173.83
62.34
344.91
431. 11
24.48
53.68
D-32
-------
Pittsburgh - 1972 - 24-Hour
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
48, 298
469, 182
--
172,493
689,973
0
428,081
75, 544
503, 625
0
157,712
--
27,830
185,542
TOTAL
26,548,174
HD
2,044
19,860
--
7,301
29,205
0
18, 120
_ _
3,198
21,318
0
6,676
--
1, 178
7,854
TOTAL
810,580
Diesel
766
7,448
2,738
10,952
0
6,795
1, 199
7,994
0
2,504
--
442
2.946
TOT A L
308, 185
Area
(sq. mi.)
46.99
243. 21
94.61
VMT
Total for
All Vehide
Types
7, 666,939
D-33
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan *~" Pittsburgh
Year.
Time
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
31
17
13
31
17
13
31
17
13
17
13
17
13
31
17
13
VMT
LD
7,663
5, 860
-
31. 553
45,076
6,738
8, 142
_
1-3, 196
28,076
7,691
8, 905
-
23,882
40,478
0
2, 694
-
2, 295
4,989
0
5,207
_
7, 811
13, 018
8, 414
6,732
-
26, 926
42,072
HD
394
301
-
1. 622
2, 317
346
418
_
678
1,442
395
458
-
1,227
2,080
0
139
-
118
257
0
268
_
401
669
432
346
-
1,384
2, 162
Diesel
148
113
-
608
869
130
157
_
254
541
148
172
-
460
780
0
52
-
44
96
0
100
151
251
162
130
-
519
811
Area
(sq. mi.)
l". 26
2.07
3.85
2.89
5.82
4.23
D-34
-------
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collectoi
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
17
13
17
13
17
13
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
VMT
LD
o
9,323
_
10, 100
19,423
0
596
-
3,661
4', 257
0
15,222
8, 563
23,785
0
6, 878
-
8,074
14,952
0
3,351
-
4,265
7,616
0
4,367
-
3,873
8,240
0
1, 237
-
5,635
6,872
HD
0
479
519
998
0
31
-
188
219
0
782
440
1,222
0
354
-
415
Z69
0
172
-
219
391
0
225
-
199
424
0
64
-
290
354
Diesel
0
180
195
375
0
12
_
71
83
0
293
165
458
0
133
-
156
289
0
65
-
82
147
0'
84
-
75
159
0
24
-
109
133
Area
(sq. mi.)
4.54
1.96
2.55
6.99
1.52
3.06
2.27
D-35
-------
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
31
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
18
14
VMT
LD
14,308
25,278
-
8, 108
47,694
0
3, 596
-
5, 394
8, 990
0
8,626
-
10, 126
18,752
0
3,660
-
6,798
10,458
0
9,886
-
7,159
17,045
0
1,780
-
1,780
3.561
0
1,205
-
4,817
6,022
HD
735
1, 299
-
417
2,451
0
185
-
277
462
0
443
-
520
963
0
188
-
350
538
0
509
-
369
878
0
92
-
92
184
0
62
-
248
310
Diesel
276
487
-
156
919
0
69
-
104
173
0
166
-
195
361
0
71
-
131
202
0
191
-
138
329
0
34
-
34
68
0
23
_
93
116
Area
(sq. mi.)
3. 89
5.51
1.23
1.21
2.55
1.85
1.69__
D-36
-------
District
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
22
36
28
22
28
22
28
22
36
28
28
28
28
28
28
VMT
LD
0
25,513
-
13,738
39,251
7,697
59,270
-
10, 007
76,974
0
17,483
_
4, 101
21, 584
0
11, 108
-
966
12,074
13,692
17,763
-
5,551
37,006
0
23,425
-
3, 195
26, 620
0
27,401
-
1,442
28, 843
HD
0
688
-
371
1,059
208
1,599
-
270
2,077
0
472
_
111
583
0
300
-
26
326
369
480
-
150
999
0
632
-
86
718
0
739
-
39
778
Diesel
0
265
-
143
408
80
615
104
799
0
181
_
43
224
0
115
-
10
125
142
184
-
58
384
0
243
-
33
276
0
284
-
15
299
Area
{sq. mi. )
7. 17
24. 78
3.07
3.89
9. 19
12.20
71. 50
D-37
-------
District
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
VMT
LD
0
3,063
-
5,216
8,279
0
3,427
-
3,864
7,291
0
30,962
-
958
31..920
0
9,983
-
3,507
13, 490
0
52,031
_
10,657
62,688
0
10, 125
-
1, 125
11,250
0
20,023
-
3,260
23, 283
HD
0
83
-
141
224
0
92
-
104
196
0
835
-
26
861
0
269
-
95
364
0
1, 403
-
287
1, 690
0
273
_
30
303
0
540
_
88
628
Diesel
0
32
-
54
86
0
36
-
40
76
0
321
-
10
331
0
104
-
36
140
0
540
-
Ill
651
0
105
_
12
117
0
208
_
34
242
Area
(sq. mi.)
15.42
9.02
10.34
5. 15
93. 15
6. 77
10.09
D-38
-------
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
36
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
28
36
28
28
44
28
28
VMT
LD
0
7,138
_
7,429
14, 567
23,719
7,441
_
15, 347
46, 507
0
18, 565
-
5,546
24, 111
0
18,577
-
5,240
23,817
0
36,009
-
5,381
41,390
4,825
65,131
-
10,453
80, 409
6, 627
12, 544
-
4,497
23,668
HD
0
193
_
200
393
640
201
_
414
1,255
0
501
-
150
651
0
501
-
141
642
0
971
-
145
1, 116
130
1,757
-
282
2,169
179
338
-
121
638
Diesel
n
74
_
77
151
246
77
_
159
482
0
193
-
58
251
0
193
-
54
247
0
374
-
56
430
50
676
-
109
835
69
130
-
47
246
Area
(sq. mi. )
4 79
12.82
44.99
38. 72
11.30
22.87
19.58
D-39
-------
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL,
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
28
44
28
28
44
28
24
28
24
44
28
24
44
28
24
28
24
VMT
LD
0
22, 179
-
14, 180
36, 359
2,732
19, 122
_
8,499
30,353
15,942
55, 328
-
22,506
93,776
0
19,637
-
3,465
23, 102
3,881
43,800
-
7,762
55,443
5, 187
36,780
-
5, 187
47, 154
0
17,716
-
11, 327
29,043
HD
0
598
-
382
980
74
516
_
229
819
430
1,492
-
607
2,529
0
530
-
93
623
105
1, 181
-
209
1, 495
140
992
-
140
1,272
0
478
-
306
784
Diesel
0
230
-
147
377
28
198
-
88
314
165
574
-
234
973
0
204
-
36
240
40
454
-
81
575
54
382
-
54
490
0
184
-
118
302
Area
(sq. mi.)
