Transportation Controls
To Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions
                 IN
     Major Metropolitan Areas
       ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

-------
         TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS

    TO REDUCE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS

                   IN

        MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS
              Prepared by:
             GCA CORPORATION
         GCA TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
         Bedford,  Massachusetts

                TRW INC.
TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATIONS
            McLean, Virginia
        Contract Nos. 68-02-0041,
                      68-02-0048
     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
         Research Triangle Park
         North Carolina   27711
              December 1972

-------
                           DISCLAIMER

This report was furnished to the Environmental  Protection Agency
by the GCA Technology Division and TRW Transportation and
Environmental Operations in fulfillment of Contract Numbers
68-02-0041, Task Orders No. 7 and No. 10; and 68-02-0048, Task
Order No. 11.  the contents of this report are reproduced herein
as received from the contractor.  The opinions, findings and
conclusions are those of the authors and not necessarily those
of the Environmental Protection Agency.  Mention of company or
product names does not constitute endorsement by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
                                n

-------
                            Acknowledgements

     Many individuals and several  organizations have been helpful  in
carrying out this study; for these contributions the authors  extend
sincere gratitude.

     Continued project direction and guidance were given by Mr.  Fred
Winkler (Project Officer) and Mr.  Dave Tammy and Mr. Bob Clark  of  the
Land Use Planning Branch, EPA, Durham, North Carolina,  and members of
EPA Regional Offices.

     Many members of local  and state agencies supplied  data and  critical
analysis to the study.

     Alan M. Voorhees Associates,  Wilbur Smith Associates, and  ABT Asso-
ciates 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.  DeLeuw, Gather and  Company,  a
TRW subsidiary, provided similar inputs and assistance  to TRW.
                                    m

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title                                                               Page

1.0  INTRODUCTION	1-1

     1.1  PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION 	   1-1
     1.2  STUDY LIMITATIONS 	   1-2

2.0  GENERAL METHODOLOGY	   2-1

     2.1  EMISSIONS AND AIR QUALITY ESTIMATES	  .  .  .   2-1
     2.2  CONTROL MEASURES  	   2-10
     2.3  OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION 	   2-12

3.0  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS FOR FOURTEEN METROPOLITAN AREAS  ...   3-1

     3.1  BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 	   3-3
     3.2  BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 	   3-8
     3.3  DAYTON, OHIO	   3-14
     3.4  DENVER, COLORADO  	   3-19
     3.5  HOUSTON/GALVESTON, TEXAS  	   3-26
     3.6 -LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA	   3-31
     3.7  NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK	   3-40
     3.8  PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA  	   3-47
     3.9  PHOENIX/TUCSON, ARIZONA 	   3-51
     3.10 PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA  	   3-58
     3.11 ST, PAUL/MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 	   3-62
     3.12 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH	   3-68
     3.13 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 	   3-71
     3.14 SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 	   3-74

APPENDIX A - ATTITUDINAL SURVEY 	   A-l
                                    IV

-------
                             LIST  OF TABLES
Table Number       	Title	         Page

   Bal.1            Summary of Expected 1977 ^mission  Levels          3-5

   Bal.2           Recommended Control  Strategies  and Their          3-7
                   Effects

   Bos.l            Carbon Monoxide Emissions  (Kg/Day) and  Con-       3-9
                   centration (ppm) Kenmore Sq.  With  and Without
                   Control Strategies

   Bos.2           Carbon Monoxide Emissions  (Kg/Day) and  Con-       3-10
                   centration (ppm) at Haymarket Sq.  With  and
                   Without Control Strategies

   Bos.3           Carbon Monoxide Emissions  (Kg/Day) and  Con-       3-11
                   centration (ppm) at Science Park With and
                   Without Control Strategies

   Bos.4           Hydrocarbon Emissions (Kg/Day)  and Oxidant        3-12
                   Levels (ppm) Within Rt.  128 Region With and
                   Without Control Strategies

   Bos.5           Emission Reductions With Recommended Control      3-13
                   Strategies

   Day.l            24-Hour Hydrocarbon Emissions For  Montgomery      3-16
                   and Greene Counties (Kg/Day)

   Den.l            Percent Reductions  Achievable For  CO             3-21
                   (Total Emissions)

   Den.2           Percent Reductions  Achievable For  HC             3-22
                   (Total Emissions)

   NY.l             Assumed Vehicle Emission Reductions For          3-42
                   Hardware Control Measures
   NY.2            Air Pollutant Emission Estimates For The         3-44
                   "Worst" Square Miles In Different Areas Of
                   New York City (Ton/Year)

   NY.3            Mobile Source, Stationary  Source,  and Total       3-45
                   Emissions of Air Pollutants In The New  York
                   City Area (Ton/Year)

   Pitt.l          Total Carbon Monoxide Emissions In Kg/Day  and     3-60
                   Expected Maximum Eight-Hour Average CO  Con-
                   centrations In PPM  For Pittsburgh, Zone 1
                   (CBD)

   Pitt.2          Total HC Emissions  In Kg/Day and Expected         3-51
                   Maximum One-Hour Average Oxidant Concentra-
                   tions In PPM For Allegheny County

   Minn.l          Summary Of Oxidant  Air Quality and Hydrocarbon   3-63
                   Emissions In Minneapolis CBD

   Minn.2          Summary Of Oxidant  and Air Quality and  Hydro-     3-64
                   carbon Emissions In St.  Paul  CBD

-------
      LIST OF TABLES  (Cont.)
Table Number
Minn. 3
Minn. 4
SLC.l
Sea.l
Spo.l
Title
Summary Of Carbon Monoxide Air Quality and
Emissions In Minneapolis CBD
Summary Of Carbon Monoxide Air Quality and
Emissions In St. Paul CBD
Summary Emission and CO Air Quality Data
For Salt Lake City (Zone H)
Summary Emission and CO Air Quality Data
For Seattle CBD
Summary Emissions and CO Air Quality Data
Page
3-65
3-66
3-69
3-73
3-75
For Spokane CBD

-------
                             LIST OF  FIGURES
Figure Number      	Title	       Page

    3.1             Metropolitan Area  Characteristics                 3-2

    HOU.l           Estimated  Total  Hydrocarbon  Emissions  In          3-27
                   1977 Resulting  From The  Proposed Control
                   Measures

    LA.l            Percentage Of Emissions  From Major Sources       3-32
                   In The South Coast Air Basin

    LA.2           Major Air  Pollutants - Monthly  Maximum Hourly     3-33
                   Averages West San  Fernando Valley

    LA.3           The Impact Of Proposed Control  Strategy On       3-39
                   Reducing Reactive  Hydrocarbon Emissions

-------
                            1.0  INTRODUCTION

1.1  PROGRAM PURPOSE AND DESCRIPTION
     Eighteen States must submit definitive transportation  control  plans
to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  no later than  February 15,
1973, for those areas of the State where emissions  from transportation
sources have resulted in concentrations of pollutants in excess  of  the
national  ambient air quality standards.  To assist  the States  in the
preparation of these transportation plans, EPA has  awarded  contracts to
TRW Inc., and its subsidiary De Leuw,  Gather and Company and GCA and its
subcontractors, Alan M.  Voorhees Associates,  William Smith  Associates,
and ABT Associates, to develop strategies for fourteen metropolitan areas
that will achieve carbon monoxide and  oxidant air quality standards
required to be met by the year 1977.  In the performance of this program
the following tasks were performed:
     1.  Implementation  Plan Review to verify and assess the severity of
         the carbon monoxide and oxidant pollutant  problem.
     2.  Identification  of Transportation Controls.   These  strategies
         considered the  impact of the  required 1975  motor vehicle controls
         on carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions as well  as the
         assessment of the feasibility of achieving  control  as estab-
         lished by the Six Cities Study.
     3.  Estimate of Air Quality Impact.  Estimate  of the likely impact
         anticipated from each of the  control techniques using established
         rollback or modeling methods.
     4.  Documentation of Implementation Obstacles.   The contractor met
         with local air  pollution and  transportation agencies  responsible
         for implementing the recommended controls  for the  purpose  of
         identifying obstacles that can be expected  in the  implementation
         process.
     5.  Formulation of  Surveillance Review Process.   The formulation of
         a timetable of  key checkpoints to be used  by EPA in monitoring
         implementation  progress in achieving transportation control. The
         timetable includes the period January 1973  through December 1976.

                                   1-1

-------
Those metropolitan areas specifically investigated  are  listed  below:

TRW (DCCO)                           GCA,  Voorhees. Smith,  and ABT
Dayton                               Baltimore
Denver                               Boston
Houston/Galveston                    Pittsburgh
Los Angeles                          Salt  Lake City
New York City                        Spokane
Philadelphia                         Seattle
Phoenix/Tucson                       Minneapolis/St.  Paul
Detailed individual  reports were prepared  for each  metropolitan area.
This document is intended to be used in conjunction with  these reports  as
a guide for the development of transportation strategies  for metropolitan
areas having similar air pollution problems.  Section 2.0 discusses  the
general methodologies employed and Section 3.0 highlights the  air quality
problems encountered in the fourteen metropolitan areas and the recommended
transportation strategies.

1.2  LIMITATIONS OF THE TRANSPORTATION CONTROL STRATEGY ANALYSIS
     The basic requirement which any acceptable  air pollution  control
strategy must meet is that emission levels following implementation of the
strategy are consistent with the attainment and maintenance of National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.  Satisfaction of this requirement depends
upon a detailed knowledge of current air quality levels and a quantification
of the pollutant emissions in the region.   Additionally,  an .implementable
transportation control strategy must consider the economic  factors  associated
with its adoption and also the social and political changes necessary to
accommodate each specific control measure.  The air quality benefits of any
action must be thus balanced against the social  and economic  dislocations
caused by its implementation.  Long-term regional transportation goals and
policies must be balanced against the need to achieve specific degrees of
emission reduction by 1977.  Limitations in the data available and  in the
analytic method used became obvious during the course of this study, and
care must be taken in the interpretation and evaluation of  the control strat-
egy recommendations contained in this report.  Several  specific areas in
                                   1-2

-------
which the present study needs to be confirmed  and  validated by future study
are listed below.

1.2.1  Air Quality Monitoring
       Two basic areas of concern appear in  connection with air quality data
available for this project.  First and most important,  ambient monitoring
at only one point completely fails to give an adequate  appreciation of  the
regional character of the air pollution problem.   It is  impossible to de-
termine whether the monitor is being adversely affected  by local  sources  and
thus giving unrealistically high readings in terms of the regional  problem
or conversely, whether there are areas of maximum ambient pollution that
are being completely unmonitored.  The only solution to  this  problem lies
in increasing the number and geographical spread  of ambient monitors.  Data
from the extended monitoring network should be used to  constantly evaluate
and update the control strategy presented in this document.   The  second
problem concerning the use of air quality monitoring data lies in the
statistical manipulations and projections used to determine the required
level of reduction for the attainment of standards.  Basing an extensive
control program on measurements obtained in one or two hours  per  year may
lead to the imposition of unduly strict control measures.  The trend of
ambient measurements during the period before the target year of  1977 must
be carefully watched and used to adjust control measures according to
observed ambient conditions.  Further, specific high measurements obviously
due to adverse meteorological conditions may be considered as episode
control situations and may not require the imposition of long-term trans-
portation control strategies for their solution.

1.2.2  Emission Factors
       The mobile source emission estimates utilized in  this  study are  based
upon the best currently available emission factor estimates.   These emission
estimates are in the process of updating and revision with both in-use  and
new vehicle testing programs, conducted by the Environmental  Protection
Agency.  The applicability of the standard testing driving cycle  to the
driving patterns in each metropolitan area is questionable,   Further, there
                                   1-3

-------
are many trip types making up the total vehicle miles traveled in each area;
and it has not been possible on the basis of currently available data to
distinguish in an air pollution emissions sense between the different driving
modes used.  It is highly recommended that new emission factors be utilized
as they become available to recompute and redefine the severity of the
mobile source generated emissions in the region.  Finally, the emission
factors used in the study relate speed to emissions only on the basis of
the integrated driving cycle.  This has prevented the accurate assessment
of changes in emissions due to improvement in traffic flow characteristics
in core, center city areas.

1.2.3  Cold-Start Emissions
       Preliminary data have shown that the emissions  generated during  the
first few minutes of vehicle operations represent a large and  increasing
portion of the total emissions during any individual vehicle trip.  The
implications of this fact are that to truly reduce mobile source emissions
it may be necessary to address the reduction in total vehicle  trips rather
than merely reducing the number of vehicles miles traveled.  Unfortunately,
the data relating to this phenomena were not sufficiently developed to be
used in the analysis presented in this study.    A potential control strategy
to reduce the high level of cold start emissions might be the direct
control of emissions from parking structures which act as stationary sources.
Again, it has not been possible to quantitatively describe the effect of this
type measure on the regional air pollution problem in this report.

1.2.4  Traffic Data and Projections
       Traffic data and traffic projections have not historically  been  col-
lected with a view to the estimation of motor vehicle air pollution emissions.
This fact has necessitated the reworking of traffic data including vehicle
flows, speeds and modal mixes into the format necessary for emission cal-
culations.  Certain assumptions and potential Inaccuracies  have been
introduced by this process.  Further the use of trends and projections  in
vehicle growth have been prepared by various agencies and often little
unanimity has been found concerning appropriate growth rates.   These data
                                   1-4

-------
in certain cases require that a close watch be maintained both on traffic
changes and ambient air quality during the period between now and full
strategy implementation so that any deviations from the expected vehicle
emission rates can be determined and appropriate adjustments made in the
control strategy.  It should be noted that stationary source emission
projections also suffer from inaccuracies in the projection of industrial
growth and in the application of as yet untested control  technologies to
control of these stationary sources.

1.2.5  Analytic Techniques Used
       The key analytic calculation performed in this  study is the  relation
between emission levels and ambient air quality.   Due  to  the time restraints
it was not possible to utilize sophisticated mathematical modeling  techniques
in the development of this relation between emissions  and air quality.   Con-
trol strategy reductions were thus based on proportional  rollback techniques
relating existing emissions and air quality on a proportional  basis.   The
use of modeling is highly recommended since it will  both  include  the  effects
of local meteorological and topographical  features  and indicate,  in  a way
that rollback estimation cannot, the geographical  extent  of the  regional
air pollution problem.  Such modeling and simulation exercises using  models
currently under development should be carried out during  the years  between
now and 1977 and should be used to modify, if required,  the control  strategy
recommended in this document.

1.2.6  Effects of Control Measures
       It was generally not possible to expressly quantify  the emission  reduc-
tion effect of many of the control measures considered in this document.
For example, the effect of the inspection and maintenance program depends
strongly upon the exact test procedure used, maintenance recommendations,
the quality and availability of trained mechanics and a host of other factors
which were impossible to define exactly during this study.   Similarly, mass
transit improvements can be expected to reduce vehicle miles traveled within
the region.  However, the extent of this reduction is unknown and specific
data concerning the economic elasticity of the various travel demands, the
modal split of trips within the region, and many other factors need  to be
carefully evaluated before a quantitative estimate can be prepared.
                                    1-5

-------
       It is strongly recommended that programs be instituted  to  provide
additional data and to apply more sophisticated analytic techniques in the
areas listed above.  Work must begin upon the implementation of the required
regional control measures; however, final implementation and enforcement
should be dependent upon data collected during calendar years 1973, 1974,
and even 1975.  Full consideration must be given to the political,
jurisdictional and social impact of all  control actions.   The  control
strategy presented in this document must be considered as an Initial
attempt to quantify the relationship between transportation processes  and
the regional  air pollution problem.  The further study indicated  should  be
used to modify this baseline effort.  The air pollution implications of
the transportation process are very complex and a modification of this
process can potentially effect significant changes in the social  and
economic character of the metropolitan region.
                                   1-6

-------
                        2.0  GENERAL METHODOLOGY

     Transportation control measures must be defined which will  reduce
mobile source emissions to a level  which will  allow compliance with the
Federal air quality standards.  The technical  approach is to select
candidate control measures and quantify where  possible the emissions
reductions expected.  Control  strategy development includes the following
tasks:
     •  Development of emissions and air quality estimates.
     •  Definition of Control  Measures - Transportation control  measures
        fall into two categories; exhaust emission reductions and
        reduction of vehicle miles  traveled (VMT).  These control
        measures may be both long and short-term and region-wide or area
        specific in extent.
     •  Analysis of the socioeconomic impact of strategies and the
        obstacles to their implementation
These subtasks are described in the following  sections.

2.1  EMISSIONS AND AIR QUALITY ESTIMATES

2.1.1  Emissions Estimates
       A vehicle emission estimate  is the product of two factors; vehicle
miles travelled  (VMT) and an emission factor or rate.  The techniques
employed for the determination of VMT, speeds, and vehicle age distribu-
tions varied widely from city to city and descriptions of these techniques
can be found in the individual city reports.  The vehicle emission factors
used in this study are based on measured and projected emission rates for
each vehicle class considering age  of vehicle,  effectiveness of emission
controls, average speed, and vehicle age distribution.  The impact of
Federal new car standards is considered in both the present and projected
vehicles.  The emission factor development followed the procedure developed
by Kircher and Armstrong' ' of the  EPA.  A summary of the procedure is given below.
   D. S. Kircher and D. P. Armstrong, "An Interim Report on Motor Vehicle
   Emission Estimation," Environmental Protection Agency, October 1972.
                                   2-1

-------
                      EMISSION FACTOR CALCULATIONS

    The equation for calculating emission factors is shown below:

                   n+1
            enp  =i=n-12   Ci--d1  mi  Sl
    where,
            e    = emission factor in grams per vehicle mile for
                   calendar year n and pollutant p,
            c..   = the 1975 Federal test procedure emission rate for
                                                     th
                   pollut nt p (grams/mile) for the 1   model  year,
                                                      ~ ~            i
                   at low mileage
            .dj   = the controlled vehicle pollutant p emission deteriora-
                   tion factor for the 1	 model year at calendar year n,
            m^   = the weighted annual travel of the 1_ model year during
                   calendar year n (The determination of this  variable
                   involves the use of the vehicle model year  distribution),
            Sj   = the weighted speed adjustment factor for the 1  - model
                   year vehicles.

CT is based on a recent study  of  light duty vehicle  exhaust  emission rates
in six cities,   dj,  deterioration factor accounts  for  the aging  or
deterioration of emission  control  devices,  m^,  weighted annual  mileage
is determined as follows,
                                    2-2

-------
            mi   =VxD
                 EV  x  D

             V   = fraction  of  each  model year  vehicle  in  use on  December
                 31  of year
             D   = average miles  driven  of  each model year vehicle

s., speed adjustment factor, varies inversely with average route speed.
1975 and later model  years are assumed to have a factor of one.

     Emission estimates for non-vehicular  sources  and  their projected
growths were obtained from the state implementation  plans.

2.1.2  Air Quality  Estimates
       In order to  evaluate the  acceptability  of a transportation control
measure  it was necessary to compare the estimated  emissions  following
application of that control measure with an "allowable emission  rate"  or
goal to  be achieved.   This "allowable emission rate" must be  extrapolated
from existing air quality data.

       Air quality standards to be attained are prescribed by  the  Federal
government in terms of concentration values (parts per million,  or  micro-
grams per cubic meter) and not emission values.  Therefore,  some system
of conversion must be employed to quantitatively assess the  effect  of
emissions and changes in emission rates on concentration values.  Several
methods  are currently available ranging from simple  rollback  proportioning
through  very elaborate and detailed computerized diffusion models.

       The proportional rollback method assumes the  existence  of a  linear
relationship between emissions and air quality.  A given percentage change
in emissions produces the same percentage change in  air quality.  It also
assumes  a homogeneous distribution of emission changes and effects  of  emis-
sion changes over the region under consideration.   No consideration is made
of meteorology, topography, atmospheric residence  time, pollutant  half life,
photochemical reactivity, or any of the many other complex variables affecting
the relationship between emissions and air quality.
                                    2-3

-------
       Modeling techniques consider some or all  of the above variables
were utilized when applicable.  These models require great quantities of
detailed input data, and extensive amounts of time and money in order to
obtain results.

       In selecting a technique to be used, several  compromises and trade-
offs must be made.  Proportional rollback modeling is fast and inexpensive,
and requires very little accumulation of input data.   The results  are easy
to interpret, but due to limitations discussed above, they are not highly
accurate.  If extremely accurate results are desired, detailed data is
complete and accessible, and if time and funds are freely available,  then
sophisticated computer modeling should be used.   Care should be taken,
however, not to attempt to use a method which requires a greater degree
of input data accuracy than that which is available.   Inaccurate or
incomplete input data will produce inaccurate results in both sophisticated
and simple models.

       There are many variations of these modeling techniques which
incorporate some of the advantages of each extreme.   Some form of  propor-
tional "rollback" has been used in each of the metropolitan areas  studied.
The specific application of this technique varied considerably in  order  to
accommodate the wide range of input data and output requirements.   A
sample methodology for the application of a modified proportional  "roll-
back" to CO and oxidants is given below.

       Sample 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
reduce 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
proportional to the emission rate of that pollutant emission within that
                                   2-4

-------
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 were already available for existing "traffic districts," the traffic
zones were either the traffic districts themselves or suitable aggregations
thereof.  Otherwise, the traffic zones were based on rectangular grids.

       An emission density/concentration ratio (e/c ratio) was assigned
to each sensor, the e/c ratio being based on the total CO emission density
(expressed in Kg/sq. mile/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 density was derived
which corresponded to the national air quality level to be achieved (i.e.,
9 ppm for an eight-hour average).  Maps showing the emission densities for
each zone were then prepared for years 1977, etc., based on the predicted
vehicular and non-vehicular emissions for those years.  Vehicular emissions
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 implementation plans and
state agencies, and take into account predicted growth and the predicted
control strategies to be applied to those sources.

       From these maps, the zones in which emissions exceeding the maximum
allowable density were identified.  On the assumption that the predicted
emission densities from non-vehicular sources were to be taken as irreducible,
the allowable emissions 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 density
for the year 1977 was expressed as a percentage reduction from the 1977
"no strategy" emission density.  However, as each control measure was
developed, emissions were recomputed, using the revised VMT's and speeds
resulting from the application of the control measures.
                                   2-5

-------
       Discussion of Sample Methodology for Carbon Monoxide
       The applications and the limitations of the conventional  propor-
                                                             (2)
tional rollback method have been well  documented and reviewedv  ' and need
not be discussed further here.  The technique used in the present study
was an extension of the conventional  rollback 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 rela-
tively 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 concentrations 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
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 uniform distribution of emission within an urban area and the
rate at which 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 sophisticated
technique, the use of this extension to the proportional model  was
        de Nevers, "Rollback Modelling, Basic and Modified," Draft
Document, EPA, Durham, N. C.  August 1972.
^Hanna, S. R., "A Simple Method of Calculating Dispersion from Urban
Area Sources," J. APCA 21_, 774-777  (December 1971)
(4'liifford, f. A., "Applications of a Simple Urban Pollution Model,"
(yaper 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.)

