.United States Region 7 EPA 907 9-85-004
Environmental Protection 324 E. 11th St June, 1985
Agency Kansas City, MO 64106
Air and Toxic Division
v>EPA Carbon Monoxide
Analysis of
Future Attainment
of the NAAQS
in Wichita, Kansas
-------
7/16/2018
The EPA National Library Catalog | EPA National Library Network | US EPA
irrwi
'onrrenljl fvc'tKf on
Record Display for the EPA National
Library Catalog
RECORD NUMBER: 1 OF 1
New Search Search Results Full Record
Bibliography Modify Search Search History
OLS Field c ~ .
OLS Field Data
Name
... rp... Carbon monoxide analysis of future attainment of the NAAQS in
1 Wichita, Kansas /
Author Schewe. G. J.
CORP PEI Associates, Inc., Cincinnati, OH.;Environmental Protection Agency,
Author Kansas City, MO. Region VII.
Publisher U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Air Branch,
1985
Year
Published
Report EPA/907/9-85/004; EPA-68-02-3890
Number
Stock
Number
OCLC
Number
Subjects
PB86-119906
48689050
Carbon monoxide-Environmental aspects—Kansas-Wichita.; Air
quality—Kansas—Wichita-
Carbon monoxide ; Monitors ; Air pollution ; Exhaust emissions;
Standards ; Concentration^Composition^; Sites ; Sampling ;
Additional Mathematical models ; Urban areas ; Calibrating ; Performance
Subjects evaluation ; Streets ; Air pollution sampling ; National ambient air
quality standards ; Special purpose monitors ; WichitafKansast; Baseline
measurements ; Case studies ; Air quality
https://cfpub.epa.gov/ols/catalogiadvanced_brief_record.cfm?&FIELD1=TITLE&INPUT1=carbon%20AND°/o20monoxide%20AND%20analysis%20AN... 1/3
-------
EPA 907/9-85-004
CARBON MONOXIDE
ANALYSIS OF FUTURE ATTAINMENT OF
THE NAAQS IN WICHITA, KANSAS
by
G. J. Schewe
PEI Assocfates, Inc.
11499 Chester Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246-0100
Contract No. 68-02-3890
Work Assignment No. 10
PN 3655-10
Project Officer
Robert Chanslor
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VII, AIR BRANCH
324 EAST 11TH STREET
KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64160
June 1985
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was furnished to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency by PEI Associates, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio 45246, in fulfillment of
Contract Number 68-02-3890. The opinions, findings, and conclusions ex-
pressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency or of cooperating agenies. Mention of company or