13.01
50.62
20.23
34.44
20.51
58.34
8.28
D-40
-------
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
28
24
44
28
24
28
24
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
VMT
LD
0
8,369
-
7,725
16,094
26,008
78,023
58,517
162,548
0
12, 337
-
13,365
25,702
2,896
24, 774
-
4, 505
32, 175
5, 296
71,496
_
11,475
88, 267
1, 817
50, 862
~
7, 871
60, 550
9,420
43,569
5,888
58,877
HD
0
226
-
208
434
702
2, 104
I, 578
4, 384
0
333
-
361
694
47
405
-
74
526
87
1, 170
-
188
1,445
30
832
"
129
991
154
713
96
963
Diesel
0
87
-
80
167
270
809
607
1,686
0
128
-
139
267
18
152
-
28
198
32
439
-
70
541
11
312
48
371
58
268
36
362
Area
(sq. mi.)
11.38
25 78
13.64
25.13
189. 39
339. 42
239. 00
D-41
-------
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
30
30
30
30
30
30
50
30
30
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
VMT
LD
0
22, 189
-
2,465
24, 654
0
46,706
-
4,061
50,767
0
42,908
-
3.731
46,639
33,037
107,805
-
33,037
173,879
0
15,465
-
3,395
18, 860
4, 872
17, 865
_
4, 331
27, 068
17, 828
87, 223
-
16,774
111, 825
HD
0
965
-
107
1,072
0
2, 031
-
177
2, 208
0
1,866
-
162
2,028
926
3,023
-
926
4,875
0
434
-
95
529
137
501
_
121
759
220
2,446
_
470
3, 136
Diesel
0
377
-
42
419
0
793
-
69
862
0
728
-
63
791
343
1, 120
-
343
1,806
0
161
-
35
196
51
186
_
45
282
81
906
_
174
1, 161
Area
(sq. mi.)
38.23
251.77
375.25
91.09
20. 50
17.29
233.97
D-42
-------
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
30
30
50
20
30
30
30
VMT
LD
20, 020
93,427
-
20,020
133,467
57, 929
35,648
-
17, 824
111,401
25,983
70,041
-
16,945
112,969
2,834
81,233
_
10, 390
94, 457
25, 117
81,330
-
13, 156
119, 603
5,704
21, 548
-
4,436
31,688
0
44, 933
-
14, 977
59,910
HD
561
2, 619
-
561
3,741
1, 624
1,000
-
500
3, 124
535
1,441
-
349
2,325
58
1,671
_
214
1,943
517
1,673
-
271
2,461
117
443
-
91
651
0
1,902
-
634
2,536
Diesel
208
970
-
208
1,386
602
370
-
185
1, 157
214
576
-
140
930
23
669
_
86
778
207
670
-
108
985
47
177
-
37
261
0
713
-
238
951
(sq. mi. )
513. 30
173. 83
62. 34
344.91
431. 11
24.48
53. 68
D-43
-------
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
30
30
30
30
30
30
VMT
LD
5, 310
51,587
-
18,966
75,863
0
52,460
-
9,258
61,718
0
17,930
.
3, 164
21,094
TOTAL
3,061,703
HD
225
2, 184
-
803
3,212
0
2,221
-
392
2,613
0
759
_
134
893
TOTAL
92,805
Diesel
84
819
-
301
1,204
0
833
-
147
980
0
285
_
50
335
TOTAL
35,307
Area
(sq. mi. )
46. 99
243.21
94.61
VMT
Total for
All Vehicle
Types
3,189,815
D-44
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Pittsburgh
Year
1977
Time Period 12-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
19
17
39
19
17
39
19
17
19
17
19
17
39
19
17
VMT
LD
57,470
43, 949
-
236,644
338, 063
50, 537
61, 066
-
98,969
210, 572
57,682
66, 789
-
179, 115
303,586
0
20, 208
-
17,215
37,423
0
39, 053
-
58,581
97, 634
63, 108
50,486
201, 946
315, 540
HD
2, 954
2, 258
-
12, 161
17,373
2,597
3, 138
-
5, 086
10,821
2,965
3,432
-
9,206
15,603
0
1,039
-
884
1, 923
0
2, 007
-
3, Oil
5, 018
3, 243
2, 594
_
10,379
16, 216
Diesel
1, 107
847
-
4,562
6, 516
974
1, 177
-
1, 907
4,058
1, 112
I, 287
-
3, 452
5, 851
0
390
-
332
722
0
752
-
1, 129
1,881
1, 216
973
"
3,893
6, 082
Area
(sq. mi.)
1.26
2. 07
3.85
2.89
5.82
4. 23
D-45
-------
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mphj
19
17
19
17
19
17
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
0
69, 924
-
75,752
145,676
0
4,469
-
27,455
31, 924
0
114, 165
-
64,219
178,384
0
51, 584
-
60,556
112, 140
0
25, 132
-
31, 986
57, 118
0
32, 751
29, 045
61,796
0
9, 278
-
42,266
51, 544
HD
0
3, 594
-
3,893
7,487
0
230
-
1,411
1,641
0
5, 867
-
3,300
9, 167
0
2, 651
-
3, 113
5, 764
0
1, 292
-
1,643
2, 935
0
1,683
1,493
3, 176
0
476
-
2, 172
2,648
Diesel
0
1,348
-
1,460
2, 808
0
86
-
530
616
0
2, 200
-
1,238
3,438
0
994
_
1, 167
2, 161
0
485
-
617
1,102
0
632
560
1, 192
0
179
-
815
994
Area
(sq. mi.)