                                    2-6

-------
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 some
cities it was found that the sensors were, in fact, in  the "hot spot"  zones
and also that the recommended transportation controls did not increase
emissions in adjacent areas to unacceptable levels.  Thus the final  roll-
backs were confined to the zones with a sensor within their boundaries and
the extensions of the techniques to other non-sensor zones did not,  there-
fore, 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 concentration level and that  this
level depended only upon the average emission 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 microtopography 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  downtown
areas the variation was judged not to be too great, so that the single
recorded concentration might reasonably be expected to be representative
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  over-
all air quality nor of the overall emission density in the zone.

                                    2-7

-------
       Accordingly, e/c ratios were generally derived from sensors  in the
central areas of the cities and applied to suburban areas for the predic-
tion of 1977 concentration levels.  This procedure gave air quality levels
which were generally representative of the suburban zone.  However, it must
be realized that control strategies based on this procedure, while  they
may insure 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.

       Seasonal and Diurnal Variations
       The carbon monoxide concentration level  chosen as the basis  for the
base year e/c ratio in any zone was, in all  cases, the highest valid eight-
hour average observed during the base year.   The one-hour average either
never exceeded the standard or was very much closer to the standard than
the eight-hour average, so that controls required to meet the eight-hour
standard would also result in the one-hour standard being met.   Motor
vehicle emissions over 24 hours, 12 hours and max eight-hour periods were
compared with sensor readings and the most appropriate period of time
selected on which to base calculations of emission density.  Although
seasonal variations in readings were noted,  traffic data was not available
on a seasonal basis, so that vehicle emissions  were based on annual average
work day traffic data.

       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.  Where a zone actually contained a large point source,
its emissions were found to be much greater than automotive emissions
within the zone and any problem in that zone was regarded as due entirely
to the stationary source.
                                   2-8

-------
       Sample Methodology and Discussion for Qxidants
       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  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, in general, was about the size of  the metropolitan
area.  The reductions in hydrocarbon emissions  necessary to  achieve  oxidant
ambient standards were obtained from Appendix J, Federal Register of
August 14, 1971.

       In some cities the use of the larger area presented two problems.
First, where there was more than one valid oxidant sensor within the  area,
the question arose as to which gave readings best representative of  the
area's air quality,and usually the sensor giving the highest reading  was
selected.  Second, it was found for some cities that the amount of rollback
required for vehicle hydrocarbon emissions was  significantly sensitive
to the size of the area selected.  Generally, it was found that vehicle
emissions peaked sharply in the CBD and tapered off towards  suburban  areas,
while non-vehicular emissions were relatively evenly distributed over the
metropolitan area.  Thus, if a relatively small rollback area (encompassing
the CBD) was selected, vehicle emissions constituted the major portion of
the total emissions.  On the other hand, if an  entire metropolitan area
was selected, non-vehicular emissions could constitute more  than half the
total emissions.  Since the predicted 1977 non-vehicular emissions were
considered to be irreducible, the total required rollback from the "no-
transportation strategy case" had to be obtained from reductions in
vehicular emissions; and where the total emission rollback was required
to be about 50 percent or more, the vehicular emission rollback became
very sensitive to the ratio of the vehicular emissions to total emissions.
For example, for the case of a required total emission rollback of 50
percent, if non-vehicular emissions were 20 percent of total emissions, a
rollback of about 62 percent of vehicular emissions would be required;
while if non-vehicular emissions were 40 percent of total emissions,  a
rollback of about 83 percent in vehicular emissions would be required.
                                   2-9

-------
2.2  CONTROL MEASURES CONSIDERED
     Vehicle emissions control measures fall into two categories - direct
exhaust emission controls, and indirect control through the reduction of
vehicle miles of travel (VMT) or vehicle use.  The major types of control
measures in these categories are discussed below.  The specific elements
of these control measures applicable to each city are given in Sections
3.1-3.14 of this report.

2.2.1  Exhaust Emission Controls
       Four major types of exhaust emission control measures have been
considered as follows:

       •  Federal emissions control requirements for new cars.
       •  Inspection/Maintenance Programs (I/M).
       •  Retrofit of Light Duty Vehicles (LDV).
       t  Gaseous fuels conversion.

       The main advantage of this group of control  measures is- tftat their
impact is region-wide.  This is important because physical  and meteoro-
logical conditions cause all emission areas to contribute to the formation
of critical  concentration zones.   An area-wide control  measure also helps
maintain the air quality in areas not currently exceeding the standards
and provides for some control in areas which may exceed the standards but
are not currently monitored.

       Each of the four types of exhaust emission controls are discussed
briefly below.  They are discussed in detail in the EPA document "Control
Strategies for In-Use Vehicles".

       •  Federal Emissions Control Requirements For New Cars.
          The Federal 1975 standards for new cars are assumed to be met.
          Though these controls are highly  effective in reducing emissions
          the turnover rate by 1977 will not be sufficient to meet the
          required reductions in most of the fourteen metropolitan areas
          studied.
                                   2-10

-------
t  Inspection/Maintenance (I/M).
   The many varieties of programs and their benefits are discussed
   in detail in "Control Strategies for In-Use Vehicles".   An
   "Inspection/Maintenance" program is defined as a means  to reduce
   emissions from in-use vehicles through identifying those vehicles
   that need emission control  related maintenance and requiring that
   such maintenance be performed.  The reason that such a  program
   can achieve additional reductions is that current in-use emission
   control devices deteriorate or their effectiveness deteriorates
   due to other automotive parameters such as a poorly tuned engine.
   Therefore the purpose of an I/M program is to maintain  exhaust
   emissions from in-use vehicles as close to the standards of the
   new vehicle as possible and thereby gain the maximum benefit
   from emission control technology.
•  Retrofit of Light Duty Vehicles  (LDV).
   The majority of retrofit devices are designed for installation
   in pre-controlled or pre-1968 light duty vehicles although some
   can be effective on other vehicles.  There are two prime con-
   siderations for selecting retrofit devices; which pollutant do
   they most effectively reduce and what segment of the automotive
   population is affected.  Although the retrofit devices  are very
   effective in reducing emissions from these vehicles the added
   reduction in total emissions by 1977 is generally less  than
   10 percent of the total emissions.  There are however,  two
   advantages to this control  measure, its impact is region-wide,
   and it is directed at the worst polluters.
•  Gaseous Fuel Conversion.
   Recommendations for the use of gaseous fuel conversion is limited
   to metropolitan areas where large, centrally located fleet travel
   represents a significant portion of the total VMT.  It is further
   restricted by the limited supply of such fuels in many areas.
                           2-11

-------
2.2.2  VMT Reduction
       Long-term VMT reduction measures such as mass transportation
systems not currently planned for completion by 1976 will  have little
impact on meeting the air quality standards by 1977; however, their
impact beyond 1980 could be significant.

       The short-term reduction measures consist of methods to encourage
use of existing and immediately planned public transportation and methods
to directly or indirectly reduce actual trips or VMT.  Samples of these
groups of short-term measures are listed below:
   Methods to Encourage                     Methods to Reduce
Use of Public Transportation               Actual  Trips or VMT
Improved Bus Service                       Pollution Tax
Peripheral Parking                         Wheel  Tax
Park-And-Ride Systems                      Gas Rationing
Exclusive Bus Lanes                        Auto-Free Zones
Subsidized Transit Systems                 Parking Limitations
                                           Carpooling
                                           Improved Traffic Flow
The majority of the encouragement methods will not achieve a significant
VMT reduction without the imposition of direct vehicle restraints.

2.3  OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION
     Each of the major categories of air pollution control measures has a
varying potential for effective implementation in the study areas.  A mail
panel survey^ ' of seven Metropolitan areas, for example,  (see Appendix A)
indicated a greater awareness of a nationwide air pollution problem than
a local air pollution problem.  Acceptability responses of various control
measures were conditioned by the financial cost to individual motorists,
the degree to which motorists might be limited in the use  of their auto-
mobiles, and the inconvenience of the control measures.  Long-term
measures, such as public transportation improvements, generally are
acceptable and desirable even though reducing air pollution may not be
1 - bee Appendix a for complete discussion of tne mail panel survey.

                                  2-12

-------
the primary reason for implementing this measure.   On other specific
actions which would be required as segments of other measures,  the panel
survey was inconclusive.  For example, a tax on all  day parking,  and any
restriction on non-essential auto travel had approximately as many
respondents for as against these measure.

       The primary control measures reducing air pollution—that  of
fitting control devices to cars and mandatory inspections  to assure
their continued effectiveness—seem to be the most acceptable.

2.3.1  New Car Standards
       The Federal new car pollution standards seem to have been  accepted
and anticipated with little concern for increased  costs for new cars so
equipped.

2.3.2  Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
       Two factors must be designed into the inspection process and
specifically included in expanded enabling legislation.  The inspection
charges must be reasonable—the mail panel survey  favored a fee of less
than $5 annually—and it must be convenient.  During various discussions
in the cities, some opposition was encountered to  having an inspection
program imposed on a statewide basis to solve a metropolitan problem.

2.3.3  Retrofit of Pre-1968 Cars
       The ease of adopting legislation to require the installation of
retrofit devices on cars built before 1968 will be directly related to
the cost of installing their devices.  While the majority  of the  panel
respondents favored this action if it cost under $50, few  felt  that it
would be justified at a cost of $200 per car.

       Costs for retrofitting pre-1968 motor vehicles in the $200 range
could be equal to or in excess of the actual market value  of the  car.   To
the extent that this level of cost might eliminate the second car in a
                                  2-13

-------
family, it would be beneficial to reducing air pollution from light duty
vehicles.  Although the ownership of older cars by level of income is not
known, this requirement could impose a serious financial burden on lower
income families.

2.3.4  Vehicle Use Reduction
       The predominant opposition to vehicle restraints suggested by the
mail survey indicates restraints are not measures readily acceptable by
the public.  Suggested measures included such constraints as a very high
($500) registration fee, gasoline rationing, or tolls on exit ramps of
freeways.  Inherent to constraining the use of the automobile is the
mandatory provision of making available some alternative mode of
transportation.

       The more severe restrictions on the use of motor vehicles could be
recommended.   However, on the basis of travel  forecasts made available
for this study and limited air monitoring data, these measures could
become controversial.   They will  have a major impact on the economic  and
social character of the region.   It is recommended that several  actions
be undertaken to increase the ability to quantify the effectiveness of
these control  measures before actually implementing them.

       A network of air monitoring stations must be established throughout
the region to (1) obtain comprehensive air data for evaluation; (2) deter-
mine the actual impact of the more palatable inspection and retrofit
controls; and (3) to support the need for the more severe traffic
restrictive controls.   Traffic forecasts measuring effects of alternative
approaches to emission factors,  and refinement of modal use and sensitivity
analysis also should be undertaken.

       Based on these continuing studies, a greater refinement in the air
pollution analysis can be undertaken, pollution criteria reevaluated, and
more accurate quantification of solutions undertaken to support a greater
reliance on the appropriateness  of the required control measures.
                                  2-14

-------
       Pending adequate basic data for imposing control  measures requiring
massive outlays of public funds, economically impacting  major areas of the
city, or requiring the resident to substantially modify  his  travel  habits,
the less severe measures which can be initiated include  the  following.

2.3.5  Car Pooling
       Encouraging car pooling can result in some reduction  of air
pollution without major social or economic impacts.   A small  percentage
of respondents to the survey indicated that they now participate in car
pools, the majority indicated an interest in them, but only  about 10%
indicated that, if necessary, it would be easy to get into one.

2.3.6  Peripheral Parking, Exclusive Bus Lanes
       The two most acceptable motor vehicle restraints  indicated by
survey respondents were creating exclusive bus lanes and prohibiting
traffic or parking in the CBD.   Any prohibition of traffic or parking  in
the CBD,  however, will  require an effective program  of peripheral parking
and transit within the CBD.   Increased effectiveness of  the  present "park-
and-ride" programs will  be necessary.   Both of these control  measures
assumes an improved bus  transportation.

2.3.7  Improved Bus Transportation
       The improvement of the bus service in most metropolitan areas is
currently under way.   The air pollution control  measures have assumed
that these improvements  will  continue as planned and may include such
service improvements  as:  express bus service, exclusive bus  lanes,
peripheral parking, "PRT" personnel rapid transit, regional  bus  network,
and greater improved  transit service.

       Refinement of  presently used mechanisms for furnishing bus service
outside the city limits, or additional legislation,  will be  necessary.

       Although major economic investments will be required,  they have
already been justified as a cost of a balanced transportation system.

                                   2-15

-------
2.3.8  Long-Term Measures
       Limited planning programs have already been established and work is
presently under way to achieve the coordination of land use planning and
transportation-related environmental  factors.

       These long-term approaches to  solving urban problems are generally
accepted by both the citizens surveyed and the public officials contacted.
Although not initially justified for  the reduction of air pollution, they
furnish one of the more acceptable long-term measures to accomplish this
goal.
                                  2-16

-------
       3.0  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS FOR FOURTEEN METROPOLITAN AREAS

     This section presents brief summaries of the air pollution problems
encountered and the concomitant transportation strategies recommended,  for
each of the fourteen urban areas studied.   Some primary characteristics
of the fourteen cities studied are presented in Figure 3.1, together with
major parameters of their pollution problem.  While this matrix will
assist in identifying those cities having  characteristics and air pollution
problem parameters similar to the city of  interest it should be emphasized
that the strategies presented are very specific to the city for which they
were developed and there is not necessarily a strong relationship between
the  parameters presented and the strategies recommended for each city.
                                   3-1

-------
                                  10
                                   o
                                      vo
                                       o
                                        i

                                       o
                                            0)
                                            -o
•(->

<:
                                                OJ
                                                o
                                                o
                                                o
                                                    0)
o
o
o
                                                         0)
                                                        I—
                                                        .0

                                                         2
     o
    tx
o
o
X
o
                                                                     0)
                 (0
                 co
                                                                       0»
                                                                       u
                                                                       S-
                 (4-
                 o
                 01
                 CJ>
                 T3
                   o
                   I/O



                     |

                     O


                      >

                      cu
                      (J

                     jr
                      0)
                    u
                   •i—
                   il
                    
-------
                      3.1   SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  -
                            BALTIMORE, MARYLAND
3.1.1  Air Quality and Emissions Reductions
       The existing air quality levels in Baltimore  are  monitored  by  two
networks of sensors, one of which provided CO data at a  number  of  sites
throughout the areas, the other providing oxidant data for the  center
city only.  One network operates stations throughout the urban  area and
provided the carbon monoxide data used herein;  after extensive  validation,
data were available from seven sites.   The maximum eight-hour average
levels range from 20.6 ppm at a site in the  center city  area  (though  not
in the CBD) to 9.9 and 7.0 ppm at outlying suburban  sites.  Using  the
empirical relation between air quality and emissions developed  from these
sites, it is estimated that the maximum eight-hour CO level in  the densest
portion of the city is about 30 ppm.

       The only oxidant data available from  these stations  are  from
phenolphthalein grab samples, and in the past has generally indicated
minimal oxidant problem.  However, reference method  data from the  new
state network's center city have very recently become available; and  data
from the summer of 1972 indicate a much more severe  oxidant problem,  with
a maximum one-hour level of 0.21 ppm.   Thus, these latter data  were used
for the evaluation here.

       In the case of carbon monoxide,  an  empirical  relation  was developed
between air quality at a site and the emission density in its vicinity.
This relation was then used in conjunction with projected 1977  emission
densities to predict the 1977 air quality in three separate analysis  areas.
The results, which included the reduction through the Federal Motor Vehicle
Pollution Control Program (FMVPCP), were compared with the  national air
quality standards to determine any further reductions required.  In the
case of oxidants, the standard relationship  derived  by EPA enabled the
direct determination of the total hydrocarbon reductions required  (69 per-
cent) and any additional over that provided  by the federal  programs.
                                   3-3

-------
       With this methodology, it was determined that the oxidant standard
will  not be met in 1977.  The one-hour carbon monoxide standard, which  is
only  slightly exceeded at present,  will  clearly be met in 1977.  The
eight-hour CO standard will  be met in the Urban Fringe and Suburban  analysis
areas  but will not be met in the Central Area in 1977 without further
transportation control efforts.

       The oxidant levels will require a  reduction in regional  total
hydrocarbon emissions of aroud 40 percent of the already reduced 1977
level, which requires a 56 percent reduction in motor vehicle emissions.
This is based on an inventory of emissions in the 6-9 a.m. period;  since
the problem is severe, this  further refinement was felt desirable,   i-leeting
the eight-hour CO standard in the 11-square-mile Central  Area of the region
will  require a 36.8 percent  reduction in  the motor vehicle portion  of the
emissions.  Table Bal .1 presents a quantitative summary of these expected
emission levels and required further reductions, with 1970 emissions
included for comparison.

       These conclusions, and the methodology by which they were developed,
represent GCA Technology Division's best  assessment of the problem;  neither
the methodology nor the conclusions have  yet been accepted by the Air
Quality Task Force, although the Maryland BAQC representatives have
recommended that they be so  accepted.  This is, no doubt, partially  due
to the extreme nature of the problem as developed, particularly in  the
case of hydrocarbons.

3.1.2  Control Strategy
       Despite major implementation obstacles associated with some  of the
candidate strategies, the severity of the problem, particularly  the
oxidant-hydrocarbon problem, requires the choice of all  the most effective
possibilities, including a retrofit program with an associated inspection
and maintenance program, and the total subsidy of transit fares.  The
maximum possible reduction of emissions from light-duty vehicles is  not
completely sufficient, so a  program of evaporative and crankcase control
device retrofit for heavy-duty vehicles is necessary.  Specifically, the
following are recommended:
                                   3-4

-------
              Table  Bal.l.   SUMMARY  OF  EXPECTED  1977  EMISSION  LEVELS
                          6-9 a.m.        CARBON MONOXIDE (kg/mi2/day)
                        HYDROCARBONS
                          (kg/day)      CBMTRAL    URBAN FRINGE    SUBURBS
1970 Total
58,850
10,281
3,787
780
1977:
   Light-duty vehicles
   Heavy-duty vehicles
   Other

      Total
AQ Std. Equivalent
11,770
9,600
8,990
30,360
18,244
2,824
1,793
251
4,868
3,078
1,050
666
90
1,806
3,078
235
149
145
529
3,078
Further Reduction
  Required
12,116
 1,790
 Stationary Sources and non-gasoline vehicles
                                     3-5

-------
       1.  Traffic flow improvements
       2.  Bus transit service improvements
       3.  Total  subsidy of bus transit operations
       4.  Mandatory retrofit of uncontrolled  vehicles:
           a.  Catalytic converters on pre-1975  light-duty
               vehicles
           b.  Crankcase and evaporative controls  on  pre-
               1973 heavy-duty vehicles
       5.  Annual  inspection and mandatory maintenance

       The detailed reductions produced and  the  calculation  of  their  total
effect are shown in the following Table Bal.2.   Note  that the order of
their presentation is dictated by the needs  of the  calculations,  and  not
by preference  for the various component strategies.
                                   3-6

-------
                Table  Bal.2.   RECOMMENDED CONTROL STRATEGIES AND THEIR EFFECTS
Control Action
1977 Expected
Traffic flow im-
provements to
increase speed
Total subsidy of
transit fares
with associated
service improve-
ments and parking
restraints
Inspection and
maintenance pro-
gram
Control Device
Retrofit:
a) Catalytic con-
verters on pre-
1975 light-duty
vehicles
b) Evaporative
and crankcase
control on pre-
1973 heavy-duty
gasoline vehicles
Hydrocarbon Emissions (kg/day)
6-9 a.m. peak
Effect Emissions Total Further Reduction
Emissions de-
crease equiva-
lent to 107.
VMT reduction
157o decrease
in VMT
Effective emission
reduction: HC-4.017«
and CO -3. 197,*
Effective emission
reduction: HC-23.337.
and CO-27.337»
Reduction of hydro-
carbon emissions by
6.87» of heavy-duty
vehicle contribution
30,360
- 2,162
28,198
- 3,243
24,955
650
24,305
- 3,783
20,522
- 2,612
17,910
12,116
- 2,162
9,954
- 3,243
6,711
650
6,061
- 3.783
2,278
- 2,612
0
Carbon Monoxide-Central Area
(kg/mi2/day)
Emission Density Further Reduction
4,868 1>790
- 467 - 467
4,401 1,323
- 700 - 700
3,701 623
- 112 - 112
3,589 511
- 957 - 957
2,632 0
- - - No CO Effect- - -
In both cases,  % reductions  apply to the 757» of motor  vehicle emissions remaining after VMT reductions.

-------
           3.2  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

3.2.1   Air Quality and Emissions
       Carbon Monoxide Air Quality and Emissions
       The eight-hour average CO air quality will  not be achieved by 1977
in several zones in the inner city of Boston with  the CO emission reduc-
tions  obtained from the Federal  Motor Vehicle Emissions Control  Program.
Three zones (Kenmore Square, Haymarket Square-Government Center  and Science
Park)  will exceed the standard by a substantial amount, while two others
(the East Boston Area by the Sumner-Callahan Tunnel  and the Washington
Street-Albany Street Area) will  exceed it slightly.   Tables Bos.l, Bos.2,
and Bos.3 summarize the emissions and air quality  in the three most crit-
ical zones with and without the application of the recommended control
strategies.  The other two zones will easily attain the air quality when
any of the recommended transportation controls are applied.

       Oxidant Air Quality and Hydrocarbon Emissions
       The oxidant problem in Metropolitan Boston  is regional and assumed
to be uniform within the Route 128 area.  A 25 percent reduction by 1977
in hydrocarbon emissions will be needed in addition to that which is attained
by the Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Program (FMVECP)  and the
reduction of the stationary sources.  Table Bos.4  summarizes the emissions
and air quality in the area within Route 128 with  and without the applica-
tion of the recommended control  strategies.