product names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
ii
-------
CONTENTS
Pacje
Figures v
Tables vi
Acknowledgment vi i i
1. Introduction 1
2. Ambient CO Concentrations 4
2.1 Ambient CO levels 4
2.2 Impact of 1979 CO control strategy 6
2.3 CO levels at the SPM Site 7
3. Modeling Methodology 8
3.1 Overview 8
3.2 Traffic and street characterization 9
3.3 CO emission characteriztaion 12
3.4 Meteorology 16
3.5 CALINE-3 model 17
3.6 Urban background concentrations 18
3.7 Calibration of CALINE-3 results 20
4. Analysis of the Special Purpose Monitor 2?
4.1 Introduction 22
4.2 Emission/roadway scenarios 25
4.3 CO Impact with left turns 30
4.4 CO Impact with no left turns 35
4.5 Summary of SPM site CO impacts 41
5. Calculation of Total CO Exhaust Emissions 45
6. Conclusions and Recommendations 48
6.1 Conclusions 48
6.2 Recommendations 48
References 50
iii
-------
CONTENTS (continued)
Page
Appendices
A Traffic Counts for Main, Douglas Streets /\_1
B Example Calculations of Idle and Queue Emission
Factors B-l
C 1-Hour Estimated Concentrations of CO at the SPM Site C-l
D Mobile-3 Calculations - Main and Douglas Streets D-l
iv
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area and Existing
CO Monitors in Wichita, Kansas 2
2 Average Daily Traffic Volumes in 1983 for Streets in the
Vicinity of the SPM and WFD No. 2 Monitoring Sites 9
3 Location of SPM Site and Approximate Route of Friday and
Saturday Night Street Congestion and Dragging 18
4 Intersection at Main and Douglas in Wichita Showing Traffic
Direction and the Location of the Special Purpose Monitor
(Including the Left-Hand Turns) 19
5 Queue Link Layout at the Intersection of Main and Douglas
Including Left Turns from Douglas to Main 27
6 Through Roadway Link Layout at the Intersection of Main
and Douglas (Left Through Link of Link D Is Eliminated
for Cases with Left Turn Ban) 29
v
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Measurements of CO Exceeding the 8-hour NAAQS At the
Wichita Special Purpose Monitor 6
2 Seasonal Maximum and Second-Maximum CO Concentrations
at the SPM Site 7
3 Growth Factors Derived From KDOT Projected VMT for
Wichita, Kansas 11
4 Urban Background Concentrations 19
5 Observed 8-Hour and Calculated 1-Hour CO Concentrations
Used for Model Calibration 20
6 Queue Analysis for the Intersection at Main and Douglas 24
7 Through Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With I/M and Left Turns for Main and
Douglas Streets 31
8 Queue Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide Emis-
sions With I/M and Left Turns for Main and Douglas
Streets 32
9 Through Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With No I/M but With Left Turns for Main and
Douglas Streets 33
10 Queue Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide Emis-
sions With No I/M but With Left Turns for Main and
Douglas Streets 34
11 Maximum Estimated 8-Hour Concentrations of CO at the SPM
Site in Wichita, Kansas, Allowing Left-Hand Turns 35
12 Through Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With I/M and No Left Turns for Main and
Douglas Streets 37
v1
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
13 Queue Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With I/M for Main and Douglas Streets and
No Left Turns 38
14 Through Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With No I/M and No Left Turns for Main and
Douglas Streets 39
15 Queue Traffic Characteristics and Carbon Monoxide
Emissions With No I/M for Main and Douglas Streets
and No Left Turns 40
16 Maximum Estimated 8-Hour Concentration of CO at the SPM
Site in Wichita, Kansas, With No Left-Hand Turns 42
17 Maximum Estimated 8-Hour Concentration of CO at the
Special-Purpose Monitor in Wichita, Kansas 43
18 Total VMT/Day by Facility Type 47
19 Annual Average Composite Exhaust CO Emissions Factors by
Facility Type 47
20 Average Daily Exhaust CO Emissions in the Nonattainment
Area 47
21 Annual Exhaust CO Emissions in the Nonattainment Area 47
vi i
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This report was prepared under the direction of Mr. Robert Chanslor of
the Air Branch of Region VII in Kansas City, Missouri. Mr. George Schewe o-f
the PEI office in Cincinnati, Ohio, was the author. Mr. Keith Rosbury of th»
PEI office in Denver, Colorado, directed the task. Additional assistance was
provided by Mr. Joseph Carvitti on the traffic analysis and Messrs. Jeffrey
Winget and Joseph Velten in all computer simulations.
Also appreciated was the assistance of Ms. Joyce Hart of the Wichita
Metropolitan Area Planning Department and Messrs. William McKinley and Robert
Mielke of the Wichita Department of Operations and Maintenance for the traf-
fic data and information provided for downtown Wichita. ~
v1 i i
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Two permanent CO monitors are located near the central business district
(CBD) of Wichita, Kansas. These monitors showed exceedances of the 8-hour
(10-mg/m3) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) during the period
extending from 1974 to 1982. As a result, a fully approved State
Implementation Plan for CO was implemented in Wichita. Since 1982, no ex-
ceedances have been detected at either of these monitors (the Health Depart-
ment or Fire Department No. 2). Because of these previous exceedances,
however, a portion of Wichita was designated as a nonattainment area for CO
(i.e., it failed to meet the NAAQS for CO). The EPA requested that the SIP
be reviewed because they believed that CO violations were still occurring at
other locations. The nonattainment area was determined on the basis of the
three monitors and is bounded by 13th Street on the north, Grove Street on
the east, Kellogg on the south, and the Big Arkansas River on the west.
Figure 1 shows this CO nonattainment area and the locations of the two
permanent CO monitors.
In 1983, an additional CO monitor, a Special-Purpose Monitor (SPM), was
installed in the central business district (Figure 1) as a check on the
attainment progress of the area. This monitor showed exceedances of the
8-hour NAAQS in 1983, whereas the two permanent monitoring sites did not.
1
-------
WFD #2: WICHITA FIRE DEPARTMENT Nn
H.D.: HEALTH DEPARTMENT
SPM : SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
Carbon monoxide nonattainment area and existing CO monitors
in Wichita, Kansas.
2
-------
The SPM site exceedances have all occurred on Friday or Saturday nights when
vehicular traffic is heavy as a result of "cruising," primarily by persons of
high school and college age.