4. 54
1.96
2.55
6.99
1.52
3.06
2.27
D-46
-------
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
107,312
189, 585
-
60, 809
357,706
0
26, 971
-
40, 457
67,428
0
64,695
~
75, 945
140, 640
0
27,453
-
50, 986
78, 439
0
74, 144
""
53, 691
127,835
0
13,352
-
13,353
26,705
0
9, 035
-
36, 130
45, 165
HD
5,516
9,743
_
3,125
18,384
0
1,386
-
2,079
3,465
0
3,325
~
3,903
7,228
0
1,411
-
2, 621
4,032
0
3, 810
*
2,760
6,570
0
686
-
687
1,373
0
464
"
1,856
2,320
Diesel
2, 068
3, 654
_
1, 172
6,894
0
520
-
780
1,300
0
1. 247
""
1,464
2,711
0
529
-
983
1,512
0
1,429
"
1, 035
2,464
0
257
-
257
514
0
173
697
870
Area
(sq. mi.)
3.89
5.51
1.28
1.21
2.55
1.85
1.69
D-47
-------
District
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
28
45
36
28
36
28
36
28
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
191, 345
-
103, 034
294,379
57,730
444,524
-
75, 050
577,304
0
131, 121
-
30,758
161, 879
0
83, 307
-
7,245
90,552
102,691
133,221
-
41,631
277,543
0
175, 688
""
23, 958
199,646
0
205, 507
-
10,816
216,323
HD
0
5, 161
_
2, 779
7, 940
1, 557
11, 990
-
2,024
15,571
0
3,537
-
830
4,367
0
2, 247
-
196
2,443
2,770
3, 593
-
1, 124
7,487
0
4, 739
~
646
5,385
0
5,543
-
292
5, 835
Diesel
0
1, 985
-
1, 069
3,054
599
4, 611
-
779
5, 989
0
1,361
-
319
1,680
0
864
-
75
939
1,065
1,382
-
431
2,878
0
1, 822
"
248
2,070
0
2, 132
-
113
2,245
Area
(sq. mi.)
7. 17
24.78
3.07
3.89
9.19
12.20
71.50
D-48
-------
District
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
22,976
..
39, 122
62, 098
0
25,702
-
28,982
54, 684
0
232, 214
-
1, 182
239, 396
0
74, 870
_
26, 306
101. 176
0
390, 229
-
79,927
470, 156
0
75,936
8,438
84, 374
0
150, 171
-
24, 446
174, 617
HD
0
620
1,055
1,675
0
693
-
782
1,475
0
6, 263
-
194
6,457
0
2,019
_
710
2,729
0
10, 525
-
2, 156
12,681
0
2,048
-
228
2,276
0
4,050
-
659
4,709
Diesel
0
239
_
406
645
0
266
-
301
567
0
2,408
-
75
2,483
0
776
_
273
1,049
0
4,049
-
829
4,878
0
788
-
88
876
0
1, 558
-
254
1, 812
Area
(sq. mi.)
15.42
9.02
10. 34
5. 15
93. 15
6.77
10. 99
D-49
-------
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
45
36
36
54
36
36
VMT
LD
0
53,536
-
55,721
109,257
177, 890
55, 809
-
115, 104
348. 803
0
139, 240
_
41,591
180,831
0
139,328
-
39,297
178, 625
0
270,070
-
40, 355
310,425
36, 185
488, 480
_
78, 398
603, 063
49,701
94,076
-
33,727
177, 504
HD
0
1,444
-
1, 502
2,946
4,797
1,506
-
3, 104
9.407
0
3,755
_
1, 122
4,877
0
3,758
-
1,060
4,818
0
7,284
-
1,088
8, 372
976
13, 175
_
2, 115
16, 266
1, 341
2, 537
-
909
4,787
Diesel
0
556
-
578
1, 134
1,846
578
-
1, 194
3.618
0
1,445
_
431
1,876
0
1,445
-
407
1,852
0
2,801
-
419
3,220
376
5,068
_
814
6,258
516
976
-
350
1,842
Area
(sq. mi.)
4.79
12. 82
44.99
38. 72
11. 30
22. 87
19.58
D-50
-------
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
54
36
36
54
36
30
36
30
54
36
30
54
36
30
36
30
VMT
LD
0
166,343
-
106,350
272,693
20,489
43,417
-
63,741
227,647
119,564
414,959
_
168,797
703, 320
0
147, 279
-
25,991
173,270
29, 108
328,503
-
58,217
415, 828
38,900
275,843
-
38.900
353,643
0
132,873
-
84,952
217,825
HD
0
4,487
_
2,868
7,355
553
3,369
-
1,719
6,141
3,225
11, 192
_.
4,553
18,970
0
3,972
-
701
4,673
785
8, 860
-
1,571
11,216
1,049
7,440
-
1,049
9,538
0
3,584
-
2,291
5,875
Diesel
0
1,726
_
1,103
2,829
212
1,488
-
662
2,362
1,241
4,304
-
1,751
7,296
0
1,527
-
270
1,797
302
3,408
-
605
4,315
404
2,861
-
404
3,669
0
1,379
-
881
2, 260
Area
(sq. mi.)