3.2.2  Control Strategies
       The following transportation control strategies are recommended for
implementation within the Route 128 boundary and their projected impact
over the years is shown in Figues Bos.l and Bos.2.

       a.  A Source Oriented Control Strategy consisting of Inspection-
           Maintenance and Retrofit estimated to reduce emissions as
           summarized in Table Bos.5.
       b.  A Transportation Oriented Control Strategy consisting of a CBD
           Parking Management, Peripheral Parking  Facilities, moderate
           Transit Improvements, Road Pricing and  Traffic Flow Improvements.
           These are estimated to reduce emissions in the inner city and
           throughout the region by the percent shown in Table Bos.5.
                                    3-8

-------
                               TABLE BOS.l

       CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS (KG/DAY) AND CONCENTRATION (PPM)
             KENMORE SQ. WITH AND WITHOUT CONTROL STRATEGIES

Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
CO Level
(8-hour Average)

Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
CO Level
(8-hour Average)
1977
Present without
1970 strategy
13,130 7,164
45 54
13,175 7,218
22.4 12.3
Without Strategies
1978 1979 1981
5,917 4,852 3,468
56 58 63
5,973 4,910 3,531
10.1 8.3 6.0
1977
with
strategy
3,790
54
3,844
6.5
1984
2,339
70
2,409
4.1

Area = 0.471 sq. mi.
                                   3-9

-------
                               TABLE BOS.2

       CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS (KG/DAY) AND CONCENTRATION (PPM)
          AT HAYMARKET SQ. WITH AND WITHOUT CONTROL STRATEGIES

Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
CO Level
(8-hour Average)
Present
1970
12,119
45
12,164
20.7
1977
without
strategy
7,837
54
7,891
13.4
1977
with
strategy
4,195
54
4,249
7.2
1978 1979
wi thout
strategy
6,472
55
6,527
11.1
5,306
57
5,363
9.1
Area = 0.471 sq. mi.
                                   3-10

-------
                               TABLE BOS.3

       CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS (KG/DAY) AND CONCENTRATION (PPM)
           AT SCIENCE PARK WITH AND WITHOUT CONTROL STRATEGIES

Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
CO Level
(8-hour Average)
Present
1970
14,148
45
14,193
24.2
1977
without
strategy
8,658
54
8,712
14.8
1977
with
strategy
4,645
54
4,699
8.0
1978 1979
without
strategy
7,238
55
7,293
12.4
6,027
57
6,084
10.4
Area = 0.471 sq. mi.
                                  3-11

-------
                               TABLE BOS.4

         HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS (KG/DAY) AND OXIDANT LEVELS (PPM)
        WITHIN RT.  128 REGION WITH AND WITHOUT CONTROL STRATEGIES

Vehicular Emissions
Non-Vehicular Emissions
Total Emissions
Oxidant Level
(1-hour Average)
Present
1972
131,555
170,002
301,557
.20

1977
without
strategy
72,101
51,000
123,101
.10

1977
with
strategy
47,800
51 ,000
98,830
.074

1978 1979
without
strategy
51 ,000
52,500
113,500
.089

52,500
54,000
106,500
.081

Area = 243 sq. mi.
                                  3-12

-------
                      TABLE BOS.5
EMISSION REDUCTIONS WITH RECOMMENDED CONTROL STRATEGIES

Program
Element
Source Control

Transportation
Oriented

Program
Strategy
Inspection and
Maintenance
Retrofit
CBD Parking
Management,
Peripheral
Parking Facili-
ties, Mass Transit
Improvements,
Road Pricing
Traffic Flow
Improvements
TOTAL
Percent Emission Reduction
Inner City
HC CO
10.4 8.7
33.2 43.5
11.1 11.1
1.5 1.5
56.2 64.8
Region
HC CO
10.4 8.7
33.2 43.5
3.9 3.9
.3 .3
47.8 56.4
                         3-13

-------
               3.3  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-DAYTON,  OHIO

3.3.1  Air Quality
       The second highest measurement of oxidant concentration during  1971
was 343 micrograms per cubic meter, one hour reading.   It was measured
at the sole monitor operating at that time (just off Dixie Drive,  approxi-
mately five miles north of town).   The national  primary standard of 160
micrograms per cubic meter, one hour reading, must be achieved by  July 1977.
Carbon monoxide measurements indicate that no problem should exist with
carbon monoxide ambient air levels by July  1977.

       Serious doubt exists about the validity of the data used to deter-
mine the air quality for the Dayton area.   Reasons for this doubt  are  based
on the erratic nature of peak value (732 micrograms  per cubic meter)
obtained on only one day in well over a year of monitoring, and upon  the
fact that neither this value nor any value close to  it has been repeated
since August 1971.  During the equivalent period of  1972, no value  of  the
same order of magnitude was obtained.  Perhaps the most important  factor
in questioning the validity of the 1971 summer data  is the location of the
monitor in relation to abnormal traffic flow patterns during that  time.
At the time when the high readings were obtained,a temporary interchange
was located at the interstate highway approximately  one mile east  of  the
monitor.  Traffic was diverted to a road upwind of the monitor across  to
Dixie highway, located to the west of the monitor approximately 200 to 300
yards.  It might be noted that during this time when the high oxidant
readings were obtained, the carbon monoxide monitor  in the CBD did not
have a correspondingly high peak.   This would indicate that the emissions
in the CBD were not in proportion to the unusually high value measured at
the monitor located 4 to 5 miles north of town.   In  addition, the  monitor
is located in a parking lot used by the school district for parking school
buses.  Although these buses should not normally create a problem  with
photochemical oxidants due to the lag time in oxidant formation after
emission of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, the buses could have been
involved in the especially high reading that was recorded on August 30 due
to the excessive HQ^ interference which may not have been accounted for by
usual statistical adjustment procedures.

                                  3-14

-------
       It should be noted that the temporary interchange  has  since  been
closed and the interstate highway opened to traffic.   During  the  summer  of
1972 no value approached the single value measured on August  30,  1971, of
372 micrograms per cubic meter, and in fact no value  approached  that  level
again after August 30, 1971.  The second highest reading  was  measured the
hour after the highest reading on August 30, and that value was  343 micro-
grams per cubic meter.  The next highest value measured was on August 30,
1971 (314 micrograms per cubic meter).  The highest value measured  during
the summer months of 1972 and in fact the highest value measured  since
September of 1971 was 225 micrograms per cubic meter, on  August  31, 1972.
This was the only value to exceed 200 micrograms per  cubic meter  since
September 1971.  This indicates that a significant reduction  in  oxidant
levels in the vicinity of the monitor has occurred.  It is not felt that
meteorological changes alone should cause an overall  shift in values  of
this magnitude and consistency.

       The most obvious reason for this reduction would be the improved
traffic flow patterns around the monitor.  It seems that  the  high values
measured in August 1971 were due to the unusual  traffice  conditions in this
area, the school bus situation, or some other unexplained localized phe-
nomena.

3.3.2  Emission Reduction Required
       A reduction of 58 percent in hydrocarbon emissions is  estimated to
be needed to achieve the oxidant National Ambient Air Quality Standard,
assuming the air quality data to be accurate and representative.

       Table Day.l shows the stationary, mobile, and  total hydrocarbon
emissions for 1971, 1977 with only federal emission controls  applied, and
1977 as required to meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standard  (58
percent reduction in total emissions).  Comparison of the two 1977  columns
indicates that an additional 27.2 percent reduction in mobile emissions
will be required to achieve the necessary 16.2 percent required  reduction
in total emissions.
                                  3-15

-------
                                TABLE DAY.l
                     24-HOUR HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS FOR
                  MONTGOMERY AND GREENE COUNTIES  (kg/day)

Stationary
Mobile*
Total
1971
61 ,224
86,693
147,917
1977 (Federal)
29,902
44,251
74,153
1978 (Federal)
31,009
38,655
69,664
1977 (Standard)
29,902
32,223
62,125
*Based on average speed of 28.0 mph for 1971  and 29.1  mph  for 1977,  78.

        Based upon the preceding information, it is not possible  to unqual-
 ifiedly recommend a control  strategy for the Dayton area.   It,  however,
 would be in the best interest of the residents of the Dayton area for
 efforts to be made to reduce vehicular contributed pollution in order  to
 further improve air quality.   Special  effort should be made to  increase
 use of the mass transit system.  Use of the  private automobile  in the  CBD
 should be discouraged; and effort to insure  proper operation of these
 vehicles should be made, such as a periodic  inspection and/or maintenance
 program.  In addition, an adequate air quality monitoring system should
 be instituted and maintained in order to measure and provide updated pro-
 jections of required emission reductions.   As an interim  measure to insure
 compliance, an  episode control strategy could be implemented.   It should
 be noted that if the air quality data is correct, projections indicate
 that the National Ambient Air Quality Standards would only be violated twice
 annually at the worst (once is permissible).

 3.3.3  Proposed Control  Strategy
        In consideration of the emission reduction potential and obstacles
 to implementation of the control measures  considered, the  following control
 strategy is proposed.
                                   3-lfi

-------
•  Phase 1  - Problem Evaluation and Planning
   In view of the limited air quality and emissions data, a compre-
   hensive program for the expansion and review of air quality
   monitoring network and stationary source emissions data should
   be completed no later than October 1974.  During this period the
   Episode plan described below should be fully developed and ready
   for implementation by Summer 1975 if necessary.  Also during
   this period the requirements and regional extent of an Inspection/
   Maintenance Program most effective for the Dayton region must
   be defined and any preliminary testing performed.
t  Phase 2 - Control Measure Implementation
   By June  1975 the following control measures should be fully
   implemented in order to achieve maximum emission reduction
   potential by July  1977.

   1.  Inspection/Maintenance - a loaded emission test of the Key
       Mode type with manditory annual inspection.
   2.  Transit and Traffic Improvements as currently planned.
   3.  An Episode Control Plan as described below.

•  Episode Controls
   An episode control plan is recommended for control of photo-
   chemical oxidant pollution in the Dayton region.  While this
   type of strategy is not generally useful in providing for the
   attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards, certain
   specific features of the Dayton problem appear to indicate the
   usefulness of this strategy.

   1.  Based on monitoring data extending from August  1971 through
       September  1972, the air quality standards appear to be ex-
       ceeded on less than 10 days per year.
   2.  The highest photochemical oxidant measurements occur during
       period of general atmospheric stagnation.  These stagnation

                            3-17

-------
              periods are currently being forecasted and implementation
              of episode controls would not have to wait until  air quality
              standards were actually exceeded.
          3.  The region is small enough, in terms of physical  site and
              population, to permit significant diversion to non-polluting
              transit on a short-term basis.

       It is therefore recommended that an episode control  plan be adopted
for the Dayton region which incorporates the following features.   Detailed
elaboration of this plan should be conducted by State and local  officials
and reported to EPA as a part of the second semi-annual  report.   The plan
should:

       1.  Provide for plan activation based on a forecast of adverse
           meteorological conditions and deteriorating air quality (i.e.
           120 pg/m3 oxidant).
       2.  Closing of all nonessential   operations, especially those
           which generate large numbers of auto trips such as shopping
           centers, theaters, etc.
       3.  Mobilization of available bus fleets (school  buses,  national
           guard vehicles) to provide essential  transportation.
       4.  Strictly enforced limitation of private auto use on major
           arteries in the two county area surrounding Dayton.

The episode control strategy should provide the degree of reduction in
hydrocarbon emissions required to prevent formation of levels of photo-
chemical oxidants in quantities exceeding air quality standards.   It is
estimated that an episode along the lines described above will  reduce
mobile source hydrocarbon emissions by 30 to 40 percent.  This  is equiv-
alent to a 20 percent overall reduction in hydrocarbon emissions  and should
allow attainment of air quality standards by 1977.
                                 3-18

-------
              3.4  SUMMARY  AND CONCLUSIONS-DENVER,  COLORADO

3.4.1  Air Quality and Emission Reduction
       The physical and climatic characteristics  of the  Denver  metropolitan
area impose a finite limitation on the allowable  emission  density  for  the
area if ambient air quality standards  are to  be met.   Mobile  source  emissions
are responsible for 97 percent of the  total  carbon  monoxide emissions  and
70 percent of the hydrocarbon emissions in the metropolitan Denver area.
Superimposed on this physical environment is  a high vehicle population
growth rate (5.2 percent/year) and the highest per  capita  automobile
ownership in the nation.  The combined impact of  these physical  and  social
characteristics is to partially offset the expected benefits  from  the
incursion of controlled automobiles into the  vehicle population.

       The 1971 CAMP station air quality data show  a  64  percent reduction  in
carbon monoxide emissions required to  meet the Federal eight-hour  standard.
The hydrocarbon emissions must be reduced by  32 percent  in order to  bring
the peak-hour oxidant values within Federal  requirements.

       The emission estimates and the  transportation data  indicate the
source of the pollutant is  strongest in the center  of the  city.  However,
the outer parts of the metropolitan area contribute substantially; therefore,
any program designed to reduce extreme pollution  levels  should  not be  limited
to the reduction of maximum emissions  area, but should include  some  plan
for area-wide reductions.  It should also be  noted  that  although the CAMP
station data support the conclusions that areas of  high  vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and therefore high emissions are areas of high pollutant
concentration, the meteorological and  physical factors documented  by Riehl
and Herkhof^ ' strongly suggest that other high concentration areas  may
well exist which are not currently monitored.
^Herbert Riehl and Dirk Herkhof, "Weather Factors in Denver Air
   Pollution," August 1970.
                                   3-19

-------
3.4.2  Control Strategy

       The analyses of the control measures considered most feasible for

implementation by 1977 show that no one control  measure will  be sufficient

to meet the required reduction for carbon monoxide.   The reductions

achievable by several combinations of control  measures are shown in  Tables

Den.l and Den.2.  The strategies considered are  as follows:


       0  Strategy 1 - Inspection/Maintenance, Lead  Idle Air  Fuel
          Ratio/Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect  (I&M, LIA/VSAD)

          This strategy is totally exhaust control oriented.   It
          consists of either key mode or idle  inspection  and
          maintenance with twice yearly inspection,  LIA7VSAD  retrofit
          for  pre-1968 light-duty vehicles.

       •  Strategy 2 - Inspection/Maintenance, Lead  Idle Air  Fuel
          Ratio/Ignition Timing Modification  (I&M, LIA/ITM)	

          Inspection/Maintenance as above with LIA/ITM retrofit for
          pre-1968 vehicles.  The primary difference between
          Strategy 1 and Strategy 2 is the greater impact on  CO
          of the Ignition Timing Modifications.

       •  Strategy 3 - VMT Reductions

          This strategy does not include an exhaust  controls  with
          the exception of Federal new car controls.  The maximum
          reduction is achieved in the core area.   The suggested
          measures are (1) regional bus network  improvements,
          (2) peripheral parking, (3) car pooling  and those restraints
          necessary to ensure the effectiveness  of these measures,
          namely, curb parking removal.

       •  Strategy 4 - Combined Strategy 1  and Strategy 3

          VMT reductions are combined with the exhaust control
          measures in Strategy 1 above.

       •  Strategy 5 - Combined Strategy 2 and Strategy 3
       The above strategies are considered conservative in their estimates

of emission reduction possible; however,  no strategy will  precisely achieve
the 64 percent reduction required even in the core area where VMT reduction

impact is greatest.  No consideration has been given to any high altitude
retrofit package  due to lack of data.  The reduction achievable by imple-

mentation of this exhaust control measure will definitely  be sufficient

                                    3-20

-------
                                   Table Den.l .
OJ
I
no
PERCENT REDUCTIONS ACHIEVABLE*

FOR CO (TOTAL EMISSIONS)
TOTAL
(64% Reduction Required)
1971
Federal New Car
Strategy 1
Strategy 2
Strategy 3
Strategy 4
Strategy 5
DENVER
Emissions
(tons/day)
538.8
357.6
279.9
263.5
348.1
272.9
257.0
Reduction
(percent)
_ _
33.6
48.1
51 .1
35.4
49.4
52.3
CENTRAL AREA
Emissions
(tons/day)
162.0
101.8
78.3
73.5
95.9
74.0
69.4
Reduction
(percent)
_ _
37.2
51.7
54.6
40.8
54.3
57.2
CORE
Emissions
(tons/day)
79.1
42.9
36.7
34.4
39.8
34.1
32.0
Reduction
(percent)
_ _
45.8
53.6
56.5
49.7
56.9
59.5
                *Reductions  from  1971  all  include  1975  standards,

-------
                                       Table Den.2.
PERCENT REDUCTIONS ACHIEVABLE*

FOR HC (TOTAL EMISSIONS)

TOTAL
(32% Reduction Required)
1971
Federal New Car
Strategy 1
Strategy 2
Strategy 3
Strategy 4
Strategy 5
DENVER
Emissions
(tons/day)
105.8
77.6
72.4
72.5
76.6
71.6
71.7
Reduction
(percent)
__
26.7
31.6
31 .5
27.6
32.3
32.2
CENTRAL AREA
Emissions
(tons/day)
20.4
10.6
9.0
9.1
10.0
8.6
8.6
Reduction
(percent)
__
48.0
55.9
55.4
51.0
57.8
57.8
CORE
Emissions
(tons/day)
8.7
4.4
3.7
3.8
4.1
3.5
3.5
Reduction
(percent)
__
49.4
57.5
56.3
52.9
59.8
59.8
u>
I
ro
ro
            *Reductions  from  1971 all  include  1975 standards.

-------
in combination with Strategy 4 or Strategy 5 above to meet the required
reduction for the core and central  areas.


       Based on the figures in Table Den.l,  it is  recommended  that Strategy
5 (with the additional high altitude retrofit package)  be adopted  as  the
transportation control plan for Denver.


3.4.3  Conclusions and Recommendations
       From the qualitative and quantitative analyses  of existing data and

recommendations for the control of transportation related carbon  monoxide
and hydrocarbon emissions, the following conclusions  can be stated:
       •  The Federal  standard for eight-hour carbon monoxide will
          require a 64 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions
          by 1977.  The peak-hour oxidant data indicate a  32 percent
          reduction is required in the 6 - 9 a.m.  hydrocarbon emissions

       •  Federal new car standards will not be sufficient to meet
          the required reduction by 1977.

       •  No one control  measure will  be sufficient to  meet the
          required carbon monoxide reduction.

       0  A region-wide plan is required to

          (1) Prevent the deterioration of air quality  in
              areas not currently exceeding the standards

          (2) To reduce the region-wide contribution to the
              accumulation of pollutants in maximum concen-
              tration areas.

       •  The region-wide plan would consist of

          (1) Those control measures which will  effectively
              reduce the  region-wide contribution  to the
              formation of critical concentrations of which
              some combination of the following is considered
              most feasible and effective:

              'Inspecti on/Mai ntenance
              •High Altitude Retrofit
              •Pre-1968 Retrofit

          (2) Those control measures which will  reduce  the
              emissions in critical concentration  areas
              resulting from high density vehicle  miles
              of travel at  low average vehicle speeds.
                                  3-23

-------
          (3) Those long-term measures which in addition to those
              mentioned above will  ensure that existing air quality
              in the region is not degraded.  These measures should
              include:
              'Land use planning with attention to transportation
               related environmental  factors

              "Tax reforms to reverse the existing encouragement
               for additional cars and/or VMT tax.
              •Planned development of a regional  public transporta-
               tion system in conjunction with land use planning.
       On the basis of these conclusions,  the following recommendations  are

made:
       1.  Establish immediately a testing facility to adequately
           measure the uncontrolled and controlled emissions  at
           high altitudes.  This facility should also test the
           proposed retrofit devices especially the high altitude
           modifications.  Use this facility to test the findings
           of the Northrop study'^) .

       2.  Expand the regional monitoring network for carbon
           monoxide and oxidants.

       3.  On the basis of test results and the findings of the
           Northrop study, select an Inspection and Maintenance
           and retrofit program most effective at high altitudes
           and phase implementation of this program to achieve
           total impact by June 1976 at the latest.

       4.  On the basis of test results and findings of the
           Northrop study, determine the retrofit packages most
           effective for the Denver area (with special attention
           to high altitude retrofits) and phase implementation
           of this program to achieve full impact by June 1976
           at the latest.
   Northrop Corporation, "Vehicle Emission Inspection and Control
   Program, Volume I - Summary," unpublished report, 15 November
   1972.
                                   3-24

-------
5.  Implementation of those VMT reduction measures  directed at
    the central  area (until  extended monitoring indicates
    extension to other areas)  and consisting primarily of:

    * Regional  bus network improvements
    • Peripheral parking
    • Car pooling

    and those restraints necessary to ensure the effectiveness
    of these measures, namely

    * Curb parking removal

    Although further restraints such as taxation may be required
    to support a large modal  shift, they require careful  considera-
    tion of socio-economic impact and demand elasticity modeling
    before implementation.

6.  Utilize the modal split,  trip distribution, and economic
    analyses being carried out by the Council  of Governments
    and the Regional Transportation District and long-range
    planning program to postulate alternative restraints  and
    transportation impacts on  the total transportation network.
    This effort will focus on  long-term measures to assure  the
    maintenance of ambient standards.

7.  Update the emissions and  air quality data base  on the  basis
    of monitoring and test results at least semi-annually  during
    the period January 1973 to July 1976.

8.  Redefine, if necessary, the air quality problem on the
    basis of the updated inventory and any modeling performed.

9.  Re-evaluate and redefine  the elements of the control
    strategy, where necessary, at least semi-annually
    between January 1973 and  July 1976.
                            3-25

-------
          3.5  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-HOUSTON/GALVESTON,  TEXAS

3.5.1   Air Quality and Emission Reductions
       There is no identified carbon monoxide problem in the  Greater
Houston Area.  An ozone measurement study was performed on the  upper Texas
Gulf coast between April and June of 1972.  This study identified  a
regional photochemical oxidant problem of major magnitude.  As  a  result
of this study, the baseline maximum one-hour oxidant concentration was
revised upward to 0.315 ppm (630
       After careful  evaluation, a total  hydrocarbon emission reduction goal
of 75 percent was established to meet photochemical  oxidant standards  in the
Greater Houston Area.   Calculations were  performed to determine  the total
hydrocarbon emissions  from all  sources including motor vehicles,  and to
estimate the reduction possible with present stationary source regulations
and Federal motor vehicle emission controls.  This initial  evaluation  de-
termined that the ambient air quality standards could not be met  by 1977,
even with zero mobile  emissions, unless hydrocarbon  emissions from
stationary sources are also reduced significantly.