The Special-Purpose Monitor, which is located at 111 West Douglas
Street, has operated continuously since its installation. This monitor meets
the general guidelines for the horizontal and vertical placement of a CO
probe (40 CFR 58, Appendix E). The following comparison shows the guideline
criteria versus the SPM siting:
0 Distance from edge of nearest traffic lane
Guideline - 2m to 10m
SPM - 3.05m
° Distance from intersection street corridor
Guideline - minimum of 10m
SPM - 27.4m
0 Vertical placement
Guideline - 3 ± 0.5m
SPM - 3.05m
The only notable difference between the actual SPM site and the recommended
siting is the distance from the intersection. The guidelines strongly recom-
mend a midblock location of CO monitors in downtown areas rather than near
intersections. The SPM site is much closer to the intersection of Main and
Douglas Streets than to midblock.
For the area in question to be able to show attainment, the Wichita
state implementation plan must be revised to demonstrate that concentrations
of CO at the SPK will be less than the NAAQS by 1987. This emissions and
modeling analysis allows for any transportation control measures (TCM's) that
have already affected traffic flow and/or CO emissions in the nonattainment
3
-------
area. For example, the future-year analyses consider the impact of the
projected Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program on CO emissions. This analy-
sis is not a complete SIP package for Wichita-Sedgewick County, but rather a
background modeling analysis that will be included as part of the overall SIP
package.
This study models CO impacts to 1987; it includes detailed dispersion
modeling, which compares existing monitored CO concentrations with estimated
values (model evaluation) and estimates the 1984 to 1987 CO concentrations.
The following sections describe the dispersion modeling, emissions estimates,
and the resulting CO concentration projections for the SPM site.
4
-------
SECTION 2
AMBIENT CO CONCENTRATIONS
2.1 AMBIENT CO LEVELS
Concentrations of CO at the SPM site exceeded the 8-hour NAAQS (10
3
mg/m } a total of 10 times in 1983, one time in 1964, and not at all thus far
in 1985. Table 1 shows these concentrations and when they occurred. As
shown, the noncomplying concentrations were distributed throughout the year
3 3
and ranged from 10.2 mg/m to 12.2 mg/m . The distribution of values is
somewhat atypical (e.g., one would expect to find the maximum 8-hour value in
one of the winter months, whereas it occurred in August). This distribution
indicates that either the meteorological conditions or variations in traffic
volumes and patterns (or both) may have offset the normal variation in CO
emissions, which are temperature-dependent. Urban background CO concen-
tration (the concentrations against which all dispersion modeling calcula-
tions were compared) also may have varied. All averaging periods ended
during late night, high downtown traffic density periods on Friday or Sat-
urday.
Examination of attendance records at the nearby Century II Convention
Center indicated that events occurred on 8 of the 11 dates with high CO
concentrations. The attendance per event ranged from a minimum of 500 per-
sons to 3300 persons, who arrived and departed over a limited time span,
i.e., immediately before and after the event. An examination of the 8-hour
5
-------
periods of high concentrations shows that no single hour of measurements
could be associated with attendance at a Century II event and that the concert
trations were high over a longer period of time than expected with an influx
of traffic for a particular event.
TABLE I. MEASUREMENTS OF CO EXCEEDING THE
8-HOUR NAAQS AT THE WICHITA SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
(1983 to April 198b)
Eight-hour
concentration,
mg/m3
Ending
day, date
Ending
hour
11.0
Sunday, 1-16-83
3 a.m.
10.5
Friday, 3-4-83
12 p.m.
11.1
Friday, 4-15-83
12 p.m.
10.7
Saturday, 7-23-83
1 a.m.
10.8
Sunday, 7-24-83
3 a.m.
12.2
Saturday, 8-6-83
4 a.m.
11.5
Saturday, 9-3-83
3 a.m.
10.2
Saturday, 10-8-83
1 a.m.
11.6
Sunday, 10-16-83
3 a.m.
11.8
Saturday, 10-29-83
1 a.m.
11.0
Sunday, 1-8-84
4 a.m.
"
Based on the assumption that ambient concentrations are not directly
related to Century II activities alone, it was further assumed that nighttime
street cruising (observed visually and appearing in street counts) was a
primary contributor to the high ambient CO concentrations.
2.2 IMPACT OF 1979 CO CONTROL STRATEGY
In 1979 an SIP for CO was implemented in Wichita. As of May 31, 1934
11 transportation control measures (TCM's) had been committed.