13.01
50.62
20,23
34. 44
20.51
58. 34
8.28
D-51
-------
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
30
54
36
30
36
30
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
62,764
-
57, 935
120, 699
195,057
585, 171
-
438,879
1,219, 107
0
92, 529
-
100, 240
192,769
21,719
185, 808
-
33,784
241, 311
39,719
536, 219
-
86,059
661,997
13,624
381,465
-
59,036
454, 125
70,652
326,769
-
44, 159
441,580
HD
0
1,693
-
1, 563
3, 256
5, 261
15,782
-
11, 837
32,880
0
2,495
-
2,704
5, 199
356
3,040
-
553
3,949
650
8,773
-
1,408
10,831
223
6,241
-
966
7,430
1, 156
5,346
_
722
7,224
Diesel
0
651
-
601
1,252
2,024
6,071
-
4,552
12,647
0
960
-
1,040
2,000
134
1, 140
-
207
1,481
243
3,291
-
528
4,062
84
2,340
-
362
2,786
434
2,005
_
271
2,710
Area
(sq. mi.)
11.38
25.78
13.64
25. 13
189. 39
339. 42
239.00
D-52
-------
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local :
TOTAL j
Aver Speed
(mph)
38
37
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
56
i
38
37 ;
I
LD
0
166,417
_
18,491
184,908
0
350,294
-
30,460
380,754
0
321,807
-
27,983
349,790
247,778
808,541
-
247,779
1,304,098
0
115,988
-
25,461
141,449
36, 542
133, 988
-
32, 481 |
203,011
58,708
654, 173
-
125, 804
838,685 j
VMT
HD
0
7,235
_
804
8,039
0
15, 230
_
1, 325
16, 555
0
13, 992
-
1,217
15,209
6,947
22,669
-
6,947
36,563
0
3,252
_
714
3,966
1,025
3,757
911
5,693
1, 646
18,341
-
3, 527
23,514
Diesel
0
2,824
_
314
3,138
0
5,944
_
516
6.460
0
5,460
475
5,935
2, 573
8,396
-
2,573
13,542
0
1,204
-
265
1,469
380
1, 392
-
337
2,109
610
6,794
-
1, 306
8,710
Area
(sq. mi.)
38. 23
251.77
375. 25
91.09
20. 50
17. 29
233. 97
D-53
-------
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
150,150
700,702
-
150, 150
1,001,002
434,465
267,362
-
133, 682
835, 509
194, 871
525,308
127, 091
-847, 270
21, 253
609, 250
-
77, 927
708, 430
188, 374
609, 973
-
98, 672
HD
4, 210
19,646
-
4, 210
28, 066
12, 181
7, 496
-
3, 748
23,425
4, 010
10,808
2, 615
17, 433
437
12, 536
-
1, 604
14, 577
3, 876
12,551
-
2, 030
897,019 18,457
56 42,779j 881
38
161, 610
-
37 33,272
3, 325
-
685
237,661 4,891
0 0
38 336, 996J
-
37 i 112,331
t
! 449, 327
- - f
14, 264
-
4, 755
19, 019
Diesel
1, 559
7, 276
-
1,559
10, 394
4,512
2, 777
-
1,388
8, 677
1,604
4,323
1,046
6, 973
175
5,014
-
641
5,830
1,550
5,021
-
812
7,383
352
1,330
-
274
1, 956
0
5, 350
-
1, 784
7, 134
Area
(sq. mi.)
513.30
173.83
62.34
344.91
431. 11
24.48
53.68
D-54
-------
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
39,828
386, 901
_
142,243
568, 972
0
393,449
-
69,433
462, 882
0
134,471
-
23,729
158,200
TOTAL
LD
22,952,734
HD
1, 685
16, 377
_
6, 021
24, 083
0
16, 654
-
2, 939
19, 593
0
5, 693
-
1,004
6, 697
TOTAL
HD
695,964
Diesel
632
6, 142
_
2,258
9,032
0
6, 245
-
1, 102
7,347
0
2, 135
-
377
2,512
TOTAL
DIESEL
264,718
Area
(sq. mi.)
46. 99
243.21
94.61
V Ml
Total for
All Vehicle
Types
3,923,416
D-55
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area. Pittsburgh
Year.
1977
Time Period.
2 4-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
5
6
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
19
17
39
19
17
39
19
17
19
17
19
17
39
19
17
VMT
LD
76,627
58,598
-
315, 525
450,750
67,382
81,421
-
131,958
280,761
76,909
89,052
_
238,820
404,781
0
26,944
-
22,953
49, 897
0
52,071
-
78, 108
130, 179
84, 144
67,315
-
269,261
420, 720
HD
3,938
3,011
-
16, 215
23, 164
3,463
4, 184
-
6,781
14,428
3, 953
4,576
_
12,274
20,803
0
1,385
-
1, 179
2,564
0
2,676
-
4,014
6,689
4, 324
3,459
-
13, 838
21,621
Diesel
1,476
1, 129
-
6,082
8,687
1,298
1, 569
-
2,543
5,410
1,482
1,716
_
4,603
7,801
0
520
-
442
962
0
1,003
-
1,505
2,508
1,621
1,297
-
5, 190
8, 108
Area
(sq. mi.)
1.26
2.07
3.85
2.89
5.82
4.23
D-56
-------
District
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
19
17
19
17
19
17
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
VMT
LD
0
93,232
-
101,002
194,234
0
5,959
-
36, 607
42,566
0
152,220
-
85,625
237, 845
0
68,779
-
80,741
149, 520
0
33, 509
-
42, 648
76, 157
0
43, 668
-
38,726
82, 394
0
12,371
-
56,354
68,725
HD
0
4,792
-
5, 190
9,982
0
307
-
1, 881
2, 188
0
7,823
-
4,400
12,223
0
3,535
-
4,150
7,685
0
1,722
-
2, 191
3,913
0
2,244
-
1,990
4,234
0
635
-
2,896
3,531
Diesel
0
1,797
-
1,947
3,744
0
115
-
706
821
0
2,933
-
1,650
4,583
0
1,325
-
1,556
2.881
0
646
-
822
1,468
0
842
-
746
1,588
0
238
-
1,087
1,325
Area
(sq. mi.)