3.5.2  Proposed Control Strategy
       The proposed strategy is phased so as to take advantage of legisla-
tive or judicial remission, technology development and changes in require-
ments resulting from a better understanding of the air pollution  problem
in the Greater Houston Area.  In its fully implemented form, it will allow
air quality standards  to be met by the 1977 due date.  Phase I measures
have substantial justification, either in terms of significant air quality
improvement or other urban needs.  Present justification for Phase II
measures is tentative  at best.   The final decision to implement them must
be based on a better demonstration of the nend for further hydrocarbon
emission reductions than is now available.  Figure HOU-1 summarizes the
emission reductions possible from implementation of Phase I and Phase II
of this proposed control strategy.
                                    3-26

-------
                400 r-
CO
I
         CO
         00
         03  OC
         o:  <
         -

         o:  oo
         o  z:
         >-  o
O  CO
H-  Z3
   O
                300 -
       200  -
                TOO -
33. 5X*



~



'iff!
Ill
.•'. .'.x: ..
'.•'-.:.•


1 311







61 .2%*
-::;;-st|ffi>i|i



*REDUCTION FROM PRESENT
EMISSION LEVEL


62.3**





I


'<•!•'•',' '.
Pf
'-'.•I •'•'•'. •'.'•'.'•'•
•'•!**"*•• V*"'*


lit!




63.8%*
•X.V''- '•',•'•
"'•X.^'-'-'vl'X '.'-''•"'•'•':
Xy/^:y;Xy;;;;;;X;t
iixliil
;• ->!•>"•'
l^xllxii
•X-X-Xv-
70. U*




1

''•; •'•'•'-> '.'•>' •-•••/.•'.' •"

75%*



illliil
PRESENT MEASURE MEASURE MEASURES MEASURE MEASURE
REGS. 2 3 4,5,6 7 8
             Figure  HOU.1  Estimated Total Hydrocarbon Emissions  in 1977 Resulting from the
                           Proposed Control Measures

-------
       Phase I  Measures

       1.   Continue evaluation of control  measures  -  Expand the air moni-
           toring program in the Greater Houston Area to  include more
           stations and gas chromotography at selected stations.   Initiate
           a regular review of the air quality and  emission inventory data
           to determine if adjustment of the emission control  strategy is
           required to meet ambient air standards.

       2.   Stationary source measures - Tighten and expand  the Regulation
           V stationary source controls as recommended by the  Texas Air
           Pollution Control Service's study.  Broaden the  coverage of
           Regulation V to include all counties in  the region.

       3.   Mandatory inspection/maintenance - Implement an  annual  inspec-
           tion/maintenance program for in-use vehicles.  An idle emission
           test performed in conjunction with the annual  safety inspection
           is the method recommended.

       4.   Mass transit - A substantial improvement in mass transit is re-
           quired in the Greater Houston Area.  Based on  this  need and
           recognizing the extensive studies that have been performed, it
           is recommended that Phase I of the Houston Transit  Action Pro-
           gram be implemented as soon as possible.

       5.   Parking measures - It is recommended that  parking measures be
           instituted in all high density areas.  These include strict
           enforcement of existing parking regulations, elimination of
           preferential rates for all day parking,  and establishment of
           procedures to control parking availability as  adequate mass
           transit is provided.
       6.   Car pool incentives - Initiate a formal  information program
           with the aim of increasing the amount of voluntary  car pooling.
           This program should include a computer matching  element.
       It is estimated that measures 4, 5 and 6 will  bring about a 3 to 5
percent reduction in VMT.


       7.  Fugitive and evaporative emission controls - (a) Promulgate
           regulations to control  evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from
           all  gasoline marketing  levels,  (b) Promulgate regulations  to
           control  all reactive hydrocarbon emissions from solvent users.
           (c)  Promulgate regulations to attack fugitive losses  from all
           process  industries.


       Phase II Measures

       If at the end of the evaluation period in 1974 it is determined

that additional hydrocarbon emission reductions are required,  those reduc-

tions can be obtained through implementation of the following  measure:


                                   3-28

-------
       8.   Motor vehicle emission reduction -  (a)  Retrofit a  catalytic con-
           verter on all 1968-1974 automobiles  and reduce the vehicle miles
           traveled during the summer and fall  months  by 30 percent or (b)  no
           major vehicle retrofit program and  reduce vehicle  miles  traveled
           by 50 percent during the summer and  fall months.   The method rec-
           ommended to effect the vehicle mile  reduction is  gasoline rationing,


       As  is obvious, implementation of the Phase  II measure  would  be very

difficult.  Rigorous objections at all  levels of government,  industry and

the public can be expected.   For that reason,  it is not recommended unless

and until  the need for additional (over Phase  I) hydrocarbon  emission re-

ductions are substantiated by additional  ambient air quality  monitoring.


3.5.3  Conclusions and Recommendations

       Presented below are the major conclusions and recommendations that

have emerged as a result of this study.


       Conclusions

       •  Photochemical oxidants and total hydrocarbons are well above
          the national standards a significant  portion of the time  in the
          Houston area.

       •  Stationary source as well as mobile  source reductions are required
          to allow the ambient standards  to be  met.

       •  There is no adequate definition of the actual effect that emis-
          sion levels have on ambient air quality  in the Greater Houston
          Area.  The present air quality  measurements and the accuracy of
          the emission inventory are not sufficient to develop this rela-
          tionship.

       •  Significant reductions in hydrocarbon emissions can be obtained
          by tightening Regulation V.

       •  Annual inspection/maintenance is necessary to obtain full benefit
          from Federal motor vehicle emission  controls.

       •  Traffic flow improvements offer only  marginal positive contribu-
          tions to air quality.
       •  A substantial improvement in mass transit is required in  the
          Greater Houston Area.  The Houston Transit Action Program is a
          major step in the right direction; however, it is questionable
          whether the key elements can be completed by the 1977 air quality
          deadline.

       •  Substantial mobile source emission reductions over those  that
          can be achieved through individual vehicle emission controls can
          only be obtained by direct reductions in vehicle miles traveled.


                                   3-29

-------
       0  The use of vehicles cannot be significantly restrained without
          providing some alternate means of transportation.
       •  Pricing schemes (including taxes) to discourage auto travel  are
          largely ineffective and heavily regressive.
       •  Gas rationing appears to be the most directly effective and  ad-
          ministratively viable means of imposing VMT reductions.

       Recommendations
       It is recommended that the Phase I control measures be implemented.
The measures have substantial justification, either in terms of signifi-
cant air quality improvement or other urban needs.  The final  decision
regarding implementation of the Phase II measure should be deferred until
the need for additional (over Phase I) hydrocarbon emission reductions are
substantiated by further ambient air quality monitoring and a review of
the air quality standards in light of the cost to achieve them.
                                   3-30

-------
          3.6  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-LOS ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA

3.6.1  Air Quality in the South Coast Air Basin
       Air quality measurements taken in the South  Coast  Air  Basin  show
the air pollution to be a severe problem.  The severity of  the  air  pollution
can be shown by at least three indices:   (1) the extensive  geographical
area which experiences the problem, (2)  the number  of days  per  year that
various established standards are violated, and (3)  the number  of pollu-
tants which contribute to the problem.

       Unlike areas which experience localized pollution  from a limited
number of point sources, the air pollution characteristic of  Los Angeles
is truly regional.  The areal nature of  the problem is the  result of
several factors.   First, the major source of contaminants in  the Basin  is
the automobile, which means the primary  pollutants* are emitted from
millions of spread out mobile sources (Figure LA.l).   The low density of
the region contributes to this by having thousands  of miles of  streets
and freeways cutting around and through  the 8000 or so square miles of
the Basin.  Finally, since the principal air pollution problem  is photo-
chemical oxidants, the primary pollutants are given the chance  to diffuse
before becoming involved in the photochemical  reactions which ultimately
generate ozone (03).

       The number of days on which different air quality  standards  is
violated varies as a function of pollutant and time of year.  High  photo-
chemical oxidant levels occur predominantly during  the summer months whereas
the CO levels are generally highest during the winter months.   The  season-
al variation of selected pollutants is seen by examining  data compiled  for
the west San Fernando Valley (Figure LA.2).  This valley  experiences neither
the best nor worst air in the Basin, and consequently, can  be viewed as
"typical".
*
 Primary pollutants are those pollutants which  are emitted  directly into
 the atmosphere, e.g., CO, HC, NO; secondary pollutants  are those which
 have resulted from a transformation process involving  primary pollutants,
 e.g. N02, 03.
                                   3-31

-------
                                                               ORGANIC  GASES
                                                                 3200 TPD
                                                                        Other
                                                                                Petroleum
                                                                                Industry
                                     Motor Vehicles
                        NITROGEN OXIDES
                           1570 TPD
                                       Other
CO
rv>
        Motor
        Vehicles
Organic Solvent
     Users
     CARBON MONOXIDE
         11300 TPD
                     Other
                                                 Combustion
                                                  of Fuels
                                                                                                                         Motor
                                                                                                                         Vehicles
                                         Figure  LA.l  Percentage  of Emissions  From Major Sources
                                                       in the  South  Coast Air Basin -  1970
                                         Source:   State of California, The Resources Agency, Air Resources Board,
                                                  California Emission Inventory - 1970. July 1972, p. 45.

-------
            oso
                               PHOTOCMEf/ICAL OXIOAMS
                 FEDER/L ST'O - 0.08 P?M - MAXIMUM Cf.E HOUR CONCENTRATION
               •65
                       'CO
                               '67
                                       '60
                                               69
                                                       •/o
              60
           - «0
          sl
          X ~*
              30
          *
          0" 20
          Sg
          21
              10
                                CARBON MONOXIDE
A      A
i
                                            A
       FEDERAL ST'D . 35 PPM • HAXir.VJM OHE-Hr-'JR CO'TCNTHATION
               •65
                       •66      '67
                                       •68
                                                •69
                                                        '70
£z
o o
             2.0
             l.B
             1C
             14
             17
             1.0
             08
             06
             04
             0.2
                        OXIDES OF NITHOGEN
                 CALIF ST O - 0.25 PPM NO, - MAXIMUM ONE HOUR CONCENTRATION
                                    *
     •65      -66      -67       -68      69
         NOTE: THE FEDERAL STANDARD IS 0 05 PPM I
              ANNUAL ARITHMETIC MEAN
                                                        •70
     Figure  LA.2.Major A1r  Pollutants - Monthly Maximum  Hourly Averages
                   West San Fernando Valley  (Monitored  in  Reseda) 1965-  1970.
Source:   Branch, M. C.,  and  E. Y. Leong  (eds.), Research Investioation-
          Air Pollution and City Planning,  Environmental Science  and
          Engineering, University of  California. Los  Angeles,  1972,  p. 6.
                                          3-33

-------
       The oxidant control  strategy discussed in this report involves  the
control of high reactive organic gases (hydrocarbons) as defined by the
Los Angeles APCD Rule 66.  This control  approach was  used in the State
Air Implementation Plan, and has been tentatively accepted by EPA.   As
a result of this approach,  some hydrocarbons considered to be reactive
by EPA, are not considered  in this control  strategy.

       The high yearly ambient oxidant reading is considered to be  direct-
ly proportional to the amount of high reactive hydrocarbon emissions for
that year.  In other words, straight line proportional  rollback of  high
reactive hydrocarbon emissions is used to predict the emissions reduction
needed to meet the oxidant  standard.

       The base year of 1970 is used to  make this prediction.  On August
6, 1970, the yearly one-hour high oxidant reading of  .62 ppm was recorded
at Riverside.  The .67 ppm  year high oxidant reading  used by the California
Air Resources Board (ARB) in the air implementation plan has since  been
rejected by the ARB.   The State Plan showed a total  of 195 tons/day of
stationary source high reactive hydrocarbon emission, and 33 tons/day  from
aircraft in 1970.   The 1970 emissions from other mobile sources (i.e., on-
highway light and heavy duty gasoline vehicles and motorcycles) are 1023
tons/day.  As indicated this number does not include  the emissions  from
off-highway gasoline usage.  However, this  usage is considered negligible
on the basis of data obtained from the ARB staff, which showed that current
off-highway gasoline usage  accounts for  only slightly more than 2 percent
of gasoline sales.

3.6.2  Control Strategy
       The relationship between air pollutant emissions and ambient air
quality is still not well understood, despite major efforts to develop
both sophisticated analytical and statistical models.  The inaccuracies
in the ability to predict air quality result from many factors, some of
which are:
                                   3-34

-------
       •  Inadequate and questionable emission inventories
       •  Questionable air quality data
       •  The representativeness  of test cycles to  actual  driving  pat-
          terns; e.g., 7-mode vs.  CVS
       t  The uncertainties of the real effectiveness  of  various control
          strategies.

       The control  strategy recommendations  presented  are based on propor-
tional rollback techniques that relate estimated emissions  to air  quality
in a linear fashion.  This has been done primarily  because  of the  time
constraints of the study.  The validity of this technique is  highly ques-
tionable and consequently does not serve as  an adequate basis on which
to implement severe control measures.

       Full  implementation of the control  measures  outlined should allow
attainment of the air quality standards by the 1977 target  date.   Imple-
mentation of Phase I measures can be justified on the  basis of air quality
improvements at reasonable costs.   The impact of implementing the  Phase  II
control measures is staggering.  This study  had neither the time nor the
data base to fully evaluate the social, political,  and economic ramifica-
tions of such a measure.  Hence,  it cannot be recommended at this  time
although it would, in all probability, result in the desired goal.

       The control  measures outlined are not new and have been proposed
elsewhere; no "magic solution" was found and only incremental improvements
can be expected from each strategy.  The primary reason for this  is a host
of control options were evaluated, the large majority  of  which proved to
be relatively ineffective.  The California Air Resources  Board is  actively
engaged in field testing a variety of control strategies  and has extensive
expqrience in the field of air pollution control; it would  be a mistake
to usurp their efforts and knowledge with massive unproven  control measures.
                                   3-35

-------
The severity of the air pollution left few alternatives  for measures
which would be adequate to accomplish the program requirements.

       Phase I Measures:
       1.  Evaporative Controls - Accelerate the evaluation program of
           evaporative control devices for 1966-1969 vehicles.   At the
           earliest date, if the devices are shown to be effective and
           available, a mandatory installation program should  be imple-
           mented.
       2.  Oxidizing Catalytic Converters - Accelerate the evaluation
           program of oxidizing catalytic converters.   If these  con-
           verters are effective and become available, incentives  should
           be made to encourage their use on 1966-1974 vehicles.
       3.  Mandatory Inspection/Maintenance - Implement  a program  of
           inspection and maintenance for in-use vehicles.  The  program
           recommended is the second stage expansion of  the recommended
           program of the Governor's Task Force on Periodic Vehicle In-
           spection and Maintenance.  This measure will  provide  significant
           reductions in motor vehicle emissions and is  necessary  to
           derive the full benefit from both new and used car  emission
           controls.  This should result in a reduction  of ten to  twelve
           percent of the reaction hydrocarbons left uncontrolled  in  1977
           (approximately 40 tons/day).
       4.  Mandatory Conversion of Fleet Vehicles to Burn Gaseous  Fuels  -
           Implement a program requiring the conversion  of all  fleet
           vehicles of model years 1970-1974 to use a gaseous  fuel.  This
           measure will significantly improve the emissions from vehicles
           which presently account for a disproportionate share  of the miles
           traveled in the South Coast Air Basin.  The reduction from  this
           program is estimated to be approximately 12 tons/day  of reactive
           hydrocarbons.
       5.  Evaporative Loss Controls - Implement a program to  substantially
           reduce hydrocarbon losses from fueling operations,  specifically
           from the loading of underground storage tanks at the  gasoline

                                    3-36

-------
    station and from the service pump to the automobile  fuel  tank.
    The control of these marketing losses is estimated to  be
    approximately 65 tons/day of reactive hydrocarbons.
6.   Additional  Stationary Source Controls -  Stationary source con-
    trols were not evaluated as part of this study;  however,  as
    mobile source controls become more effective,  the proportionate
    contribution of stationary sources to the problem will  increase.
    The emission reductions claimed from this strategy were calcu-
    lated by the EPA and have tentatively been accepted.   They are
    as follows:  6 tons/day from dry cleaning vapor  control,  25
    tons/day from degreaser substitution, and 45 tons/day  from a
    50 percent strengthening of the Los Angeles  County Air Pollution
    Control District's Rule 66.  All  in all, approximately 76 tons/
    day of reactive hydrocarbons can be controlled from  additional
    stationary source controls.
7.   Mass Transit - The level of mass transit available presently  is
    totally inadequate to handle any substantial increases in rider-
    ship.  Improving mass transit both in terms  of frequency  and
    efficiency of service and the breadth of coverage in areas
    served, is  a necessary first step to attract additional riders.
    It is also needed for making any measures which  discourage
    private auto use more effective.   Finally, should Phase II be
    implemented, it is imperative as an alternative  mode of travel.
    A much closer examination should be given to establishing express
    bus and carpool lanes on certain freeways.  Park-and-ride
    facilities, as well  as bicycling, should be  encouraged in more
    areas of the Basin.

    Implementation of a  series of mass transit improvements plus  a
    variety of incentives to discourage the  private  use  of the auto-
    mobile should result in a 5-8 percent reduction  of VMT in 1977.
    The reduction in reactive hydrocarbons is estimated  to be no
    more than 5 percent  of the remaining controllable emissions  or
    approximately 17 tons/day after the implementation of the Phase  I
    measures.

                             3-37

-------
Phase II Measure:
8.   a) VMT Reduction - Implement a massive program to  significantly
    reduce the vehicle miles traveled within the Basin,  hence
    eliminating the major source of hydrocarbon emissions.   This
    can probably be done most effectively by rationing the  gasoline
    supply.   Rationing can be accomplished either by limiting  the
    supply to the actual consumers from the gasoline station or
    from the refinery to the service station;  or_
    b) Evaporative Retrofit Device and/or Oxidizing Catalytic  Con-
    verters  with VMT Reduction - If upon completion of the  Air
    Resources Board's studies of these controls (Measures  1  and 2),
    it can be shown these devices can make a significant impact on
    the air quality improvement of the Basin,  implement programs
    to require their installation.  A detailed examination  should
    be made of costs and benefits to be derived by a mandatory
    retrofit program.  This will become more important as  time
    passes and the older cars represent a smaller contribution to
    the overall problem.

    Assuming a given reduction in VMT is the equivalent percent re-
    duction in gasoline consumed, an 87 percent VMT reduction  is
    required beyond the Phase I measures.  This would result in
    approximately 292 tons/day of reactive hydrocarbons not being
    discharged into the atmosphere (283 tons/day from vehicular
    emissions and an additional 9 tons/day from marketing losses).

    This same level of control could be accomplished by an  81  percent
    VMT reduction after implementing mandatory installation of the
    controls described in Measures 1 and 2 (evaporative control
    devices and oxidizing catalytic converters).  The approximate
    reductions in reactive hydrocarbons would then become:   26 tons/
    day from evaporative control devices; 84 tons/day from oxidizing
    catalytic converters; 8 tons/day from marketing losses; and 174
    tons/day from an 81 percent VMT reduction after all  other  con-
    trol measures had been implemented.

                            3-38

-------
Figure LA.3.  The Impact of Proposed Control Strategy on

              Reducing Reactive Hydrocarbon Emissions (1977)
700.


W ^«*%
§ 600.
f~
M
I/I
S 5°°-
^
0 — N
"jjj 2 400-
o -x.
0 £
•o o
£ £, 300-
0)
T"
S 200 II ;|;.; lillJ
«t iiiiiiiiiiiiS S-iiiii : ii-'
OJ |x?¥:: i¥:;Sx|: :w:::¥x¥:¥: ::.::::
as
100 . Hi If Sifl 1


me oo
33 O C
-J. O 31
WO r* 1
«/» 3 ~S ID
-•• r+ O 3
on — 'c*
"•^
•








1 :;; IIHI n
i-lnV.ii,™1. ,. U-
mm X:g:S:::::| """""* *!
1111? 11 liiil |.>'':::::/:
S¥SSS: :¥:¥: S : : : S¥ SiSiS-iwSS i¥:SS¥:?:S

 n>
O» 0* Hi Ol
www w
c c c c
111 -J
(D ID (D ID
CO 4k 01 0»















Measure 7








"Allowable
Emissions"





Measure 8
            n>
            a.
                   01


                   I
                   Motor Vehicles



                   Aircraft, Motorcycles, etc.


              i||j  Stationary Sources  '
                               3-39

-------
                3.7  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-NEW YORK  CITY

3.7.1   Air Quality
       At one or more points within the boundaries  of  New York  City,  the
NAAQS's for CO, Ox, and NOX are exceeded.   The principal  features  of  New
York's problems are as follows:

       •  CO  - The highest levels  are observed in  the downtown and mid-
                town sections of Manhattan where maximum  eight-hour
                concentrations of 45 ppm (parts-per-million)  and 32 ppm,
                respectively, have been recorded.   The maximum  eight-hour
                standard is 9 ppm.
       •  Ox  - The general New York area  appears to have maximum  one-hour,
                oxidant levels of about 0.18 ppm, compared  with a  national
                standard of 0.08 ppm.
       0  NO  - Congested areas have maximum one-hour  NOX levels of about
            )\
                0.08 ppm, while other areas are approximately half that
                value.  The standard is 0.05 ppm annual average.

       It should be noted that photochemical  oxidants, unlike CO and  NOX
are not emitted directly by motor vehicles.  Hydrocarbons (HC), which  are
emitted by motor vehicles, undergo a complex system of reactions to produce
Ox.  It is assumed in this report, as has  been assumed in most  other  work
of this kind, that atmospheric levels of Ox are proportional  to hydrocar-
bon emission rates.  Therefore, Ox levels  can be controlled by  reducing
hydrocarbon emissions.

3.7.2  Emission Reductions Needed
       For the most-critical areas, the estimated percentages by which
1970 emissions must be lowered to meet the national  air quality standards
are as follows:

       0  CO  - downtown - 80 percent reduction
                midtown  - 72 percent reduction
                                   3-40

-------
       t  Ox  - 56 percent reduction of HC
       •  NOX - 38 percent reduction in congested  areas
                 0 percent reduction elsewhere

3.7.3  Proposed Control Strategy
       The control strategy developed for use in New York City is  presented
in the following paragraphs.  In some cases, such  as the hardware-based
control measures, the emission reduction potentials could be quantified.
However, for others such as very localized traffic flow  improvements,  a
lack of detailed traffic data prevented a quantitative assessment  of the
actual emission control potential.   The latter class of  control  is used
only in downtown Manhattan where an additional reduction in CO emissions
(beyond that obtained by vehicle turnover and the  hardware measures) is
needed to reach the standard.  It should also be noted that in estimating
the emission reductions of CO and HC required to meet the respective CO
and Ox federal standards, the highest measured ambient levels of CO and Ox
were utilized for the rollback calculations.  This is more stringent than
the Federal EPA requirements, which allow the use  of the second highest
measured values.