1. Voluntary I/M
2. Improved traffic flow - Grove Street
3. Improved traffic flow - lst/2nd Street Bridge
4. Improved traffic flow - 2nd Street
5. Transit - 26 new buses
6. Rideshare program
6
-------
7. Alternate fuel use in county, city and school vehicles
B. Transit service improvements
9. Signal improvements
10. On-street parking restrictions, Phase I—not implemented
11. On-street parking restrictions, Phase II--not implemented
Since 1982, no exceedances of the CO NA/\QS have been detected at the two
permanent CO monitoring sites (see Figure 1). This improvement can possibly
be attributed to the implementation of the first nine TCM's. Of concern,
however, is that the SPM site continued to exceed the 8-hour NAAQS. Of all
the TCM's proposed in the SIP, only the voluntary I/M Program will have a
significant effect on the late-night cruising phenomena. Other TCM's are
primarily effective during peak-hour periods in the morning and afternoon.
2.3 CO LEVELS AT THE SPM SITE
For calibration of the dispersion model for estimating future year CO
concentrations, the maximum and second-maximum concentrations for the winter
and summer seasons were reviewed (the two extreme seasons which give the best
indication of the seasonal variation in CO emissions). Table 2 presents the
maximum and second-maximum concentrations (above the NAAQS) for these seasons
in 1983 and 1984. The second-maximum values were used in all calibrations of
the modeling results in order to satisfy the NAAQS, which allow one exceed-
ance per year. A discussion of the calibration procedures is presented in
Section 3.
TABLE 2. SEASONAL MAXIMUM AND SECOND MAXIMUM
CO CONCENTRATIONS AT THE SPM SITE
Year
Seasor?3
Measured 8-hour
concentrations, mg/m3
Maximum
Second maximum
1983
Winter
11.0
8.8
1983
Summer
12.2
10.8
1984
Winter
11.0
8.5
aWinter: December, January, and February; summer: June, July, and August.
7
-------
SECTION 3
MODELING METHODOLOGY
3.1 OVERVIEW
The basic modeling methodology used in this analysis combined the use of
i 2
Mobile-3 emission factors and the CALINE-3 highway dispersion model into a
microscale analysis. Because the emission factors estimated by MOBILE-3 were
given in grams per vehicle (moving) and grams per vehicle-minute (idling),
traffic volumes, speeds, queuing lengths, and delay times were also calcu-
lated or estimated. Inputs to the MOBILE-3 program include ambient air
temperature, the option to include inspection/maintenance, vehicle cold/hot
start percentages, year of analysis, vehicle speed, vehicle class mix, and
model year distribution within each vehicle class.
Source characterization consisted of dividing nearby roadways and inter-
sections into individual through and queuing links. Because this was pri-
marily a microscale analysis (only the intersection and midblock streets in
the immediate vicinity are modeled; all other contributions are considered
urban background), the CO concentration estimates reflect small changes in
traffic volumes and flow.
Accurate 1-hour and 8-hour dispersion modeling of specific actual events
is very difficult given the uncertainty in emissions, source characteristics,
vehicle movement, meteorological conditions, arid the complex flow of the
downwind roadway plumes. Rather than using meteorological data from the
8
-------
Wichita Airport or using specific hour-by-hour vehicle counts, worst-case
meteorological and emission conditions were assumed. The worst-case 1-hour
CO concentrations (including urban background) were calibrated to 8-hour
estimates by using a ratio of the estimated 1-hour concentration to the
measured 8-hour concentrations at the SPM site. The resulting calibration
factors were similar to the persistence factor of 0.7 (as recommended by the
EPA3). This calibration includes implicit meteorological variability and
permits comparison of the estimated 1-hour concentration with the 8-hour
measured CO concentrations.
3.2 TRAFFIC AND STREET CHARACTERIZATION
The Wichita Department of Operations and Maintenance provided 1983 and
1984 traffic counts and signal cycle timing for the streets and intersections
near the SPM site. (The signal and phase timing represents the most up-to-
date signalization used in the downtown area.) The 1983 average daily traf-
fic (ADT) counts for the downtown area (shown in Figure 2) indicated that the
intersection at Main and Douglas has high traffic volumes on all four legs.
Hourly traffic distributions were taken on July 13-14, 1984, and March
29-31, 1985, at a temporary counter located on Douglas Street (just west of
Main Street). These data and those obtained at the permanent traffic counter
on Main Street (just south of Douglas) confirmed the high traffic volumes
associated with late-night cruising. Traffic counts during the period from
8:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. were often greater than 50 to 60 percent of the week-
day peak hour (which normally occurs from 5:00 to 6:00 p.m.), and on Saturday
the counts were greater than for any individual daytime hour. Appendix A
presents the individual hourly traffic count summaries used for the analysis
of the streets near the SPM site.