4.54
1.96
2.55
6.99
1.52
3.06
2.27
D-57
-------
District
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
39
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
22
18
:
22
18
l
22
18
VMT
LD
143,083
252,780
-
81,079
476,942
0
35,961
-
53,943
89,904
0
86, 260
-
101, 260
187, 520
0
36, 604
_
67, 981
104, 585
0
98, 858
-
71, 588
170, 446
0
17, 803
-
17,804
35, 607
0
12,046
_
48, 173
60,219
HD
7, 354
12,991
-
4, 167
24,512
0
1,848
-
2.772
4,620
0
4,433
-
5, 204
9,637
0
1, 881
_
3,495
5, 376
0
5,080
-
3,680
8, 760
0
915
-
916
1, 831
0
619
~
2,475
3, 094
Diesel
2,757
4,872
-
1, 563
9, 192
0
693
-
1.040
1,733
0
1,662
-
1,952
3,614
0
705
_
1, 310
2,015
0
1,905
-
1,380
3,285
0
343
-
343
686
0
231
929
1, 160
Area
(sq. mi.)
3.89
5.51
1.28
1. 21
2.55
1. 85
1.69
D-58
-------
District
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
-\rterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
28
45
36
28
36
28
36
28
45
36
36
36
36
36
36
L
VMT
LD
0
255, 127
-
137,378
392, 505^
76,973
592,698
-
100.067
769,738
0
174,828
-
41,010
215,838
0
111,076
-
9,660
120,736
136,921
177,628
-
55,508
370,057
0
234,251
-
31,944
266, 195
0
274,009
14,421
288,430
HD
0
6,881
-
3,705
10, 586
2,076
15,986
-
2,699
20,761
0
4,716
_
1, 106
5,822
0
2,996
-
261
3,257
3,693
4,791
-
1,498
9,982
0
6,318
_
861
7, 179
0
7, 390
389
7,779
Diesel
0
2,646
-
1,425
4,071
798
6, 148
-
1,039
7,985
0
1,814
-
425
2,239
0
1, 152
-
100
1,252
1,420
1,843
-
575
3,838
r o
2,430
-
331
2,761
0
2,843
150
2,993
Area
(sq. mi. )
7. 17
24. 78
3.07
3.89
9. 19
12.20
71. 50
D-59
-------
District
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
VMT
LD
0
30,634
-
52, 162
82,796
0
34,269
-
38, 642
72,911
0
309, 619
9,576
319, 195
0
99,827
-
35,074
134,901
0 i
520, 305
_
106,569
626, 874
0
101,248
-
11,250
112,498
0
200,228
_
32,595
232,823
HD
0
826
-
1,407
2,233
0
924
-
1,042
1,966
0
8,351
258
8,609
0
2,692
-
946
3,638
0
14, 033
_
2,874
16,907
0
2,730
-
304
3,034
0
5,400
-
879
6,279
Diesel
0
318
-
541
859
0
355
-
401
756
0
3,211
100
3,311
0
1,035
-
364
1,399
0
5,398
-
1, 105
6,503
0
1,050
-
117
1. 167
0
2,077
_
338
2,415
Area
(sq. mi.)
15.42
9. 02
10.34
5.15
93.15
6.77
10.99
D-60
-------
District
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
AVB Speed
(mph)
36
36
45
36
36
36
36
36
i
36
i
,
36
36
45
36
36 __j.
f
54 {
36
t
i
36
1
LD
0
71,381
-
74,294
145, 675
237, 186
74,412
_
153,472
465,070
0
185,653
55,455
241, 108
0
185,770
52, 396
238, 166
0
360,093
i
53, 807
413,900
48, 246
651,306
-
104,531
804, 083
66, 268
125,435
-
44, 969 (
236, 672
VMT
HD
0
1,925
_
2,003
3,928
6,396
2,008
_
4,139
12, 543
0
5,007
-
1,496
6, 503
0
5,010
_
1,413
6,423
0
9,712
-
1,451
11, 163
1,301
17,566
-
2, 820
21, 687
1,788 |
3, 383
-
1,212
6, 383
Diesel
0
741
_
771
1,512
2,461
771
_
1,592
4,824
0
1,926
-
575
2,501
0
1,927
_
543
2,470
0
3,735
-
558
4,293
501
6,757
-
1,085
8,343
688
1, 301
-
467
2,456
A
(sq. mi.)
4. 79
12.82
44.99
38.72
11.30
22.87
19.58
D-61
-------
District
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
36
54
36
36
54
36
30
36
30
54
36
30
54
36
:30
36
30
VMT
LD
0
221,790
-
141, 800
363,590
27, 318
191,222
-
84, 988
303, 528
159,419
553,278
-
225,062
937,759
0
196, 372
-
34,654
231,026
38,811
438,004
-
77,622
554,437
51,867
367,791
-
51, 867
471, 525
0
177, 164
-
113, 269
290,433
HD
0
5,982
-
3,824
9,806
737
5, 158
-
2,292
8, 187
4, 300
14, 922
_
6, 070
25,292
0
5, 296
-
934
6,230
1,046
11,813
-
2,094
14,953
1, 399
9,920
-
1, 399
12,718
0
4,778
-
3,055
7, 833
Diesel
0
2,301
-
1,471
3,772
283
1,984
-
882
3, 149
1,654
5,739
_
2, 335
9,728
0
2,036
_
360
2,396
403
4, 544
-
806
5,753
538
3,815
_
538
4,891
0
1,838
-
1, 175
3,013
Area
(aq. mi.)
13.01
50.62
20.23
34.44
20.51
58. 34
8. 28
D-62
-------
District
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
36
30
54
36
30
36
30
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
83,685
-
77, 247
160,932
260,076
780,228
_
585, 172
1,625,476
0
123, 372
_
133,653
257,025
28,958
247, 744
-
45,045
321,747
52, 959
714,958
"
114,745
882,662
18, 165
508,620
-
78,714
605,499
94,203
435,692
-
58, 878
588,773
HD
0
2, 257
-
2,084
4,341
7, 015
21, 042
_
15,783
43, 840
0
3, 327
_
3,605
6,932
474
4,053
_
737
5,264
866
11,697
1,877
14, 440
297
8, 321
-
1,288
9,906
1,541
1, 128
-
963
9,632
Diesel
0
868
-
801
1,669
2, 698
8,094
_
6,070
16,862
0
1,280
_
1, 386
2,666
178
1,520
-
276
1,974
324
4,388
704
5,416
112
3,120
-
483
3,715
578
2,673
-
361
3,612
Area
(gq. mi.)