       The expected vehicle emission reduction percentages for the "hard-
ware" control measures, i.e., retrofit and inspection programs, are
tabulated in Table NY-1.  The specific control packages  are described below:

       •  Retrofit Package - this will consist of  engine modifications (re-
          tarded spark, etc.) and a catalytic converter.  NOV controls might
                                                            A
          be incorporated but these were not included in emission  calcula-
          tions.  A twice yearly inspection will be used to insure compliance.
       t  Inspection/Maintenance -  a loaded emission test will be  made on
          taxis three times per year and on private automobiles once annually.

       It appears that only the area of downtown Manhattan around  the Canal
Street Post Office might require VMT reductions.  However, the biggest emis-
sion source in this area (trucks, even after being retrofitted) is not
                                    3-41

-------
                                TABLE NY.l
        ASSUMED  VtHICLE  EMISSION  REDUCTIONS  FOR  HARDWARE  CONTROL MEASURES
    Control  Measure
 A  -  Retrofit  of  Heavy-
     Duty,  Gasoline-Powered
     Vehicles
CO
50
                                               Emission  Reduction
HC
50
NOV
IB  -  Inspection/Maintenance
     of  Taxis
 C  -  Inspection/Maintenance
     of Private  Cars
10
10
12
12
                                    3-42

-------
considered suitable for VMT reduction, because of the potential  economic
harm which might result.   The recommended additional  control  measure for
this area is as follows:

       •  Pragmatic Flow Improvement/VMT Reduction Approach - the high  CO
          levels recorded at the Canal Street sampling station are due  in
          large part to the terrible congestion problems  on this artery.
          For this reason, the downtown CBD is quite  affected by general
          traffic flow improvements such as the on-going  TOPICS program
          and the new westside highway construction.   These programs should
          be augmented by strict enforcement of parking regulations and the
          anti-cruising ordinance for taxis.

       The techniques described in the initial sections of this report  were
utilized to estimate emissions obtained by application of four hardware
control measures by 1977:

       •  Vehicle Turnover
       t  Heavy-Duty Vehicle Retrofit and Inspection
       t  Taxi Inspection/Maintenance
       •  Private Automobile Inspection

       The results are tabulated together with 1970 baseline emissions  in
Tables NY-2 and NY-3.  The conclusions drawn from these results are in  the
following paragraphs.

       t  CO Emission Controls
          Apparently, the hardware control measures alone could enable  all
          areas of New York City, except for part of  the downtown Manhattan
          CBD, to meet the ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide
          in 1977.  Because of the conservative rollback estimates used for
          this analysis,  there is a good chance that  even this area will
          meet the standards with no additional controls.  Furthermore,
          TOPICS improvements will improve traffic flow and help reduce
                                   3-43

-------
                    TABLE NY.2.  AIR POLLUTANT EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR THE "WORST" SQUARE MILES
                                  IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF NEW YORK CITY (Ton/Year)
Case

1970-U
1975-U
1977-U
1984-U
1977-A
1977-B
1977-C
1977-A11
Allowable
Downtown (134)
CO
20,730
13,998
10,804
6,123
6,931
10,755
10,638
6,716
4,146
HC
4,870
3,765
3,029
2,483
2,149
3,020
3,003
2,114
NA
NOX
9,019
5,267
4,962
4,729
4,962
4,962
4,962
4,962
5,592
Midtown (193)
CO
9,751
4,452
3,236
1,910
2,317
3,188
3,174
2,207
2,730
HC
2,053
1,228
981
828
773
972
972
755
NA
NOX
4,381
2,297
2,142
2,051
2,142
2,142
2,142
2,142
2,716
Bronx (315)
CO
5,667
3,679
2,614
964
2,355
2,614
2,430
2,171
5,350
HC
1,149
643
436
332
376
436
418
358
NA
NOX
1,381
1,372
1,271
1,184
1,271
1 ,271
1 ,271
1,271
MS
Brooklyn (75)
CO
8,462
5,825
4,159
1,569
3,752
4,159
3,871
3,464
7,988
HC
2,813
2,111
1,791
1,630
1,698
1 ,791
1 ,765
1,672
NA
NOX
2,533
2,537
2,392
2,267
2,392
2,392
2,392
2,392
MS
Queens (195)
CO
10,915
7,412
5,218
1,813
4,682
5,218
4,840
4,304
10,304
HC
2,700
1 ,761
1 ,334
1,121
1 ,210
1 ,334
1 ,300
1 ,176
NA
NOX
3,431
3,438
3,234
3,055
3,234
3,234
3,234
3,234
MS
U)
I
     Abbreviations:
  U = uncontrolled (vehicle turnover alone).
  A = control  measure A (retrofit and inspection/maintenance of heavy-duty vehicles)
  B = control  measure B (inspection/maintenance of taxis).
  C = control  measure C (inspection/maintenance of personal  cars).
All = all  of the control  measures.
 NA = not applicable, HC  is treated on an area-wide basis (see Table NY.3).
 MS = currently meets standards.

-------
                     TABLE NY.3.   MOBILE SOURCE,  STATIONARY  SOURCE,  AND TOTAL EMISSIONS OF AIR
                                  POLLUTANTS  IN THE NEW YORK CITY AREA (Ton/Year)
Case

1970-U
1975-U
1977-U
1984-U
1977-A
1977-B
1977-C
1977-A11
Allowable
Carbon Monoxide
Mobile
1 ,175,864
788,981
554,697
198,609
473,461
553,947
517,943
435,957
NA
Stationary
97,445
90,491
90,491
90,491
90,491
90,491
90,491
90,491
NA
Total
1,273,309
879,472
645,188
289,100
563,952
644,438
608,434
526,448
NA
Hydrocarbons
Mob i 1 e
217,875
123,010
76,530
51,932
57,721
76,391
73,065
54 , 1 1 7
54,117
Stationary
98,278
95,336
95,336
95,336
95,336
95,336
95,336
95,336
84,990
Total
316,153
218,346
171 ,866
147,268
153,057
171,727
168,401
149,453
139,107
Nitrogen Oxides
Mobile
93,216
91,254
68,223
48,766
68,223
68,223
68,223
68,223
NA
Stationary
239,399
201 ,187
201,187
201,187
201 ,187
201,187
201,187
201,187
NA
Total
332,615
292,441
269,410
249,952
269,410
269,410
269,410
201 ,187
NA
CO
I
tn
       Abbreviations:
  U = uncontrolled (vehicle turnover alone).
  A = control measure A (retrofit and inspection/maintenance of heavy-duty vehicles)
  B = control measure B (inspection/maintenance of taxis).
  C = control measure C (inspection/maintenance of personal  cars).
All = all of the control  measures.
 NA = not applicable, CO  and NOX are treated  as local  problems (see Table NY.2).

-------
   CO emissions on a short-term basis.   The additional  help from
   strict enforcement of existing parking regulations  and reduced
   taxi cruising will give more assurance of meeting the standard.
0  HC Emission Controls
   The very preliminary Ox air quality data available  for New York
   indicate that a 56 percent reduction in hydrocarbon  emissions
   from 1970 levels is needed area-wide to meet the Ox  air quality
   standard.  The emission estimates for 1977,  with the hardware
   controls in effect, show a projected emission reduction of 53
   percent.  Uithin the accuracy of the air quality, emission
   factor and traffic data sets, there is no significant statistical
   difference between these numbers.  Nevertheless, because the
   projections indicate that stationary sources will be responsible
   for almost two-thirds of the 1977 hydrocarbon emissions (assuming
   implementation of the hardware control measures) and most of these
   sources fail to meet existing NYC standards, the transportation
   controls should be augmented by rigid enforcement of the existing
   hydrocarbon emission regulations.
•  NOX Emission Controls
   Like the Ox data, air quality data for NOX are quite limited.
   The emission projections for 1977 imply that vehicle turnover
   will enable New York to meet the NOV air quality standards with
                                      A
   no further reductions needed.  Nevertheless, the situation should
   be analyzed more thoroughly during implementation of the plan to
   insure that the standard will be met.
                            3-46

-------
         3.8  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-PHILADELPHIA,  PENNSYLVANIA

3.8.1  Air Quality
       The second highest measurement of carbon monoxide in Philadelphia
during 1971 was 22.5 milligrams per cubic meter eight-hour average measured
at 20th and Race Streets.  The national  primary standard of 10 milligrams
per cubic meter eight-hour average must  be achieved  by July 1977.

3.8.2  Emission Reduction Required
       A reduction of 56 percent from 1971 emission  levels of CO emitted
from mobile sources throughout the City  is estimated to be needed  to
achieve the required reduction in ambient air concentrations to the level
of the standard.  Estimated mobile source emissions  of CO in 1971  was
302,000 tons per year total for the City and 25,500  tons per year  for  the
Central Business District (CBD).  By 1977, it is estimated that emissions
must be reduced to 133,000 tons per year.  With no transportation  control
strategy implemented, it is estimated that a 47 percent reduction  will  be
achieved total for the City and 61 percent for the CBD, due largely to the
effect of Federal new car emission controls.

3.8.3  Control Strategy
       •  Control Measures Considered
          Control measures which can be  used to reduce mobile source emis-
          sions and their estimated effects are as follows:
          Inspection/Maintenance - One of several  inspection alternatives
          needed to maintain engine performance and emission controls  at
          lower emission levels.  Estimated reduction:   4-6 percent.
          Inspection/Maintenance with Retrofit - One of the several  inspec-
          tion alternatives with the additional requirement that all  pre-
          1968 vehicles be retrofitted with emission control devices
          comparable to new vehicle emission controls.   Estimated additional
          reduction is less than 1 percent.
          Curbside Parking and Loading Regulations - Enforcement of  regu-
          lations in order that programmed TOPICS traffic controls are
          effective.  Estimated reduction:  3 percent for the CBD.
          Electrification - Replacement of motor buses  with electrified
          vehicles results in an estimated reduction of less than 1  percent.
                                   3-47

-------
Gaseous Fuel  Conversion - Emission rates expected from gasoline
fueled 1975 model  years and beyond compare favorably with those
rates from gaseous fueled vehicles.   Conversion of pre-1975 fleet
vehicles would have short-term, negligible effect.

Increase Mass Transportation Ridership - Control  measures which
have the potential for increasing ridership are as follows:

•  Center city tunnel connection of suburban rail stations

0  Additional park and ride facilities

•  Capacity increases

•  Shorter headways

•  Security force to eliminate crime in stations and transit
   cars

•  Rider amenities (appearance, lighting, better seating, station
   upgrading)

•  Unified fare system

•  Work staggering in CBD

•  Circumferential transit

9  Commuter rail and subway extensions

Ridership increases from 1 percent to 20 percent are estimated to
reduce emissions from less than 1 percent to 7 percent.

Restraints - Possible restraints are the prohibition of certain
classes of vehicles from congested areas (congestion pass) and
parking space control for inhibiting the movement of vehicles
into areas where limited parking is available.  A prohibition
of 100,000 vehicle trips per day are estimated to reduce emis-
sions 2 percent.
VMT Controls - The responsible planning agencies should factor
air quality effects into their transportation planning.

CBD Priority - The priority to those control measures which
preferentially control emissions from the CBD or other yet to
be determined areas of high pollutant emission density.
Car Pools - Low density population in the suburban areas dis-
courages utilization of car pools as an attractive transit mode.

Vehicle Free Zones - Attractive pedestrian malls have the potential
for helping to revitalize center city commerce.  However, expe-
rience in other urban areas has shown that displaced vehicular
traffic tends to be relocated rather than reduced.


Proposed Control Strategy

Selection requires the consideration of comparative cost effec-

tiveness of the alternative control measures and the technical

                         3-48

-------
and institutional  obstacles.   Data were available for only a
limited analysis of cost effectiveness.   Emission related control
measures, such as  inspection/maintenance programs, have technical
limitations which  need to be  overcome and also have substantial
cost effective deterrents.   VMT reduction control measures,  such
as mass transit improvements  and traffic restraints, present
funding problems for the intensive network required in the case
of mass transit and severe institutional obstacles in the case
of traffic restraints.  Traffic restraints should not be imple-
mented without alternative means of travel by mass transit.

Control measures are needed to reduce mobile source emissions by
26,000 tons CO per year (9 percent).   The recommended control
strategy for Philadelphia is  as follows:

Curbside Parking and Loading  Regulations - Estimated to achieve
a reduction of 4000 tons/year.
Inspection/Maintenance (Engine Parameter Without Retrofit) -
Estimated to achieve a reduction of 10,000 tons/year.
Increase Mass Transportation  Ridership - Potential reductions
of 6000 tons/year to 10,000 tons/year are estimated for a 10
percent increase in ridership.
Restraints - Prohibition of certain classes of vehicles from
congested areas are estimated to result in a reduction of 6000
tons/year per 100,000 daily vehicle trips.
VMT Controls - Factor effect  of increase of vehicular miles of
travel on air quality into transportation planning.
CBD Priority - Give priority  to those control measures which
preferentially control emissions from the CBD or other yet to
be determined congested areas.

With substantial increases (more than 10 percent) in mass transit
ridership, it is estimated that the air quality goal can be achieved
by implementation of the first three control measures listed.
However, considering the time constraints and economic obstacles
to implementation of most of  the mass transit control measures,
traffic restraints at least for the short term are likely to be
needed.
                          3-49

-------
        Two  concurrent  implementation  tasks requiring  immediate action
        are  the  studies  and  surveys  reqquired  to make  the necessary
        corrections  and  additions  to the data  base, and  immediate deci-
        sion mass  transit  funding.   Following  update of  the data base,
        a  better defined mass  transit  improvement program may require
        additional  funding  (deferred decision  funding).  Funding delays
        may  prevent  the  implementation of all  of the required mass transit
        control  measures within  the  time constraints.

        Control  strategy for the reduction of  carbon monoxide from
        mobile sources  has  a comparable effect on hydrocarbon emissions
        and  thus corresponding reductions in photochemical oxidants are
        projected.   Increased  average  speeds from the  implementation of
        TOPICS traffic  controls  or VMT reductions may  result in an
        increase in  nitrogen dioxide emissions per mile  traveled but
        this emissions/average speed relationship has  not been quantified
        to
'D.S.  Kircher  and  D.P.  Armstrong,  "An  Interim  Report on Motor  Vehicle
 Emission  Estimation,"  Environmental Protection  Agency, October  1972.
                                 3-50

-------
              3.9  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-PHOENIX/TUCSON,  ARIZONA

3.9.1  Air Quality and Emissions Reductions
       The development of a comprehensive transportation control  strategy
constitutes a major step towards achieving the desired air  quality standards
in the Phoenix-Tucson area.  Unfortunately, existing  Set II  pollutant con-
centration data for Tucson and other areas outside Phoenix  are not sufficient
for use as a basis for forecasting air quality in those areas.   For this
reason, control measures included in this study could not be evaluated for
use specifically in Tucson.  However, it is recommended that the  general
results of this study be used as much as possible in  current and  future
Tucson air quality programs.

       The proposed transportation control strategy is specifically designed
to meet the hydrocarbon (HC)  and primary oxidant (Ox) standards by 1975,
and the carbon monoxide (CO)  standard by 1977.   The strategy does not
directly address itself to achieving the nitrogen dioxide (N02) standard.
The Arizona State Implementation Plan was reviewed and the  1969 emissions
inventory and air quality data from this plan were used as  the baseline
for making projections.  Estimates of future air quality were made based
on current stationary source control policies and forecasted growth.   The
results of this study must be viewed within this context.  Specifically a
50 percent reduction in CO and a 25 percent reduction in oxidants above
that achieved through ongoing and/or planned programs is needed.   Control
of CO (8-hour maximum) becomes the constraining element of  the control
plan.

3.9.2  Control Strategy Specification
       A wide variety of promising control measures were examined during
the course of this investigation.  Selection of the "best"  measure for
incorporation into the proposed transportation control strategy was based,
in part, on two general criteria:

       (1)  Maximum cost effectiveness with proven reliability
       (2)  Widest possible public acceptance with minimum  socio-economic
            impact.
                                    3-51

-------
       The proposed transportation control  strategy developed  for the
Phoenix area consists of two distinct phases.   Phase I  is  designed to
accomplish substantial  improvements in air  quality for  the 1975  through
1977 period.  Based on analysis of current  data (1969),  however,  additional
controls may be necessary.   Consequently, a Phase II program has  been
formulated in order to insure compliance with  the standards.   The need for
implementing Phase II should be based on the results obtained  from Phase  I.
The measures associated with both phases of the proposed transportation
control strategy are listed below:

       Phase I
       •  Air quality surveillance system
       •  Mandatory vehicle inspection/maintenance for  all  vehicles
       •  Retrofit emission control for all pre-1968 vehicles
       •  Evaporative emission control.

       Phase II (if necessary)
       •  Vehicle exchange program
       •  Limited second vehicle registration

       A brief description of each measure  is  presented in the following.
A more definitive description of these measures appears in the text of
the city report.

       Air Quality Surveillance System
       The surveillance system proposed in  this strategy uses  the existing
system and the system recommended by the Arizona State  Implementation Plan
as a foundation for developing the capability  for monitoring Set II  pollutants
in the Phoenix-Tucson problem area.  The recommendations in this  strategy
consist mostly of expanding the use of CO and  Ox monitors  through the
metropolitan area to provide for reasonable accuracy in evaluating peaks
and trends in air quality and in assessing  the effectiveness of  the imple-
mentation plan.  It has been found that sites  used or proposed prior to
this strategy can generally be used and that they provide  an effective
                                   3-52

-------
distribution of monitors.   The approximate cost of equipment for  the  system
proposed in this strategy is $24,000 and $33,000.   In addition, the MCHD
mobile lab is regarded as a highly useful  means of determining  the spread
of pollutant concentration and of identifying the  need for  longer-term
monitoring and source control.

       Mandatory Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance
       One of the key components of the transportation control  strategy
involves a mandatory program of vehicle inspection/maintenance.   Such a
program will yield not only moderate emission reductions  from the present
vehicle fleet, but will also insure the proper operation  of advanced  con-
trol  systems as they are introduced into the automobile population.   It is
this second factor that, in the long run,  will have the largest impact on
air quality.

       Current studies indicate that the most cost-effective program  involves
a yearly exhaust emission inspection under load, followed as necessary by
fuel  ratio, ignition system (misfire), air cleaner, and PCV valve.  Pass/
fail  exhaust emission criteria should be established to obtain  the necessary
emission reductions.  A rejection rate of 30 to 40 percent  may  be required
for the first year.  The program should include a  certification of service
garages involved to insure reliable maintenance repair.  Any retest of
emissions after maintenance should be made optional.  Estimates of potential
emission reduction for the total population are 12 percent  for  hydrocarbons,
10 percent for carbon monoxide, and 0 percent for  oxides  of nitrogen. These
reductions can be achieved for an annual cost of between  $5 and $15 per car.

       Retrofit Emission Control
       The second recommended control  measure consists  of retrofitting  the
pre-1968 portion of the vehicle population.   Basically, there are two retro-
fit approaches that are suitable for use in the Phoenix metropolitan area.
The first one -- Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect (VSAD) -- is particularly
attractive for use on older vehicles in terms of potential emission reduc-
tion, cost, reliability and ease of implementation.   Costs, including labor
and with a simple override mechanism, should be from $15 to $30.   Some

                                   3-53

-------
deterioration in fuel  economy and driveability will  occur on the average.
Overheating may be a serious problem, especially during hot weather.

       The other retrofit approach -- Lean Idle Setting (LIS)  -- has  good
possibilities except for a high probability of owner or mechanic tampering.
This procedure involves the additional  leaning out of the air/fuel  ratio
beyond the manufacturer's specification.   The cost per adjustment should
be nominal -- $3 to $6 -- and fuel economy should improve slightly on the
average.   This modification is theoretically simple, but present mechanic
ability and instrumentation limitations indicate the need for  substantial
improvement.

       The combined emission reduction potential for both retrofit devices
was computed as 25 percent for HC, 9 percent for CO, and 23 percent for
NOX.  Again, this is consistent with current EPA estimates.   In order to
insure proper operation of these two systems, especially LIS,  it is sug-
gested that both be incorporated into the annual inspection program.

       Evaporative Emission Control
       The third element of the control strategy calls for the control  of
evaporative losses.  Vehicle operation (carburetor and gas tank) and  gaso-
line marketing (gas tank and storage tank filling) represent the two  main
sources of hydrocarbon evaporative losses in the Phoenix area.  For con-
trolling losses from the inuse fleet (pre-1971), it is recommended that
the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) for all gasoline marketed in the Phoenix
area be controlled seasonally.  This should yield more than a  30 percent
reduction in vehicle operating losses with moderate impact (approximately
1-2<£ per gallon) on overall marketing operations.  Some driveability  problems
may occur (during start-up), although they should be of a minimal nature.
The photochemical reactivity of the evaporated hydrocarbons may be altered
by changing the RVP, but it appears that the change will be small.

       Several methods are available for controlling evaporative losses
from gasoline marketing.  These include a totally enclosed transfer system
used with either an adsorber, condenser or vapor return system.  Approxi-

                                   3-54

-------
mately 70 percent of the vehicles on the road (mostly domestic)  can  be
serviced from one adaptive system.   The average costs of equipping service
stations in the Phoenix area with evaporative recovery systems should run
about $2000 per station.

       Vehicle Exchange Program
       All things considered, older vehicles  (pre-1968)  emit  higher  emis-
sions per mile than do later model  automobiles.  The Vehicle  Exchange
Program is designed to take advantage of this situation by limiting  the
importation of pre-1968 vehicles and by replacing some of the older  vintage
cars with newer, lower emitting vehicles.   Considerations should be  given
to limiting out-of-state vehicle registration for pre-1968 cars  after 31
December 1973.  This would have the effect of reducing the aggregate
exhaust emissions by about 3 percent.

       Coupled with this would be a program to replace a segment of  the
older in-use cars with newer state and local  government vehicles.  One
phase of this program would be to increase the rate of turnover  of state
owned vehicles to around 50 percent per year.  Based on the current  size
of the state fleet, approximately 5000 cars would be available for exchange
with pre-1968 vehicles on a yearly basis.

       Criteria for exchange would have to be developed, based upon  income
considerations, in order to maximize program effectiveness.  This combined
program would be of short-term value, since by 1980 only about    3
percent of the vehicle population will consist of pre-1968 automobiles.
The administrative costs of this program should only add a small increment
to ongoing registration costs.  However, the costs associated with exchang-
ing these vehicles may be on the order of several million additional dollars
annually.

       The net effect of both programs in terms of emission reduction
potential should be around 3 percent.
                                    3-55

-------
       Limited Second Vehicle Registration
       A preliminary assessment of the impact of the foregoing measures
on air quality indicates the potential need for additional  vehicle control.
Specifically, it appears that up to   30  percent  reduction  in
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) -- implying a need for an additional  thirty
percent air quality improvement -- may be required to achieve the  national
standards.  The uncertainty in this estimate is closely related to the
uncertainty in the baseline emissions data and limitations  in the  current
methods used for predicting future air quality.

       One approach for insuring such  a reduction in VMT is by restricting
the use of second and third family cars.  This could be accomplished through
the registration process, but the details and implications  of a specific
program would have to be very carefully assessed in terms of the political,
institutional, legal and socio-economic impact on the Phoenix area.   One
positive benefit of such a program would be more efficient  use of  the
family's primary vehicle which in turn would tend to encourage car pooling
and some additional use of the mass transit system.  Variances on  this
restriction could be granted if the vehicle were converted  over to operate
on gaseous fuels.

       Preliminary estimates of the carrying capacity of the Phoenix trans-
portation system indicate sufficient flexibility to accommodate a  substantial
portion of the affected motoring public.  It should be re-emphasized, how-
ever, that vehicle use restriction control measures should  not be  implemented
until further analysis (using refined air quality data and  improved fore-
casting techniques) can demonstrate the inherent need.

       Application of the proposed control strategy on forecasted  Set II
concentration levels for the Phoenix area yielded the following results:

       t  Hydrocarbon levels (6-9 AM Max) are well below the standard
          by 1975
       •  Carbon Monoxide levels (1 Hr Max) are well below  the standard
          by 1977

                                  3-56

-------
       •  Carbon Monoxide levels (8 Hr Max)  are within the standard
          by 1977
       t  Nitrogen Dioxide levels (annual) are substantially above the
          standard through 1980
       •  Photochemical  oxidants levels (1 Hr Max)  are within the standard
          by 1975

The variances in predicted air quality for CO and Ox vis-a-vis the standards
are well within the limits of uncertainty associated with the data base and
methods of forecasting.
                                   3-57

-------
         3.10  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS-PITTSBURGH,  PENNSYLVANIA

3.10.1   Air Quality and Emissions
        It was found that while the National  Ambient Air Quality  Standards
for both carbon monoxide and oxidants are being exceeded at the present
time, only the CO emissions 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, the transportation control
strategies which will be required to attain the standard for CO by that
time will also satisfy the requirement for reduction of hydrocarbon emis-
sions sufficient to attain oxidant standards.

        Tables Pitt.l and Pitt.2 show the expected emissions and ambient
concentrations for 1970 through 1986.

3.10.2  Control 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)  Strategy I
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)  Strategy II
Retrofit 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 result
of the total program package are shown below for CO.

*Note:  Only one quarter of available retrofit reduction was allowed.  See
        City Report.

                                   3-58

-------
                                              Successive Reductions And
                                              Resultant Emissions Rates

1972 CO emissions from motor vehicles, Zone 1   27,111  kg/day
  (the "Baseline" value)

Less expected reduction from FMVECP (51.6% of  13,991
  baseline)

1977 vehicular CO emission rate, no strategies 13,120

                                                  184 due to Strategy I
Less 1.4% emission reduction expected from
  traffice 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
                                               12,936


                                                  711 due to Strategy II
                                               12,225*
                                                1,100 due to I  & M program
                                               11,125*
                                                  912 due to retrofit
                                               10,213* kg/day
        It will be seen that this strategy package reduces CO emissions  to
slightly below the level  required to attain the 9.0 ppm eight-hour average
CO level.


        Similarly, it will  be seen from Table Pitt.2 that Inspection &
Maintenance and Retrofit reduce hydrocarbon emissions below the levels
necessary to attain oxidant standards by 1977.
*Computational procedures lead to small differences between these figures
 and those shown in Table Pitt.l.

                                   3-59

-------
                                                    TABLE PITT.l

          TOTAL  CARBON  MONOXIDE  EMISSIONS  IN KG/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM EIGHT-HOUR AVERAGE CO CONCENTRATIONS

                                          IN PPM FOR PITTSBURGH, ZONE 1 (CBD)
YEAR
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
NON-VEHICULAR
EMISSIONS


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
NO STRATEGIES
VEHICLE
EMISSIONS
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
CONCEN-
TRATION
	
	
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
VEHICULAR EMISSION




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
WITH I & M
VEHICULAR EMISSION






14,352
11,108
9,068
7,553
6,124
5,094
4,511
4,131
3,815
3,780
3,701
WITH
RETROFIT
VEHICULAR EMISSION






13,764
10,197
8,324
6,934
5,622
4,676
4,141
3,792
3,502
3,470
3,398
WITH STRATEGIES
TOTAL
EMISSIONS


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
CONCEN-
TRATION


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
CO
I

-------
                                                   TABLE PITT.2
             TOTAL HC EMISSIONS IN KG/DAY AND EXPECTED MAXIMUM ONE-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
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
WITHOUT STRATEGIES
VEHICULAR
EMISSIONS
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
CONC.


.165
.153
.140
.122
.101
.084
<.080






>






r
<.080
VEHICULAR EMISSIONS
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
WITH STRATEGIES
TOTAL OX
EMISSIONS CONC.


128,320 .165
114,454 .153
101,471 .140
86,718 .122
66,253 .095
51,452 <.080
46,406
42,199
38,771
37,104
36,169
35,407
35,687
36,277
v







<^
36,759 <.080
GO

-------
           3.11  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS  - ST.  PAUL/MINNEAPOLIS
                               MINNESOTA
3.11.1  Air Quality and Emissions
        The one-hour average oxidant air quality standard  will  be  attained
by 1977 in the Minneapolis-St.  Paul  Metropolitan Areas,  including  the  two
CBD's as demonstrated in  Tables Minn.l  and Minn.2.   This standard  will  be
attained as a result of the hydrocarbon emission reductions  obtained from
the FMVECP.  In determining that the oxidant standard would  be  attained
by 1977, GCA took the conservative approach of not  considering  the applica-
tion of non-vehicular control  strategies for hydrocarbons.  With the
application of such non-vehicular control  strategies, attaining the oxidant
standard by 1977 would be further assured.

       Carbon Monoxide Air QualityBand  Emissions
       Eight-hour average CO air quality standards  will  be attained by
1977 in the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Metropolitan Area with the exception of
the Minneapolis CBD and St. Paul CBD with the CO emission  reductions
obtained from the FMVECP.  Tables Minn.3 and Minn.4 summarize the  emissions
and air quality in the two CBD's with and without the application  of the
recommended control strategies.

3.11.2  Control Strategies
        The following transportation control strategies  are  recommended
and their impact is summarized in Tables Minn.3 and Minn.4.

        Minneapolis CBD
            Strategy 1:  Fringe parking combined with people mover
                         system estimated to reduce 1977 light-duty
                         VMT's by 8 percent.
            Strategy 2:  Traffic surveillance and control  estimated
                         to increase average speed   in Minneapolis
                         CBD from 14 mph to 20 mph  by 1977.
                                  3-62

-------
    Table Minn.l.  SUMMARY OF OXIDANT AIR QUALITY  AND
                   HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS IN MINNEAPOLIS  CBD
A.  Area = 2.2 sq. miles

B-  Hydrocarbon Emissions (kg/12 hrs) and oxidant levels (ppm)
                                                  1977
                                                 Without
     	1971	Strategy

     Vehicle Emissions          3,560           1,720

     Non-Vehicular Emissions    1,540           1,840

     Total Emissions            5,100           3,560


    Oxidant level (1-hr
       average)                 0.114        <  0.08
                           3-63

-------
   Table  Minn.2.   SUMMARY OF OXIDANT AND AIR QUALITY
                  AND HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS IN ST. PAUL CBD
A.  Area =0.8 sq. miles

B.  Hydrocarbon Emissions  (kg/12 hrs) and oxldant levels (ppm)
                                             1977
                                            Without
	1971	Strategy

Vehicle Emissions         1,290               620

Non-Vehicular Emissions     560               670

Total Emissions           1,850             1,290


Oxidant level (1-hr
   average)               0.114           < 0.08
                          3-64

-------
                         Table  Minn.3.   SUMMARY  OF  CARBON  MONOXIDE  AIR QUALITY  AND EMISSIONS

                                        IN  MINNEAPOLIS  CBD
en
in
                            A.  Area = 2.2 sq. miles


                            B.  CO emissions  (kg/12 hrs) and air  quality levels  (ppm)

Vehicle Emissions
Non-Vehicular
Emissions
Total Emissions
1971
27,960
240
28,200
1977
Without
Strategy
U,H6
284
14,400
1977
With
Strategy #1
Only
13,316
284
13,600
1977
With
Strategies
n & n
10,016
284
10,300
Without
Strategies
1978 1979
11,912 10,
288
12,200 10,
008
292
300
             CO level  (8-hr

                average)
18.9
9.7
9.1
6.9
8.2
6.9

-------
GO
I
                       Table Minn.4.  SUMMARY OF CARBON MONOXIDE AIR QUALITY AND EMISSIONS

                                      IN ST. PAUL CBD
                       A.  Area = 0.8 sq. miles


                       B.  CO emissions  (kg/12 hrs) and air  quality (ppm)

Vehicle Emissions
Non- Vehicular
Emissions
Total Emissions
1971
10,013

87
10,100
1977
Without
Strategy
5,097

103
5,200
1977
With
Strategy #1
Only
4,697

103
4,800
1977
With
Strategies
#1 & #2
3,597

103
3,700
Without
Strategies
1978 1979
4,295 3,594

105 106
4,400 3,700
          CO level  (8-hr      18.6        9.5          8.8           6.8           8.1           6.8

              average)

-------
St. Paul  CBD
     Strategy 1:   Fringe parking combined with  shuttle
                  bus  service estimated  to  reduce  1977
                  light-duty VMT's  by  10 percent.

     Strategy 2:   Traffic signal  system  estimated  to
                  increase average  speed in St.  Paul
                  CBD  from 12 mph to  18  mph by  1977.
                          3-67

-------
            3.12  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS - SALT LAKE CITY,  UTAH

     The analysis described in the Cjty Report indicates  a  need for
transportation control  strategies to reduce CO emissions  within Salt  Lake
City's central business district if the national  eight-hour  average
standard for CO concentration is to be attained by 1977.  On the  other
hand, the available data indicate that the oxidant standard  and the one-
hour average CO standard will  be attained throughout the  urban area by
means of the FMVECP alone.

    After evaluating the probable effectiveness and feasibility of  a  large
number of possible controls, the recommended strategy selected is Traffic
Flow Improvement, to be achieved principally by means of  a computerized
traffic signal system (TOPICS Improvement Project No. 1).  Current  estimates
indicate that the standards may be met in 1977 by implementation  of this
strategy.  However, it is recommended that consideration  be  given to
"back-up" strategies, including mass transit development,  in the  event
that additional controls prove necessary.  It is  also recommended that
the role of the automobile — in particular, parking in the  downtown
area -- be carefully re-evaluated.

    Table SLC.l summarizes the magnitude of the problem and  the effect
of the computerized traffic signal system on CO emissions  in the  area
of principal concern.  At the request of EPA, projections  were made
from two baseline years, 1970 and 1971.  It is emphasized again that
the air quality estimates are "best estimates" based on available data
and the proportional model.  Also, experience shows that  considerable
variation in the maximum (or second highest) eight-hour concentration
will be experienced at a given sampling location  from year  to year  even
under relatively constant emission rates.  Finally, in addition to  the
temporal variation in air quality at a given station, substantial spatial
variations are to be expected within the CBD.  The predicted concentrations
are presented in tenths of a part per million simply to indicate  the
anticipated overall trend in air quality.
                                  3-68

-------
Table SLC.l.  SUMMARY EMISSION AND CO AIR QUALITY DATA FOR SALT LAKE CITY  (ZONE H)
Without Strategies
1970 1971 1977 1978
2
a) Emission Densities (kg/8 hr/mi )
Vehicular
Non- vehicular
Total
b) Air Quality (8-hr average in ppm)
Observed (2nd Highest)
Estimated
From 1970 data
From 1971 data
c) Maximum Allowable Emission Level

7878 7691 4156
161 161 161
8039 7852 4317

22 17
11.8
9.3
(kg/8 hr/mi2)

3511
161
3672

10.0
8.0

Total Non-vehicular
Estimated
From 1970 data
From 1971 data
d) Reduction in Vehicular Emissions
Reference Year
1970
1971
3289
4157
from 1971 levels (percent)
161
161

From Federal Motor Vehicle
Control Program by 1977
46
46

With Strategy
(signal system
1979 1977

2975 3471
161 16L
3136 3632

8.6 9.9
6.8 7.9

Vehicular
3128
3996

Additional Required
by Strategies
13
2

-------
    The analysis of hydrocarbon emissions  indicated  that  emissions  from
motor vehicles will decrease by 52 percent between 1971 and  1977 as a
result of the FMVECP and that total  emissions  of  hydrocarbons  in a  14
square mile central zone of Salt Lake City will be about  30  percent below
the allowable level in 1977.
                                  3-70

-------
       3.13  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS - SEATTLE,  WASHINGTON

     The analysis described in the City Report  indicates  a  need  for
transportation control  strategies to reduce CO  emissions  within  Seattle's
central business district if the national  eight-hour  average  standard  for
CO concentration is to be attained by 1977.  On the other hand,  the  availa-
ble data indicate that the oxidant standard and the one-hour  average CO
standard will be met throughout the urban  area  by  means of  the FMVECP  alone.
This assessment is based on recently acquired data and  is somewhat at
variance with the assessment made in the Implementation Plan  which was
based upon air quality measurements made in 1970 near a major freeway  and
indicated that both CO and oxidant problems would  still be  present in
Seattle in 1977 unless transportation control strategies  were adopted.

     After evaluating a large number of possible controls,  three strategies
are recommended for implementation.  They  are:

     1.  METRO Transit development
     2.  Fringe parking with Personalized
         Rapid Transit (PRT)
     3.  Improved downtown signal system

These three strategies together provide about one-third of  the reduction in
emissions required to meet the national eight-hour standard.  The remaining
reduction can be achieved through strategies which directly limit emissions
from operating vehicles, such as retrofit, gaseous conversion of fleet
vehicles and inspection, or by strategies  which eliminate older  vehicles
from the CBD.  The single strategy of excluding all pre-controlled vehicles
from the CBD, in conjunction with Strategies 1, 2, and  3  above,  is judged
to be just sufficient.  A margin of safety can  be  introduced  by  means  of
additional strategies, if desired.  The general  use of  retrofit  systems
with the requisite annual inspection and maintenance  program, results  in
reductions considerably greater than required,  and is not looked upon
with favor by the State of Washington at the present  time.
                                  3-71

-------
     Table Sea.l  summarizes  the CO problem and  the  cumulative effects of
Strategies 1, 2,  and 3 plus  the exclusion  of pre-controlled  vehicles.   It
is emphasized again that the air quality estimates  are  "best estimates"
based on available data and  the proportional  model.  Also, experience shows
that considerable variation  in the maximum (or  second highest) eight-hour
concentration will be experienced at a  given sampling location from year
to year even under relatively constant  emission rates.   Finally,  in addition
to the temporal  variation in air quality at a given  station, substantial
spatial variations are to be expected within the CBD.   The predicted
concentrations are presented in tenths  of  a part per million simply to
indicate the anticipated overall trend  in  air quality.

     The analysis of hydrocarbon emissions indicated that emissions from
motor vehicles will decrease by 51 percent between  1971  and  1977  as a
result of the FMVECP and that total  emissions of hydrocarbons in  the 23
square mile central zone of  Seattle will be 16  percent  below the  allowable
level in 1977.  Use of the oxidant data used in the  Implementation Plan,
however, indicate the need for an additional  reduction  in vehicular emissions
of 6.6 percent.
                                  3-72

-------
                 Table  Sea.L.   SUMMARY EMISSION AND CO AIR QUALITY DATA FOR SEATTLE CBD
OJ
 i
CO
                                                    Without Strategies
                                               1971    1977
                                                          1978
a)  Emission Densities (kg/8 hr/mi )
     Vehicular
     Non-vehicular
     Total

b)  Air Quality (8-hr average in ppm)
     Observed (2nd highest)
     Estimated
                                               14,301  8,175   6,951
                                                  292    292     292
           1979
           6,001
             292
  With Strategies  (1977)
METRO +  PRT +   Sig.Sys. +  Exclus ion
8,032   7,875      7,579     6,275
  292     292        292       292
                                               14,593  8,467   7,243    6,293   8,324   8,167       7,871     6,567
                                                 20
                                                       11.6    9.9
           8.6
      c)   Maximum Allowable Emission Level  (kg/8 hr/mi  )

                                        Non-Vehicular
                    Total
                     6,567
                                              292
Vehicular
  6,275
      d)   Reduction in Vehicular  Emissions  from  1971  levels
                                                                 Percent
           From Federal Motor  Vehicle  Control Program                43
           Additional  Required by Transportation  Control             13
              Strategies

      d)   Reduction in Vehicular  Emissions  from 1977 "no  strategy"  level

                                                                 Percent

             Required  by  Transportation  Control Strategies           23
11.4    11.2
10.8
9.0

-------
            3.14  SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS - SPOKANE,  WASHINGTON

     The analysis described in the City Report indicates  a  need for
transportation control  strategies to reduce CO emissions  within Spokane's
central business district if the national eight-hour  average  standard  for
CO concentration is to be  attained by 1977.  On the  other  hand,  the
available data indicate that the oxidant standard and the one-hour  average
CO standard will be attained throughout the urban area by means of  the
FMVECP alone.

    After evaluating a large number of possible controls, three strategies
are recommended for implementation.  They are:

    1.  A computer controlled signal system in
        downtown Spokane
    2.  Transit improvement
    3.  Pedestrian separations (second level
        sidwalks)

These three strategies together provide about  half the reduction in emissions
required to meet the national eight-hour standard.  The remaining reduction
can be achieved through strategies which directly limit emissions from
operating vehicles, such as retrofit, gaseous conversion  of fleet vehicles
and inspection, or by strategies which eliminate older vehicles from the
CBD.  The single strategy of excluding all  pre-controlled vehicles  from
the CBD, in conjunction with Strategies 1,  2, and 3 above is  judged to be
more that sufficient to bring about the necessary reduction in  emissions.
The necessary additional reduction can also be attained by  the  use  of  the
"air bleed to intake manifold" retrofit device on pre-1968  vehicles.

    Table Spo.l summarizes the CO problem and the cumulative  effects of
Strategies 1, 2,  and 3 plus the exclusion  of pre-controlled, light-duty
vehicles.  It is emphasized again that the  air quality estimates  are
"best estimates" based on available data and the proportional model.
Also, experience shows that considerable variation in the maximum (or
second highest) eight-hour concentration will be experienced  at a given
sampling location from year to year even under relatively constant  emission

                                  3-74

-------
                            Table  Spo.l.   SUMMARY  EMISSIONS  AND  CO  AIR QUALITY  DATA FOR


                                          SPOKANE  CBD
GO
i
a)
b)
c)
d)
d)

Without
1971 1977
2
Emission Densities (kg/8 hr/mi )
Vehicular 7932 4751
Non-vehicular 162 162
Total 8094 4913
Air Quality (8-hr average in ppm)
Observed (2nd highest) 18
Estimated 10.9
2
Maximum Allowable Emission Level (kg/8 hr/mi )
Total Non-Vehicular
4047 162
Reduction in Vehicular Emissions from 1971 levels
Strategies
1978 1979
4066 3482
162 162
4228 3644
9.4 8.1
Vehicular
3885
Percent
With Strategies (1977)
Sig. Trans. Fed. Exclu-
Svs. + Imp. 4- Sep. + sion
4454 4352 4351 3,543
162 162 162 162
4616 4514 4513 3,705
10.3 10.0 10.0 8.2
From Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program 40
Additional Required by Transportation Control 11
Strategies
Reduction in Vehicular Emissions from 1977 "no strategy" level
Percent
               Required  by Transportation Control Strategies
18

-------
rates.  Finally, in addition to the temporal  variation  in  air quality at
a given station, substantial spatial  variations  are  to  be  expected within
the CBD.  The predicted concentrations  are  presented  in  tenths of a part
per million simply to indicate the anticipated overall  trend in air
quality.
                                  3-76

-------
                              APPENDIX A
                          ATTITUDINAL SURVEY

     The following represents the results of a questionnaire distributed
 in seven metropolitan areas for the purpose of gaining some insight to
 public attitudes towards air pollution and transportation control  measures
 designed to reduce air pollution.  The survey was conducted with the
 assistance of a professional market research group* which maintains
 standing panels of households in each major metropolitan area; each
 representing a broad cross-section of households in the given area.
 The seven metropolitan areas surveyed include:

              •  Dayton, Ohio
              t  Denver, Colorado
              •  Houston, Texas
              •  Los Angeles, California
              •  New York, Hew York
              •  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
              t  Phoenix, Arizona
*Market Facts, Inc., 100 South Wacker Drive,  Chicago,  Illinois   60606
                                   A-l

-------
                         MAJOR FINDINGS

A.    Auto Air Pollution
      1.    About 85-95 percent of all respondents in all cities feel
           auto air pollution is a serious or very serious nation-
           wide  problem.  This feeling is highest in Denver (94%)
           and lowest in Houston (85%).
      2.    Respondents in all seven cities feel that  auto air pollution
           is a more serious problem nationwide than it is locally.
      3.    A law requiring auto emission control equipment of all pre
           1975  cars is much more  acceptable at a  government sub-
           sidized cost of $50 than a non-government subsidized cost
           of $200.  Regardless of the cost, this law is viewed more
           favorably by respondents in New York and Philadelphia.
           A law requiring inspection of this equipment is also
           viewed more favorably by respondents in New York and
           Philadelphia.  Respondents in all cities feel the cost of
           this inspection should be under $9. 0.0.
      4.    In all cities the two most acceptable proposals for con-
           trolling auto air  pollution are "prohibit traffic/parking
           in central business districts" and "create car pool/bus
           only lanes on major thoroughfares".  The two most
           unacceptable are  "gasoline rationing" and "$500 re-
           gistration fee for each auto".
       V
      5.    Interest in car pools as a means of reducing auto air
           pollution is  about 40-50 percent  of the respondents in
           each city; but the prospect of joining one or organizing
           one is viewed as difficult by 75-85 percent of non-car
           pool riders.
                                 A-2

-------
      6.    The prohibition of parking, loading and unloading on
           busy  streets is rated as being very effective or
           somewhat effective by respondents in New York (90%)
           and  Dayton  (98%) in reducing traffic congestion.
           Respondents in the remaining cities feel that improving
           the timing of  traffic signals would be the best way to
           reduce traffic congestion.  All  cities agree that widen-
           ing major streets at intersections would be the least
           effective  way of reducing traffic congestion.