11.38
25, 78
13.64
25. 13
189. 39
339.42
239.00
D-63
-------
District
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
38
37
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
VMT
LD
0
221,889
-
24, 654
246, 543
0
467, 059
-
40,613
507, 672
0
429,076
-
37,311
466, 387
330,371
1,078,054
_
330, 372
1,738,797
0
154,651
-
33,948
188, 599
48,723
178,650
-
43,308
270,681
78,277
872,231
-
167,738
1,118,246
HD
0
9,647
-
1,072
10,719
0
20, 307
-
1,766
22,073
0
18, 656
-
1,623
20, 279
9,263
30, 225
_
9,263
48,751
0
4, 336
-
952
5,288
1, 367
5,009
-
1,214
7,590
2, 195
24, 455
-
4,703
31,353
Diesel
0
3,765
-
418
4,183
0
7,925
_
688
8,613
0
7,280
-
633
7,913
3,431
11, 195
_
3,430
18,056
0
1,605
-
353
1,958
506
1,856
-
449
2,811
813
9,058
-
1,741
11,612
Area
(sq. mi.)
38.23
251. 77
375.25
91.09
20.50
17.29
233.97
D-64
-------
District
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
56
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
200, 200
934, 269
-
200, 200
1,334,669
579, 287
356,483
_
178, 242
1,114,012
259,828
700,410
-
169, 454
1,129,692
28, 337
812,333
-
103, 903
944,573
251, 165
813,297
-
131,563
1,196,025
57,038
215, 480
-
44, 363
316,881
0
449, 328
_
149,774
599, 102
HD
5,613
26, 194
-
5,613
37,420
16,241
9,995
4,997
31,233
5,346
14,411
-
3,486
23, 243
583
16,714
-
2, 138
19,435
5, 167
16,734
-
2,707
24, 608
1, 174
4,433
-
913
6, 520
0
19,019
-
6,340
25, 359
Diesel
2,078
9,701
-
2,078
13,857
6,016
3,702
_
1,851
11,569
2, 138
5,764
-
1, 394
9,296
233
6,685
-
855
7,773
2,067
6, 694
-
1,082
9,843
469
1,773
-
365
2,607
0
7, 133
-
2,378
9,511
Area
(sq. mi.)
513.30
173.83
62. 34
344.91
431.11
24.48
53. 68
D-65
-------
District
70
71
72
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
56
38
37
38
37
38
37
VMT
LD
53, 104
515,868
-
189,657
758, 629
0
524, 599
-
92, 577
617, 176
0
179,295
-
31,638
210,933
TOTAL
0,616,952
HD
2,247
21, 836
-
8,028
32, 111
0
22,205
-
3,919
26, 124
0
7, 590
-
1, 339
8, 929
TOTAL
927.926
Diesel
842
8, 189
-
3,011
12,042
0
8,327
-
1,469
9,796
0
2,847
-
502
3, 349
TOTAL
352. 924
Area
(sq. mi.)
46. 99
243.21
94.61
VMT
otal for
All Vehicle
Types
1,897.802
D-f
-------
APPENDIX E
VMT ALGORITHM
-------
APPENDIX E
There were five important inputs. They are: (1) 1967 VMT, (2) 2000
VMT, (3) 1967 population and employment, (4) 1980 population and
employment, and (5) 2000 population and employment. All of these inputs
were given by SPRPC zones (968). These inputs were then aggregated
into 72 districts by AMV.
The first method used to project VMT by district for 1972 and 1977 was
based on VMT increases by county (7) from 1967 to 2000. This VMT
increase was then apportioned out to all districts in the county based on
relative population and employment growths* in each district. That is,
PE - PE
.VMT72 = AVMT^ i 72 i 67
where:
jAPlS-67
.VMT = 1972 VMT for district i
.
j
= VMT growth for county j between 1967 and 1972
72-67
.PE - .PE = district i population plus employment growth
i 72 i 67 between 1967 and 1972
,APE 7 = county j population plus employment growth
J 72-67 between 1967 and 1972
*The district population and employment growths were first represented
by a weighted factor equal to:
Population + 2 (Manufacturing Employment)
+ 2.5 (Non-Manufacturing Employment)
-I- 0. 1 (Total Employment)
This factor was found unsatisfactory as VMT growth factors due to its
greater weighting of population in districts with few manufacturing
employees. The population-employment factor for each district finally
used was the sum of population and employment. This factor is a
measure of the activity of the district.
E-l
-------
The individual district's PE was linearly interpolated between 1967
( £t
and 1980. A similar procedure was followed for 1977 VMT estimates.
It was found that those districts which were projected to experience heavy
growths in population and employment might be unfairly receiving too
large a portion of the county's increase in VMT.
Many districts which had relatively small 1967 PE totals had the greatest
increases in PE totals from 1967 to 1972. These districts were therefore
allocated a large portion of the county's VMT growth. This would be
reasonable if most of the VMT growth for the district was generated
by trips ending or beginning in the district.
It appears reasonable to assume that this method would be feasible in
areas where population and employment changes are the prime indicators
of travel activity in the districts, and where the transportation facilities
in each district are similar. In particular, transit usage and the ratio of
freeway VMT to total VMT should be similar for all districts in the county.
Another formidable obstacle can also occur if a number of districts in an
area decrease in population and employment. In this case, the equation
cannot be used.
The results of allocating county VMT growth to districts by using the
ratio of a district's 1972 population-employment factor to the county's
1972 population-employment factor was found to be inadequate at the
district level. The lack of sensitivity for districts with high transportation
growth and low population-employment growth was again prevalent. This
method did, however, eliminate the problem of decreasing population-
employment totals.