B.  Transportation Usage
      1.    Public transportation usage is highest in New York
           (229 trips per household per  year) and Philadelphia
           (135).  The  remaining cities  are much lower in usage
           (under 40).
      2.    Reasons for public transportation  usage vary by  city.
           Overall it is used in New York  and Philadelphia
           because its  cheaper and faster.  In Denver its used
           because its  cheaper and less congested.  In Los  Angeles
           its used out of necessity (no car available  or no drivers
           license).  Reasons for usage in  the other  cities vary.
      3.    Reasons for auto usage are the same in all cities - faster,
           more flexible,  more available.

      4.    The most effective proposals for encouraging usage of
           public transportation facilities  tend  to be  similar to the
           reasons poeple travel by auto -  more frequent service,
           faster travel,  more conveniently located  stops and
           stations and lower fares.   This  is true for almost all
           seven cities.
      5.    In all cities there is substantial reluctance (66% or higher )
           to disposingof any car or cars  even if public transportation
           was improved.        « ^

-------
                       DETAILED  FINDINGS - AUTO AIR POLLUTION
                   1.   SERIOUSNESS OF AUTO AIR POLLUTION
      Feelings that auto air pollution is a "serious or very se,rious" nation-
      wide problem were highest in Denver (94%) and lowest in Houston (84%).

      Feelings that auto air pollution is a "serious or very oerious" problem
      in their city were highest in Los Angeles (81%) and lowest in Dayton
      (45%).

      In all seven cities respondents felt that auto air pollution is more of a
      serious or very serious problem in the nation  than in their particular
      city.
Said Auto Air
Pollution Nation-
wide Is:
   Very serious

   Serious

   Slightly serious

   No problem


Said Auto Air
Pollution In Their
City Is:

   Very serious

   Serious

   Slightly serious

   No problem
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:

 New   Phila-  Day-  Phoe- Hous-  Den-    Los
 York delphia   ton     nix    ton    ver   Angeles
  43

  42

  14

   1
  49

  27

  17

   7
07 Of Of
/O /O /O
46 41 56
41 44 33
12 15 11

1
31 1
40 3

3 27
2 33
25 40 36
4 15 4
«•_
49
35
15
1
51
25
17
7
^^•M
55
39
5
1
39
30
24
7
41
48
9
2
55
26
15
4





(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(164)   (178)    (99)  (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                       A-4

-------
             2.   REGULATION OF AUTO AIR  POLLUTION THROUGH

                          EMISSION  CONTROL EQUIPMENT

                     a.  By Law Requiring Equipment on All Autos
Respondents were asked how they would feel about a possible law requiring
them in 1975 to put emission control equipment on cars manufactured prior
to 1975 at both a non government subsidized cost of $200 per car or a
government subsidized cost of $50 per car.   In all cities the subsidized
cost was preferred over the non subsidized  cost by a  margin of two to one.

Regardless of the cost to the owner, respondents in New York  and Philadel-
phia were more in favor of the law than respondents in other cities.
Feel This Way About
A Law in 1975 Requiring
A Car Owner to  Put
Emission Control
Equipment  on  Their
Pre  1975 Model  Cars:
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:

 New   Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
 York  delphia    ton    nix    ton    ver  Angeles

                                     O/      ft/
                                     10      /(>
At Cost of $200 Per Car:
Very much in favor
Somewhat in favor
14
28


12
30
11
23
Somewhat against 19 18 25
Very much against 39 40 41
13
20
17
50
9
25
22
44
10
21
15
54
11
22
13
54
At Cost of $50 Per Car:

   Very much in favor

   Somewhat in favor

   Somewhat against

   Very much against
                       49

                       20

                       12

                       19
45

26

 9

20
50

24

11

15
43

23

15

19
(Total Number
 Respondents)
;i64)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                       A-5

-------
               b.  By  Law Requiring Inspection of Equipment


 Respondents were also asked how they would feel  about a law requiring periodic
 inspection of emission control systems,  how much they would be willing  to pay
 for the inspection and where the inspection should be made.   The majority of
 respondents in all cities  were in  favor of the law (about 90% in favor).

 The mean amount respondents would pay for inspection is $6.93.   Respondents
 in Dayton would pay the most ($8.90) and  Denver respondents the least ($4.58).

 Respondents in all cities except Houston and Denver prefer to have their car
 inspected at state-operated inspection center.  Houston and  Denver respondents
 prefer their local service stations or garages.
Feel This Way About
L.a\v Requiring Inspection
Of Emission Control
Equipment:

   Very much in  favor

   Somewhat in favor

   Somewhat against

   Very much against
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:

 New  Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
 York  delphia   ton     nix    ton    ver  Ange les
72
19


61
31
42
36
4 4 11
5 4 11
                       54
                       26
57

25

10

 8
59

26

 9

 6
                                             70
48
32
                                             12
Would  Pay This Mean
Amount For Inspection:
Would  Prefer  to Have
Car Inspected At:

   State operated center

   City operated center

   Local service  station/
     garage

   Other

(Total  Number of
 Respondents)
JL JL
. 80 7. 02 8.
i A
45 62
10 3
39 32
6 3
JL JL
90 6.89
%_ %.
43 50
17 14
32 32
8 4
                              42

                               9
       36
46
52
                                                                     7. 87
       41

       14


       39

        6
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)  (163)   (204)   (193)
                                        A-6

-------
            3.   PROPOSALS  TO  CONTROL  AUTO AIR POLLUTION
Respondents were asked to evaulate several proposals aimed at reducing the
amount of auto air pollution in their cities.  Each proposal was evaluated in
terms  of the following scale:

                      Very Acceptable                        (+2)
                      Somewhat Acceptable                    (+1)
                      Neither Acceptable or Unacceptable      ( 0)
                      Somewhat Unacceptable                  (-1)
                      Very Unacceptable                      (-2)

A mean rating for each proposal was calculated using the weights indicated
above in the parentheses.  A  positive mean rating means the proposal is
acceptable.   A negative rating indicated unacceptability of the proposal.  A
rating  close to zero indicates indifference to the proposal.

Based  on the mean ratings, in all seven cities the two most acceptable pro-
posals were to "create bus only and car pool only lanes on  major thorough-
fares" and to  "prohibit traffic and parking in central business districts".
The two least acceptable proposals were to "have a very high ($500) regis-
tration  fee per auto  owned" and to "ration gasoline".

It is worth noting that the highest rating received by any proposal in any city
was . 9  and the lowest in any city was -1.9-  In short none of the proposals
were rated as high as "somewhat acceptable" in any city while five of the
proposals were rated  lower than "somewhat unacceptable"  in all cities.
                                       A-7

-------
Gave These Mean
TT——	———	          	Respondents In These Cities:	
Ratings To These                        r	'	
Proposals  For              New  Phila-  Day-  Phoe-  Hous-  Den-   Los
Reducing Auto Air          York  delphia   ton     nix    ton    ver  Angeles
Pollution:
Gasoline rationing

$500 registration fee for
  each auto
-1.6   -1.5   -1.4   -1.5   -1.7   -1.4   -1.5
-1.7   -1.8   -1.8   -1.8   -1.9   -1.8   -1.8
$500 registration fee for
  2nd,  3rd, etc., auto      -1.1   -1.3   -1.2   -1.2   -1.6   -1.2   -1.4
Prohibit traffic/parking
  in central districts
  .6     .6     .2    -.1     .2     .6    -. 1
Tax on all day parking in
  central business
  districts                   .2    -.2    -.3    -.3    -.4    -.1    -.5

Tax on parking in central
  business districts regard-
  less of time parked        -.3    -.8    -.7    -.9    -.9    -.7   -1.0

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares      -1.2   -1.2   -1.3   -1.2   -1.4   -1.3   -1.4

Tolls on exit ramps of
  major thoroughfares
  in times of heavy
  traffic                   -1.1   -1.2   -1.2   -1.2   -1.3   -1.2   -1.3

Control of auto usage
  through special plates/
  stickers                  -.2    -.4    -.7    -.6    -.9    -.3    -.4

Create "bus/car pool only"
  lanes on major
  thoroughfares
  .8     .6     .5     .5     .9      .5      .6
(Total Number of
 Respondents)             (164)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                      A-8

-------
The mean ratings on the previous table are deceptive to the extent that the
degree of acceptability or unacceptability amongst the proposals is not
readily perceptible.  Respondents were  asked to record by letter which
proposal would be the  most acceptable or unacceptable to them.  The
following two tables show on a precentage basis the degree of acceptability
or unar:ceptability of each proposal.  These tables mirror the mean ratings
in pointing out which two proposals are the most acceptable and least
acceptable.

It is worth noting that  specific proposals in all cities  have "most acceptable"
and "most unacceptable" shares that are low. These  Low shares are no
reflection on the  effectiveness of the proposal if implemented; but show a
lack of enthusiasm (either positive or negative) for the proposal.  In short,
these  proposals should not be cast aside  without further consideration be-
cause of low "most acceptable" shares.
                                      A-9

-------
Said These Proposals
Were Most Acceptable:*

Gasoline rationing

$500 registration fee
 for each auto

$500 registration fee
 for 2nd, 3rd, etc. ,
 auto

Prohibit traffic /parking
 in central business
 districts

Tax on all day parkirg
 in central business
 districts

Tax on  parking in central
 business districts regard-
 less of time parked

Tolls on exit ramps  of
 major thoroughfares

Tolls on exit ramps  of
 major thoroughfares
 in times of  heavy
 traffic
                              This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
                           New   Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-   Los
                           York  delphia   ton    nix    ton    ver  Angeles
36     38
                33     24     25     35     18
                10     13
                             7      11
Control of auto usage
  through special plates/
  stickers

Create "bus /car pool only"
  lanes on major
  thoroughfares

(Total Number of
  Respondents)
  18
  41
       14
       30
13     12
9     19     20
36     45     56     34     48
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)  (204)   (193)
* Percentages to over 100% due to multiple answers.
                                      A-10

-------
Said These Proposals
Were Most Unacceptable:*

Gasoline rationing

$500 registration fee
 for each auto

$500 registration fee
 for 2nd, 3rd, etc. ,  auto

Prohibit traffic/parking
 in central business
 districts

Tax on all day parking in
 central business
 districts

Tax on parking in central
 business districts regard-
 less of time parked

Tolls on exit ramps of
 major thoroughfares

Tolls on exit ramps of
 major thoroughfares
 in times of heavy
 traffic

Control of auto usage
 through special plates/
 stickers

Create "bus/car pool only"
 lanes on major
 thoroughfares

All
                              This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
                           New   Phila-  Day-  Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
                           York  delphia   ton    nix     ton    ver   Angeles
39
30
27
33
44
33
30
50
61
59
55
50
54
56
                        9     10     10     10
                               7     11
(Total Number of
  Respondents)
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)  (163)   (204)   (193)
* Percentages  to over 100% due to multiple answers.
                                        A-11

-------
                  a. Travelling to and From Work In a Car Pool
Respondents in all seven cities were also asked how they would feel about
travelling to and from work in a car pool and,  if car pools became
necessary,  how difficult or easy would it be for them to join or organize
one.
Interest on car pools among respondents was highest in Dayton and Denver
(about 50%)  - with respondents in all the other  cities are about equal in their
interest in them (about 40%).

Present usage of car pools ranges from four to nine percent.  Non auto
travel to and from work is highest in New York (28%) and lowest in Houston
(6%).  About seventy-five to eighty-five percent of all respondents who go to
work by auto, feel it would be difficult to join or organize a car pool.
Said They Would
Be This Interested
In A Car Pool:
Very interested

Somewhat interested

Not at all interested
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:
 New   Phila-  Day-  Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
 York delphia  ton    nix     ton    ver   Angeles
18
21
14
26
«••»
12
35
  29
39
35
                       17
                       25
38
                     13
                     24
48
                     19
                     31
33
                     18
                     22
44
Already in car pool

Do not travel by car
 to and from work

Said Getting Into
A Car  Pool Would Be:*
         15     11
              15
                     11     12
Difficult

Easy
  83      84     80     79     74     74
                                   86
  17     16     20     21     26     26     14
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
* Percentaged over respondents presently not in a car pool.
                                     A-12

-------
             4.   PROPOSALS TO  REDUCE TRAFFIC  CONGESTION
One of the main causes of auto air pollution is traffic congestion and/or stop
and go driving.  Respondents were asked to consider several proposals
aimed at reducing traffic congestion.  Of the ten proposals considered,  res-
pondents in  all cities except New  York and  Dayton felt that improving the
timing of traffic signals would be  the most  effective  method of reducing
traffic congestion.  Respondents in New York and  Dayton felt the prohibition
of parking,  loading, and unloading on busy  streets would be the  most effective.
Respondents in all cities agreed that widening major streets at intersections
would be the least effective method of reducing traffic congestion.

In each city most proposals were  rated very or somewhat effective by seventy
percent of the respondents.  These generally high ratings mean that all  of the
proposals are felt by the majority respondents to have some amount of effec-
tiveness in reducing traffic congestion.
                                      A-13

-------
Said These Proposals
Would Be "Very" or
"Somewhat" Effective
In Reducing Traffic
Congestions:

Prohibit parking, loading
  unloading on busy streets

Increase number of one-
  way streets

Establish reversible lanes
  for rush hours
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:

 New   Phila- Day-  Phoe-  Hous-  Den-   Los
 York delphia  ton    nix     ton    ver  Angeles
  71
  72
         94
68     66
74     66
              90     92     92     89
84     79     82     73
77     58     63     69
Prohibit turns at busy
  intersections for rush
  hours
  81
83     85     89     85     73
                     85
Widen  major streets

Widen  major streets
 at intersections

Provide pedestrian
 over  passes/under-
 passes

Improve timing of traffic
 signals

Increase number and
 frequency of
 traffic reports

Create "bus/car pool
 only" lanes

(Total  Number of
 Respondents)
  81      83     81      88     88     78     80
  63      54     61      62     53     50
  86      85
  86
  69      71
  81      82
       95
                                   48
       95     77     85     81     82
       71     67     74     73     70
       77     73     87     78     78
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                     A-14

-------
One additional proposal for reducing traffic congestion was presented to
respondents.  This proposal was to have working hours staggered throughout
the day for the  purpose of reducing large traffic flows during specific times
of the day - rush hours.

The majority of respondents in all cities had favorable attitudes  towards this
proposal.  Favorable attitudes towards this proposal were highest in New York
and Houston (about 70% in each).  Attitudes opposed to this proposal were
highest in Dayton.
Felt This Way
About Staggered
Working Hours:
   This Percent of Respondents In These Cities:

 New   Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-   Los
York  delphia   ton    nix    ton    ver  Angeles
In favor of idea
Indifferent to idea
Opposed to idea
10
  20
         68
         15
17
       59
       16
68
18
14
10
19
       64
       16
20
       67
       13
                                          20
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
;i64)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                     A-15

-------
                      DETAILED FINDINGS - TRANSPORTATION USAGE
                   1.   USAGE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Respondents  (female household heads) in all cities were requested to obtain infor-
mation from other household members in addition to themselves regarding usage
and reasons  for usage of auto and public (bus,  subway, commuter train) transpor
tation.  One of the questions answered by all household members  (husband,  wife,
children  over 16 years old) pertained to usage of public transportation.   The re-
sponses were recorded on the following scale and weighted to obtain a mean tra-
vel frequency per year:
          Scale
Three or more times a week
One to two times a week
Once  a month
Once  every three months
Never
No Household member
                              Weight
                               208
                                78
                                12
                                 4
                                 0
                         (Not Applicable)
Households  in New York and Philadelphia use public transportation far more fre-
quently than households in the other cities.   An average household in New York
uses public  transportation 229 times per year.  In Philadelphia this figure is 135
time s.  A typical household in Phoenix uses public transportation an average of
10 times per year; Houston and  Los Angeles less  than 30 times per  year and
Dayton and  Denver less than 40  times.

In all cities except Phoenix,  children (over 16 years old) are the most frequent
users of public transportation.  In all cities except New York, the wife tends to
use public transportation more often than the husband.
Public Transportation
Is Used By These
Household Members:

   Husband

   Wife

   Children (over  16 years old)
 Mean Number of Times Per Year In These Cities:
New Phila-
York delphia
73 30
6 1 36
T> (-1)
Day- Phoe-
ton nix
4 1
9 6
?.'i 3
Hous-
ton
4
4
20
Den-
ver
5
8
21
Los
Angeles
3
7
17
Total Per Year*
  Per Household

(Total Number of
  Respondents)
229
135
                38
10
28
34
27
(164)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)  (193)
* Wording of question is such that "times" is  interpreted to be a round trip not a
  one -way trip.                        .
                                      M — I 0

-------
           2.   REASONS  FOR USAGE  OF  PUBLIC  TRANSPORTATION
Household members indicating usage of public transportation were asked to
rank in order of importance several prelisted reasons for using public
transportation.  Their most important reason was ranked "1", next impor-
tant "2" etc.  Means were calculated on the basis of the numerical rank.
The following three tables show the mean ranking given each reason by
the various household members (husband,  wife, children over 16  years old).
Eligible household members who did  not rank a reason were excluded from
the mean scores.

Although the number of household members eligible to  answer is very small
in some cities, some generalizations can be made about reasons for using public
transportation.  In  New York  husbands  and wives use public transportation
because it is cheap and fast.   In Philadelphia husbands use  it for the same
reasons as New York husbands, but Philadelphia wives use public transportation
because they don't have drivers licenses or because its more available.
Husbands and wives in Dayton, Phoenix and Houston tend to vary their reasons
for usage.  Denver husbands and wives use it because its cheaper and less
congested.   "No drivers license" and "no car available" tend to be the reasons
for public transportation usage by both  husbands and wives  in Los Angeles.
Children in all cities  use public transportation because its cheaper, faster,
and more available than other forms  of transportation.
                                    A-17

-------
                                           Husbands in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Public Transportation: *

    C heaper
    Faster
    More comfortable
    Safer for passenger
    Less congested
    More available
    More flexible

    More relaxing
    No  drivers license
    Car not available

(Total Number of
 Eligible Husbands)              (76)    (54)     (8)     (6)

*The higher  the number, the less important the reason.
New-
York

2.9
2. 8
5.3
5.4

4.6
3.4
5.2

4.4
9. 0
5. 3
Phila-
delphia

2.7
3.0
5.2
5. 3

3.4
4. 1
7.5

4. 0
6.7
4.6
Day-
ton

4.0
2. 5
4.0
2. 5

1. 1
7.5
8.5

3.8
6.0
5.7
Phoe-
nix

4.0
4.0
3.3
7.0

7. 0
3.0
5. 5

6.3
6.0
3.7
Hous-
ton

3. 3
5. 7
6.5
5. 5

8. 0
3.7
2. 5

2. 0
-
3. 2
Den-
ver

1.8
4.0
4.6
3.0

2.7
6.0
5. 1

4.0
10. 0
4.0
Los
Angeles

2.7
7. 0
7. 5
8. 0

6.0
5. 5
6.0

3.3
1. 0
1.4
 (6)    (18)
(10)
                                             Wives in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Public Transportation: *
    Cheaper
    Faster
    More comfortable
    Safer for passenger
    Less congested
    More available
    More flexible
    More relaxing
    No drivers license
    Car  not available

(Total Number  of
 Eligible Wives)                 (102)    (89)    (18)    (20)

*The  higher  the number, the  less important the reason.
New
York

2. 8
2. 8
5.9
5.4

5. 3
3. 3
4. 8

5. 4
5. 0
3. 7
Phila-
delphia

4. 2
3.8
5. 1
5.0

4. 5
3.6
4.2

4. 1
| 3.4 |
3.8
Day-
ton

3.9
4.5
4.8
3.2

3.8
4.4
4.4

3. 1
4.3
3.6
Phoe-
nix

3.9
4.0
5. 3
4.0

3.9
4. 0
4. 2

4. 8
6.8
5.0
Hous-
ton

3.3
6. 0
7. 0
3. 0

4. 0
2. 8
b. 5

9.0
1.4
1. 2
Den-
ver i

2.1
4. 3
4.4
4. 1

3.2
3.8
4.7

4. 1
4.7
4.4
Los
\ngele

3. 1
7.2
6.5
3.8

4.0
3.0
2.2

5.0
2.3
2.3
s













(13)    (47)    (29)
                                       A-18

-------
                                   Children Over 16 Years Old in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Public Transportation: *

    Cheaper

    Faster

    More comfortable

    Safer for passenger


    Less congested

    More available

    More flexible


    More relaxing

    No  drivers license

    Car not available
New Phila- Day- Phoe- Hous- Den-
York delphia ton nix ton ver


3.5 3.8 3.0 - - |2.2

3.8 :

!.0 1.0 - - 2.0
6.3 5.9 - - - 5.7
6.0 4.7 - - 4.7
6.6 4.8 - - - 4.0
2.7 '•
!. 1 1.7 - 2.0 2.2
5.6 5.9 - - - 6.5
6.0 6.4 - - - 4.7
2.7| 5.1 1.5 - 1.0 4.0
3.5 4.3 1.0 - 2.0 2.8
Los
Angeles
1.5
7.0
9.0
10.0
6.0
4.0
5. 0
8.0
1. 0
2. 0
(Total Number of
 Eligible Children)
(36)    (32)
(8)
(3)
[8)
[13)
(9)
*The higher the number, the less important the reason.
                                       A-19

-------
                  3.   REASONS FOR  USING AUTO TRANSPORTATION
Household members were also asked to indicate their reasons for traveling
by auto in a similiar manner as they indicated their reasons for traveling
by public transportation.  The following three tables "show the mean ranking
given each reason by the various household member.  Once again, eligible
household members who did not rank a reason were excluded from the mean
scores.