E-2
-------
APPENDIX F
RESULTS OF RETROFIT METHODOLOGY
-------
TABLE F-l
SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
Weighted Light Duty Annual Travel
Year
1977
1976
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
1970
1969
1968
1967
1966
1965
1964
Average
Miles
Driven (D) *
3,600
11, 900
16, 100
13,200
11,400
11,700
10, 000
10, 300
8,600
10, 900
8,000
6,500
6,500
6,500
Fraction of
Total Vehicles
in Use (V) +
8.0
12.7
12.0
11.8
10.2
11.3
10.6
8.1
6.0
3.9
1.7
1.2
.5
.2
98.2
VxD
28,800
151,130
193,200
155,760
116,280
132,210
106,000
83,430
51,600
142,510
13,600
7,800
3,250
1,300
1,186,870
M *
2.65
13.91
17.78
14.33
10.70
12. 16
9.75
7.68
4.75
3.91
1.25
.72
.30
.12
100.01
* E. P. A. National Averages
+ R. L. Polk, 1971 (see Table 13)
+ ... VxD
* M = 2 VxD
F-l
-------
TABLE F-2
SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
Gas Powered Light Duty Vehicles
1977 Average Emission Reduction
for the Area
Pre-Controlled Vehicles HC CO NOX
Lean Idle Air/Fuel Ratio 0.60% 0.22% 0.53%
Adjustment and Vacuum Spark
Advance Disconnect
Oxidizing Catalytic Converter
and Vacuum Spark Advance 1.63% 1. 51% 1. 15%
Disconnect
Air Bleed to Intake Manifold 0.50% 1.39% 0%
Exhaust Gas Recirculation and Q Q<
Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect
Controlled Vehicles
Oxidizing Catlytic Converter
and Vacuum Spark Advance 32.8% 32.8% 0%
Disconnect
Exhaust Gas Recirculation and
Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect 0% 0% 15.5
Source: E.P. A.
Table F-l
F-2
-------
APPENDIX G
DETAILED RANKINGS
OF THE
NON-ECONOMIC IMPACT FOR EACH CONTROL STRATEGY
-------
TABLE 6-1.
RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
SOCIAL CRITERIA
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle -Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
^^_VI_BMIWWH
Rating*
5
4
4
2
2
3
5
5
5
3
4
4
2
4
4
4
**
**
**
**
3
3
3
2
2
Comments
Generally acceptable
No obvious conflict with goals
Mixed impact
May be regressive
May be regressive
Impact uncertain
No apparent negative impacts
Conforms to community goals
Conforms to community goals
Impact mixed
Some aspects adopted
Some aspects adopted
Tends to conflict with goals
Beneficial if justified economically
User cost
No obvious negative impacts
Indifferent
Indifferent
Indifferent
Contrary to stated goals
Contrary to stated goals
* Criteria defined in Table G-2
** Strategy rated previously in this table
6-1
-------
TABLE G-2. SOCIAL CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4,0
3.0
2.0
1.0
In conformance with expressed or implied commu-
nity goals. No obvious negative social impact.
Similar program, implemented without obvious nega-
tive social impact.
Tending to be in conformance with expressed or
implied community goals. Minor negative impacts
outweighed by positive impacts.
Indifferent with respect to expressed or implied
community goals. Social impact undetermined or
apparently evenly mixed. Implemented elsewhere
without net negative social impact.
Tending to be contrary to expressed or implied
community goals. Negative social impact slightly
in excess of positive social impact.
Obviously contrary to expressed or implied commu-
nity goals. Negative social impact outweigh posi-
tive social impact. Implemented elsewhere with
obvious net negative social impact.
G-2
-------
TABLE G-3.
RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
ADMINISTRATIVE CRITERIA
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate ~
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle-Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
i^ ^^- »«^_
Rating*
4
2
I
2
2
3
2
5
3
3
1
4
3
1
1
5
4
**
#*
#*
**
4
3
4
4
3
Comments
* Criteria defined in Table G-4
*# Strategy rated previously in this table
G-3
-------
TABLE G-4. ADMINISTRATIVE CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Program currently in existence. Similar program
currently in existence. No additional agency,
manpower or procedures necessary for implemen-
tation.
Similar program implemented elsewhere. No
additional agency or manpower required. Minor
additional procedures required for implementation.
Adaptation of programs existing in area or else-
where. Minor additions to existing agencies.
Minor manpower and procedural requirements.
Similar program not existing in area or elsewhere.
Significant additions to existing agency or minor
new agency required. Significant manpower and
procedural difficulties in implementation of program.
Similar program not existing in area or elsewhere.
Major new agency or administrative jurisdiction
required. Major manpower and procedural diffi-
culties in implementation.
G-4
-------
TABLE G-5.
RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
LEGAL CRITERIA
Strategy
Reduce Emission Rate
Rating*
Comments
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle-Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle-Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
5
5
2
4
1
1
1
5
2
1
5
4
3
3
3
**
**
1
5
2
3
3
Presently performed
Possible under present arrangements
No agency authorized currently
Could be added to existing agency
Major legislative action
Major legislative, implementation
Major legislative action
Doubtful as mandatory measure
Also depends on injunction
Subsidy challenge likely
Various challenges probable
Charges presently controlled
Attainable with existing agencies
Precedents mixed
Implementation troublesome
Can be done at local level
Doubtful as mandatory measure
Doubtful as mandatory measure
Requires other action (rates, etc. )
Questionable as mandatory measure
Local action sufficient
Local action sufficient
* Criteria defined in Table G-6.
** Strategy rated previously in this table
G-5
-------
TABLE G-6. LEGAL CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
No legislative enactment at any level required.
Existing jurisdiction sufficient for enforcement.
Legality of measure assured, due to similar
measures currently in operation in area or else-
where.
Some expansion of existing legislation required.
Minor expansion of existing jurisdiction necessary
for enforcement. Legality assured due to the
establishment of similar measures elsewhere.
Local legislative, enactment necessary. Enforce-
ment requiring additional responsibility by existing
jurisdictions. Legality not assured, due to lack
of precedents or mixed precedents.
Regional legislation required. Enforcement
requiring new responsibilities by existing juris-
dictions. Legality not assured, due to lack of
precedents and succesful challenge of precedents.
Statewide legislation required. New enforcement
agencies or major expansion of existing enforce-
ment jurisdictions required. Legality doubtful
due to successful challenge of similar measures
in area or elsewhere.
G-6
-------
TABLE G-7. RATING OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
TECHNICAL RATING
Strategy
Traffic Flow Improvements
Upgrade Existing Streets
Loading Zone
Metering
Information Systems
Source Control
Retrofit
Inspection
Fuel Conversion
Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel
Reduce Travel Demand
Four Day Week
Increase Transit Use
Short Term Transit Impv.
Transit Fares
Tolls
Parking Taxes and Charges
Parking Restrictions
Vehicle -Free Zone
Reserved Bus Lanes
Increase Fuel Tax
Increase Occupancy
Car Pools
Tolls
Metering
Vehicle-Free Zones
Parking Taxes and Charges
Shift Travel Patterns
Staggered Hours
Fringe Parking
Night Goods Deliveries
Government Offices
Zoning
^^^^ <^_ .__ ^
Rating*
5
5
3
2
2
3
2
5
5
6
5
5
5
2
3
5
4
**
**
**
**
4
4
3
4
4
Comments
* Criteria defined in Table G-8.
** Strategy rated previously in this table
G-7
-------
TABLE G-8. TECHNICAL CRITERIA
Rating
Criteria
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
No technical innovation required. Technology
existing and in wide use. No further technical
development required.
No significant technical innovation required.
Technology existing and in growth stages.
Technology somewhat beyond pilot applications.
Minor additional development and expansion of
existing technology required.
Technology developed; no major innovation required.
Pilot applications existing. Some expansion and
development necessary and currently under way.
Technology not in wide use.
Further technical innovation necessary. State
of the art projects now at pilot stage. Significant
development and expansion required. Technology
not in actual use.
Technical capability not yet developed or in use.
Probability of successful development not assured.
G-8
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1* Report No.
3. Recipient's Accession No.
Transportation Controls to Reduce Motor Vehicle
Emissions in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
S. Report Date
December 1972
Authoi(s)
8- Performing Organization Kept.
No.
Performing Organization Name and Address
GCA Corporation
GCA Technology Division
Bedford, Massachusetts
10. Project/Task/Wort Unit No.
DU-72-B895
11. Contract/Grant No.
68-02-0041
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
13. Type of Rep
12/T5/72
14.
is. supplementary Noces Prepared to assist in the development of transportation control plans
by those State Governments demonstrating that National Ambient Air Quality Standards
cannot be attained by implementing emission standards for stationary sources only.
16. Abstracts
The document demonstrates the nature of the Air Quality problem attributed to motor
vehicle operation, the magnitude of the problem and a strategy developed to neutralize
these effects in order that National Ambient air quality standard may be attained and
maintained.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17o. Descriptors
Motor Vehicle emitted pollutants - air pollutants originating within a motor vehicle
and released to the atmosphere.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards - Air Quality Standards promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency and pub-
lished as a Federal Regulation in the
Federal Register.
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
VMT - Vehicle Miles Traveled .
Vehicle Mix - distribution of motor vehicle population by age group.
LDV - light duty vehicle - less than 6500 Ibs.
HDV - heavy duty vehicle - greater than 6500 Ibs.
i7e. COSATI Field/Group
Environmental Quality Control of Motor Vehicle Pollutants
18. Availability Statement
For release to public
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (Thi;
Page
UNCLASSIFIED^
all
22. Price
FORM NTIS-3» (HEW. 3-7ZI
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for the Federal Government,
PB-180 600).
1. Report Dumber. Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation selected by the performing
organization or provided by the sponsoring organization. Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only. Examples
FASEB-NS-87 and FAA-RD-68-09.
2. Leave blank.
3. Recipient'* Accession Number. Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4 Title and Subtitle. Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed promi-
nently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more
than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number and include subtitle for the specific volume.
5. Report Dote. Kach report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected
(e.g., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation.
6. Performing Organization Code. Leave blank.
7. Author(*)' Give name(s) in conventional order (e.g., John R. Doe, or J.Robert Doc). List author's affiliation if it differs
from the performing organization.
8. Performing Organization Report Number. Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9- Performing Organization Name and Address. Give name, street, city, state, and zip code. List no more than two levels of
an organizational hierarchy. Display the name of the organization exactly as it should appear in Government indexes such
as USGRDR-I.
10. Projeet/Task/Work Unit Number. Use the project, task and work unit numbers under which the report was prepared.
11. Contract/Grant Number. Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. Sponsoring Agency Nome ond Address. Include zip code.
13. Type of Report and Period Covered. Indicate interim, final, etc., and, if applicable, dates covered.
14. Sponsoring Agency Code. Leave blank.
15. Supplementary Notes. Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with . . .
Translation of ... Presented at conference of ... To be published in ... Supersedes . . . Supplements
16. Abstroct. Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report.
If the report contains a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17, Key Words and Document Analysis, (a). Descriptors. Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the
proper authorized tetms that identify the major concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
as index entries for cataloging.
(b). Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms. Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use
open-ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(e). COSATI Field/Group. Field and Group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List.
Since the majority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignmem(s) will be the specific
discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary
Field/Group assignments that will follow the primary posting(s).
18. Distribution Statement. Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Re-
lease unlimited". Cite any availability to the public, with address and price.
19 & 20. Security Classification. Do not submit classified reports to the National Technical
21. Number of Pages. Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but excluding distribution
list, if any.
22. Price. Insert the ptice set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known
FORM NTIS-3* IREV. 3-72)
r*-' Of
EPA L[::r,:;y
RTPNC 2/711
USC OMM- D C I40T12-P~
' U. S. EOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1S737«768/«,5S
------- |