All household members in all seven cities are in agreement as  to the  most
important reasons for traveling by auto.  They travel by auto because it is
faster, more flexible, and more available.
                                      A-20

-------
                               	Husbands in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Auto Transportation: #

     Cheaper
     Faster
     More comfortable
     Safer for passenger

     Less congested
     More available
     More flexible
     Need car during day

(Total Number of
 Eligible Husbands)             (123)   (149)    (81)   (144)   (142)   (175)   (159)

* The higher the number, the less important the  reason.
New
York
4.7
2. 2
3.2
5.9
5. 0
2. 8
2. 8
4.9
Phila-
delphia
5. 1
|2.6
3.9
6.3
5.4
2.5
2.4
4.0
Day-
ton
5.2
2.7
4.4
6.6
6.2
2. 1
2.5
4.4
Phoe-
nix
5. 3
3.0
4. 5
6.3
5.9
2.0
2.3
4. 0
Hous-
ton
5.7
2. 8
4.6
6.6
5.6
2.4
2.4
3.7
Den-
Los
ver Angeles
5. 7
2.8
4.6
6.7
5.4
2.0
2.6
3.6
5. 5
2.4

4. 8
6. 5
5.6
2.2
2.6


3.4
                               	Wives in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Auto Transportation: *

    Cheaper
    Faster
    More comfortable
    Safer for passenger
    Less congested
    More available
    More flexible
    Need car during day

(Total Number  of
 Eligible Wives)                (137)   (164)    (89)   (168)   (153)   (193)   (180)

*The higher the number,  the less important the  reason.
New
Phila-
York delphia
5.2
2.9
3. 1
5. 7
5.0
2. 8
2.9
4. 1
5.3
3.0
3.9
6.3
5.3
2. 3
2.2
4.6
Day-
ton
4.8
2.9
3. 8
6.4
5.9
2.0
2. 3
4.5
Phoe-
nix
5. 3
2.6
4.6
6.1
6.0
1.9
2. 2
4. 8
Hous-
ton
5. 8
3. 1
4. 2
6.5
5. 5
2.6
2.2
3.8
Den-
Los
ver Angeles
5.7
2.7
4.8
6.6
5.7
2. 1
2.3
3.6
5.4
2.6

4.6
6.4
5.7
2. 0
2.2


3.4
                                      A-21

-------
                                  Children Over 16 Years Old in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to
These Reasons for Using
Auto Transportation; *

    Cheaper

    Faster

    More comfortable

    Safer for passenger


    Less congested

    More available

    More flexible

    Need car during day
New
York
5.5
2.0
3.5
6.8
4.7
3.0

1.7
4.1
Phila-
delphi.
5.5
|2. 3
3.7
5.7
4.1
|2.2

|2.3
6.9
Day- Phoe- I
i ton nix
4.9 4.2
|2.4| | 2. 7 |
3.7 4.7
6.0 5.3
6. 6 5. 2
| 1. 7 | |l.6:|

|2.8| |T.7|
4.7 3.6
Hous-
ton
5.6
2.7
4.4
6.4
5.. 5
.2 :. i :

2. 0
3.9
Den-
ver i
5.4
1 2. 6 |
5.4
6. 1
5..0
1.8

1.7
5. 1
Los
Angeles
5. 5
2.5
4.6
6.2
5.7
1.9

2.0
4. 1
(Total Number of
 Eligible Children)
(44)    (52)    (30)    (60)    (58)    (55)    (63)
 :The higher the number,  the less important the reason.
                                       A-22

-------
                 PROPOSALS FOR ENCOURAGE USE OF
                        PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Household  members were asked to rate various proposals designed to encourage
increased usage of public transportation facilities.  Proposals were  rated in the
same manner as  were the reasons for  traveling by auto and public transportation.
That is,  the most effective proposal was rated "1", the next "2". etc.  Means
were calculated for each  proposal on the basis of meaningful responses.


Household  members in all seven cities feel that more frequent service would be
one of  the more effective ways of encouraging use of public transportation.
Household  members in New York would also  include faster travel, lower fares
and cleaner newer  vehicles.  Household members in Philadelphia and Dayton
are similiar  to those in New York in also considering faster travel and lower
fares as  being effective.  Household members  in Phoenix, Houston,  Denver
and Los Angeles  feel that more conveniently  located stops and  stations is an
effective way  of encouraging use of public transportation.  With the exception
of Phoenix, household members in these cities would also include faster
travel  as an effective proposal.

It is interesting to  note the sirmliarity  between the most effective proposals for
encouraging  use  of public transportation (faster travel, more frequent service
and more conveniently  located stops and stations)  and the reasons for traveling
by auto (faster,  more flexible and more available).
                                      A-23

-------
                                            Husbands in These Cities:
Gave This Mean Rating to New Phila-
These Ways of Encouraging York delphia
Use of Public Transportation: *

Cleaner /newer vehicles 3. £
Faster travel 3. 2

5 4.8
3.8
Air conditioned vehicles 5.2 5.7
More frequent service 3. C
Lower fares 3. c.
) 3.0
) 3.6
Day-
ton
4.8
3.6
6.5
2.8
4.2
Parking facilities at stops
and stations 5.8 4.6 4.7
Shelters against bad weather 6.2 6.3 5.7
Better security for
personal safety 5.3 5.1 5.8
More conveniently located
stops/stations 4.9 5.2 4.3
(Total Number of
Eligible Husbands) (132) (153) (84)
*The higher the number, the less effective the propo
Wives i
Gave This Mean Rating to New Phila-
These Ways of Encouraging York delphia
Use of Public Transportation^*

Cleaner /newer vehicles 3.6
Faster travel 3. "

> 4.4
' 4.6
Air conditioned vehicles 5.2 5.8
More frequent service 3. ]
Lower fares 3. 1
3.2
' 3.6
Parking facilities at stops
and stations 6.4 5.5
Shelters against bad weather 5.9 5.5
Better security for
personal safety 4.4 4.3
More conveniently located
stops/stations 5.2 5.0
Day-
ton
5. 0
4.2
6.4
2.5
3.9
5.2
5.6
5.5
4.0
Phoe-
nix
6.1
4. 1
5.4
2.0
4.0
5.3
6.2
6.2
3.0
(148)
sal.
n These
Phoe-
nix
5.8
4.6
5.3
2.3
4.0
5.3
5.5
6.1
2.9
Hous-
ton
5.8
3.5
5.5
2.8
4.5
4.9
5.3
6.3
3.5
(146)
Cities:
Hous-
ton
5.8
4.4
5.5
3.0
4.2
5. 5
4.6
5.4
3.7
Den- Los
ver Angeles
6.5
3. 5
6.9
2. 5
4.6
4. 5
5.5
6.4
3. 0
(178)
6.0
3.4
6.2
|2.4
4. 3
4.6
5.6
6.3
3. 3
(161)
Den- Los
ver Angeles
6.3
4.0
6.5
2.5
4.6
4.9
5. 0
6.1
3.3
5. 7
3.7
5.6
2.5
3.9
5.0
5.6
5.9
3.5
(Total Number of
 Eligible Wives)               .  (163)   (174)    (96)   (175)   (I6i;

*The higher the number, the Less   effecive the proposal.

                                       A-24
(202)   (188)

-------
Gave This Mean Rating To
These Ways of Encouraging
Use of Public  Transportation:

   Cleaner/newer vehicles
   Faster travel
   Air conditioned vehicles
                                   Children Over 16 Years Old In These Cities:

                                New  Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
                                York  delphia   ton    nix    ton    ver  Angeles
                                        5.2    5.0    5.5    5.5    6.3     5.8
                                                                            3.2
                                                                            5. 0
       4.0    3.7    4.3     4.0    3.4
4.6    5.7    5. 2    4.6     5.0     7. 1
   More frequent service

   JLower fares

   Parking facilities at
      stops and stations
3.0
3,5

3.0

2.7

1.9
2. 3

1.7

3.4

2.3
4. 1

3. 1

3.7

2. 2
3.9
6. 0    6. 2    5. 4    6.6    6. 1     5. 4    5. 0
   Shelters against bad
      weather
   Better security for
      personal safety
   More  conveniently
      located stops /
      stations
5.6    5. 1    5. 3    6. 1    4. 7     5.4    6. 7
4.6    4. 1    5.8    6.3     6. 7     6. 1     5. 5
6.4    6.0    5. 0    3.2     3.6     3. 7    3. 2
(Total Number of
 Eligible Children)
(56)    (59)    (35)    (63)    (63)    (68)    (68)
  The higher the number the less effective the proposal.
                                       A-25

-------
                           DISPOSAL OF AUTOS OWNED
Respondents were asked if they would dispose of any of the cars they owned
i'~. better  public transportation were available.  Respondents in Denver and
Los Angeles are more likely to dispose of a car or cars  than respondents in
any of the other cities.  New York respondents are least likely to dispose of
any cars.  However,  respondents in New York own fewer cars (1.2) than
those in Denver and Los Angeles  (1. 8). In all cities the  mean number of
cars that would be disposed of is  about 1. 0.
When Asked If They Would
Dispose of Any of Their
Cars  If Belter Public
Transportation Were
Available Said:
   Yes

   Maybe


   No
   This Percent of Respondents In These  Cities:

New   Phila-  Day-   Phoe-  Hous-  Den-    Los
York  delphia   ton     nix    ton    ver   Ange les
  10
  10
15
21     17     13     19
11
              23
                                   15
       16
  80      75      74      72     73     66     69
   Mean Number of Cars
      Owned
 1.2     1.6     1.7     1.6     1.9     1.8     1.8
   Mean Number of Cars
      Disposed
 1.0     1.0     1.0     i.i     i.o     1.1     1.0
(Total Number of
 Respondents)
;i64)   (178)    (99)   (178)   (163)   (204)   (193)
                                      A-26

-------
                               QUESTIONNAIRE
 CM
         CONSUMER MAIL  PANELS
P\
       323 SOUTH FRANKLIN STREET CHICAGO. ILLINOIS 60606
U-C796)
 Dear Panel Member,

 Today, I am sending you a questionnaire which I consider both exciting and
 interesting.   Hopefully,  you will too.   This qxiestionnaire deals with the impor-
 tant problem of air pollution caused by automobiles.

 As you know, autos  are a major source of air pollution—especially in metro-
 politan areas.   You probably have read in newspapers or magazines that auto
 manufacturers are being required to make changes in their cars that will
 reduce the amount of pollutants coming out of cars.   This will be particularly
 true for cars manufactured in 1975 and thereafter.

 Many pollution experts believe, however, that despite  these new federal regu-
 lations on auto air pollution, other ways will have to be found  to further reduce
 pollution caused by cars.   The purpose of this questionnaire is to obtain your
 reaction to these new auto pollution control ideas being suggested by the
 experts.   In answering some questions, you will probably have to consult
 other members of your family to  get their ideas and reactions.   I am sorry
 if this is inconvenient,  but I am sure you will agree that the importance of
 solving pollution problems is worth making every reasonable effort.

 As always,  please check each of your answers after you have  completed the
 questionnaire.   Then return it to me in the  enclosed postage-paid envelope.
 If you have any additional comments,  please write them on the lines pro-
 vided in Question  11.

                                        Cordially,
                                   A-27

-------
                                                                     CONSUMER MAIL PANELS
                                                                                              (2-C7%)
                                AUTO AIR POLLUTION QUESTIONNAIRE
2.
3a.
3b.
3c.
4a.
4b.
4c.
All autos made in 1975 and thereafter will be equipped with emmision control devices to reducu air
pollution.   IS in 1975 you owned a car built before that year,  how would you feel about a law re-
quiring you to put emission control  equipment which might cost $200 on your car?   ("X"  BELOW)

How would you  feel  about this law if the coat was  reduced by government subsidy to about $50?
("X" BELOW)
                                            1.    Cost $200   2.   Cost $50
Feeling Toward  Law;
Very much in favor of law
Somewhat in favor of law .
Somewhat .igainst law . . .
Very much against law . .
                                                       |  |2
                                                           (17)
                                                                  LJ2
                                                                  D3
                                                                  34
                                                                            (18)
Even cars properly equipped with emmision control equipment might still pollute the air if the equip-
ment was not properly maintained.   How would you feel about a law requiring periodic inspection of
the emission control system to assure that it was working properly?   ("X"  ONE ONLY)
          Very much in
           favor of law
                  Dl
          Somewhat in  r
           favor of law
Somewhaf   r
 against law
V>ry much  r
 against law
      Assuming you had to have your car inspected at least once a year,  what would you consider a
      reasonable cost for the inspection?   (WRITE IN AMOUNT)
                                                                                                           13
                                                                                                      1-1-16
                                                                                                      O pe "\
      Assuming you had to have your car inspected al least once a year,
      should be made^   ("X"  ONE ONLY)
                                                               where do you think the inspecuu;i
             At state-operated inspection centers . |~|l
             At city-operated inspection centers* . [~~]2
                                                     At some ottter place  (Specify):
At local service stations or garages . [_\ J — — — ^^

Even if all autos were equipped with properly maintained 1
emission control systems, some cities might still have auto 1 v
air pollution problems due to the large number of cars 1 £
either on the streets at the same time or concentrated in I —
m ^«
particular areas. Listed below are several possible ways I n
to re-duct.- pollution under one or both of these conditions. I u
Please tell me how you feel about each of these proposals. 1 ,
("X" ONE ON EACH LINE) I £
Proposal: / 1


c. Very high ($500) registration fee per auto but only . — .

d. Prohibit traffic and parking in central business districts D'
e. A tax on all day parking in central business districts . . P] 1
f. A tax on parking in central business districts regardless _
of whether a person parked only one hour or all day "— '
g. Tolls on exit ramps of major freeways and expressways Q)i
h. Tolls on exit ramps of major freeways and expressways

i. Restrictions on non-essential auto travel during times
of high pollution by issuance of special license P)l

j. Turn some existing lanes into "bus only" and "car pool , — .
only" lanes on major expressways and streets . ...
Which of the proposals listed above would be the most acceptable?
Which would be inost unacceptable? 	 	 	 .„._. 	


To
/
/
J

1 v K
j c  5; jp
iZ-Zl
I2 S' ° /
/ " ^ /
/ <:
i 1
H3
1 — 1 J
r~i3
1 	 1 J
D3
D3
p-.
•
D3

D3

D3

D3
Letter:)
Letter:)


Plan Is
/
/

/ ra S
f -? *
*a.

W°| I
I
ri4
i 	 i^
H4
1 	 J^
1 — I"
D4
D4
ri4
1 	 IT
D-i

1J4

D4

D4













1-1 5
H-
n-
1 — f J
U5
U'
--,.
~
D'

1 1^

D5

D5


                                                                                                     19
                                                                                                n
                                                                                      23
                                                                                      24

                                                                                      25

                                                                                      26


                                                                                      28

                                                                                      29

                                                                                      30


                                                                                      31


                                                                                      32



                                                                                      34

-------
    Page Z
                                                                                                 (2-C796)
                                                                                                                                 (Z-C796)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Page 3
3=
rv>
vo
QUESTIONS 5-8 ASK FOR INFORMATION RELAT'VG TO OTHER HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS.
CONSULT THEM. IF NECESSARY, FOR THE ANSWERS.
5a, How often do the various members of your household travel by public transportation? (For ex-
ample, by bus, subway, or commuter train.)
Children
Husband Wife (Ov«?r 16 Year* Old)

One or two times a week 	 Q?

Never 	 Q5

5b. Please rate each household member's reason for using public tra
important reason "1", the next most important "2", the next "3"
never uses public transportation. "X" the "never use" box at the
a» in Question 5b. (WRITE IN BELOW UNDER 5c_)
5b. Public Transportation
Children
(Over 16
Reasons: Husband Wife Years Old)
a. Cheaper 	 (38) (39) (40)
b. Faster 	 (44) (45) (46)
c. More comfortable 	 (50) (51) (52)
d. Safer for passenger. . . . 	 (56) 	 (57) 	 (58)
e. Less congested 	 	 (62) 	 (63) 	 (64)
f. More available 	 	 (68) 	 (69) 	 	 (70)
g. More flexible (I can come
and go as I please) . . . 	 (15) (16) 	 (17)
b. More relaxing (able to
read while traveling). . 	 (21) 	 (22) 	 (23)
j. I do not have a driver's
k. Car is not available when
I need it 	 (30) (31) (32)
1. Other [Specify):
(33) (34) (35)
m. Never use ("X" Box) ... Ql QZ D' <39)
5d. Again, consulting other members of your household, please rate
below you feel would be most effective in encouraging the use of
Items: Husband V
. .Qi . ..Qi
..DZ . ..az
..G3(36| •• -03(37,
;:DS i-D* •
. .Q6 - . -D&
naportation. (Rate the most
etc. If a household member
bottom of the list.)
5c. Auto Transportation

Children
(Over 16
Hunband Wife Years Old)
. . - 	 (4D 	 (42) 	 (43)
. . - 	 (47) 	 (48) 	 (49)
- . . 	 (53) 	 (54) 	 (55)
... 	 (59, 	 (60) 	 <")(74_78
. . . 	 (65) 	 (66) 	 (67) open)
. . . 	 (71) 	 (72) 	 (73)79ED>0
Cd. Z
. . . 	 (18) 	 (19) 	 (20) r>u^
1-14
	 (Not Applicable) 	
	 (Not Applicable) - -
. 	 (Not Applicable) - -
(36) (37)
(38)
. . . DI Qz D3 «o)
in order of effectiveness which items
public transporation. (Rate the most
tc.,
Children
file (Over 16 Years Old)
Cleaner and newer vehicles 	 (4.1) _^__ (42) (43)




Shelters against bad weather at stops
Better security to assure personal
More conveniently located stop*
Other (Specify):
(68)
	 (48) 	 (49)
	 (51) 	 (52)
	 (54, 	 (55)

	 (60, 	 (61)
	 (63, 	 (64)
	 (66) 	 (67)
(71-78 open,
(69) (70) 79p]znBO
6a.   How would you or other household member a feel about traveling to and from work in a car pool?
      ("X" ONE ONLY)
                                         Very interested	[^}.
                                         Somewhat interested. .  . . r~.Z
                                         Not at all interested . .  . .Q3

                                         Already in car pool	Ql
                                         Do not travel to and from ,—,
                                            work by car	
                                                                                                                                       reduce pollution and car pools became necessary,  how difficult do you think it would be to get
                                                                                                                                       into one an existing one or organise one  amongst your friend*, neighbors and/or work associates.
                                                                                                                                       ("X" ONE  ONLY)
                                                                                                                                                                          Extremely difficult	[Ijl
                                                                                                                                                                          Very difficult	Q2
                                                                                                                                                                          Somewhat difficult	Q3
                                                                                                                                                                          Somewhat easy	Q4
                                                                                                                                                                          Very easy	D*
                                                                                                                                                                          Extremely easy	,—^
                                                                                                                                                                          Already in cor pool  . .  . .Q?
                                                                                                                                       One of the major causes of areas of high pollution is traffic
                                                                                                                                       congestion.   Pollution could be reduced if traffic congestion
                                                                                                                                       and stop-and-go traffic was reduced.  Lifted below are
                                                                                                                                       several Ideas for reducing traffic  congestion.   Picas* tell
                                                                                                                                       me how effective you think each of these  ideas would be in
                                                                                                                                       reducing congestion and pollution.    ("X" ONE  BOX  FOR
                                                                                                                                       EACH IDEA)

                                                                                                                                              Idea:
a.
b.
c.
d.

e.
R-

i.

j.
Prohibit parking, loading and unloading on busy streets
Increase the number of one-way streets 	
Establish reversible lanes on busy streets to be used
Prohibit turns at busy intersections during rush hours .


Provide pedestrian underpasses and/or overpasses . . .
Lmnrove timino of traffic sicnals
Increase the number and frequency of radio traffic re-

Turn some existing lanes into "bus only" and "car pool
DI
LJi
DI
DI
r— j.
rni
DI
DI

DI

02
LJz
Oz
DZ
ri2
ri2
nz
DZ

Dz

03
LJ3
03
O3
n j
[— \\
D3
Q3

D3
D3
D«
L>
O«
O«
D*
ru
n«
Q4

D*

                                                                                                                                              Your Ideas  (Please List):
                                                                                                                                                                                                       DI    Dz     O3     D«
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            r>up.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            1.14
                                                                                                            19
                                                                                                            20
                                                                                                            Zl
                                                                                                            IZ
                                                                                                            23
                                                                                                            24

                                                                                                            25

                                                                                                            26
                                                                                                                                       Since traffic congestion is mos! severe at times when people are going to or corning from work.
                                                                                                                                       one alternative for reducing congestion would be to have people start and stop work at different
                                                                                                                                       times of the day.  That is,  some people would start work at 5:00 AM and quit  st 2:00 PM. others
                                                                                                                                       would work from 7:00 AM to 4:00  PM. others from 10:00 AM to 7:00 PM. etc.  How do you feel about
                                                                                                                                       this  idea?    ("X" ONE ONLY)
                                                                                                                                                                           Very much in lavor	Ql
                                                                                                                                                                           Somewhat in  favor	C]2
                                                                                                                                                                           Indifferent	D3
                                                                                                                                                                           Somewhat opposed	Q4
                                                                                                                                                                           Very much opposed	Q5
                                                                                                                                                                    (PLEASE CONTINUE ON THE NEXT PACE)

-------
Page 4
                                                                                             (2-C796)
 9a.   Please record the model year of each car owned in your household.  (WRITE  IN  BELOW
       UNDER _9a)
 9b.   Please estimate the number of miles each car was driven in the last year.
       (WRITE IN NUMBER OF MILES  UNDER  9b BELOW)
 9c.   For each car, please estimate what percentage of last year's mileage was accounted for by
       driving outside your local metropolitan area.   (For example, vacation,  business trips,
       short weekend trips,  etc.)   (WRITE IN BELOW  UNDER  9c_)
                                                        9b.                      9c.
                                     9a.            Last Year's       Percentage of Mileage
                                 Model  Year          Mileage          Outside Local Area
                    Car #1

                    Car #2

                    Car #3

                    Car H
 9d.
 9e.
How many licensed drivers are there in your household?   (WRITE IN)

                         Number of Licensed Drivers: _

If better public transportation were available, would you consider disposing of any of the
cars you own?

              I C S    I  I 1 I     -  »»        _  ,,,»»»._ mv-i »«.» v                                ™ £
                     Maybe
                     No .    D3
                             9f.  How many?  (WRITE IN)
                                                                         cars
                                                                      7
lOa.

lOb.
Overall,  how serious a problem do you think auto air pollution is in your city?  ("X"  ONE BOX
UNDER lOa BELOW)
Overall,  how serious a problem do you think auto air pollution is nationwide?  ("X" ONE BOX
UNDER lOb BELOW)
                                                 lOa. City
                                                               lOb.  Nationwide
                    Very serious problem	
                    Serious problem	
                    Slightly serious problem ....
                    No problem at all	
                                              Di
                                              D2
                                              D3
(44)
Dl
Dz
D3
(45)
 11.
                                              D4                     D4

If you have any views or comments regarding any question or idea, please record them:
                                                                                              (46-78 open)
Thank you for your help.  Please check your answers and then return the questionnaire to me in the
enclosed postage-paid envelope.
                                                 A-30

-------