9
-------
>-
Ut
ia
o
•n
n
o
r-
CD
1ST
C
r.c
-------
The expected growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was used to estimate
the traffic volumes for future years on each street. These estimates were
4
made by KDOT using a travel demand model for a dispersion modeling study of
Wichita for 1982 and the year 2000. A straight-line estimate of the growth
rate from 1983 to 1987 was approximated using the KDOT estimates for vehicle
miles traveled in 1982 and 2000. The resulting growth rates for each year
are shown in Table 3 with respect to data for 1984. These rates were used to
adjust the through-traffic volumes on Douglas and Main Streets. No growth
projections were made for queuing traffic volumes (they are calculated for
the purpose of estimating total queue emissions). The assumption made
throughout this analysis is that the projected vehicular volumes will not
exceed street capacities and that queue lengths will not change signifi-
cantly.
TABLE 3. GROWTH FACTORS DERIVED FROM KDOT' PROJECTED
VMT FOR WICHITA, KANSAS
Year
Projected number of
vehicle miles traveled
Ratio of future year
to 1984
1983
5,219,504
0.984
1984
5,302,941
1.000
1985
5,386,379
1.016
1986
5,469,817
1.032
1987
5,553,255
1.047
aBase case because traffic data used in analysis is pri-
marily from 1984.
Each leg of the intersection was divided into smaller "links" as appro-
priate to represent different vehicle movements and speeds. These model
links represented vehicle traffic traveling through the intersection at
11
-------
representative speeds. They also represented vehicle queues where appropri-
ate. If a left-hand turn lane had vehicles left over from a green light
cycle, or if differences arose between queuing in different lanes, more links
were used to simulate the intersection leg. (Individual links are described
in subsequent chapters.)
One special feature that was incorporated into the 1985 analysis of
Douglas and Main Streets was the banning of left-hand turns from westbound
Douglas to Southbound Main. The effect on the 1985 analysis was to eliminate
queue links from consideration and to adjust adjacent links accordingly.
3.3 CO EMISSION CHARACTERIZATION
Emissions from a vehicle traveling through an intersection or street
without experiencing delay were calculated directly by MOBILE-3. For queuing
vehicles, the idling CO emissions calculated by MOBILE-3 were combined with
the approximate vehicle length (4.35 m/veh) to determine the emissions per
roadway length per second per lane. This information combined with the
number of lanes and the delay time in each queue yields a total emission
estimate over the length of the queue. The CALINE-3 model required both an
emission rate (g/mi) and a vehicle count. Thus, for queuing links, an arb1»
trary emission rate of 100 g/mi was assigned; using the total queue emis-
sions, an equivalent vehicle-per-hour count was back-calculated for use in
CALINE-3. These rates were calculated in accordance with suggested EPA
5
Region I techniques; details are presented in Appendix B.
The use of the MOBILE-3 emissions model was dependent on a number of
factors, each of which is discussed in the following subsections.
12
-------
3.3.1 Year of Analysis
For this modeling analysis, CO emissions were estimated for the years
1983 through 1987. The 1983 and 1984 estimates were made to correspond with
the years of data collected at the SPM site. The purpose of the other year
estimates was to estimate the CO emissions (and related ambient air quality
impacts) for future years to determine when attainment would be reached under
various scenarios.
3.3.2 Route Speeds
Route speeds on Douglas and Main Streets were estimated on the basis of
observations^ and speed limits. Speeds of 10, 15, 20, and 25 miles per hour
were estimated for the streets and intersections in the subject analysis.
These speeds were used in subsequent MOBILE-3 calculations.
3.3.3 Vehicle Mix
The MOBILE-3 default mix of vehicle types (national mix for all roads)
is not applicable for analysis of the SPM site because the site is in an
urban area with little heavy truck traffic and the maximum events are asso-
ciated with the late-night period and the cruising phenomenon. In a previous
4
modeling study, the Kansas Department of Transportation suggested the follow-
ing vehicle mix for arterial and collector streets:
LDV* LDT1 LDT2 HDG LDDV LDDT HDD MC
0.777 089 0.089 03S "O "O OTO (57005
*
Glossary of terms
LDV = light-duty gas vehicle
LDT1 = light-duty gas truck, less than 6000 lb
LDT2 = light-duty gas truck, 6001 to 8500 lb
HDG = heavy-duty gas truck
LDDV = light-duty diesel vehicle
LDDT = light-duty diesel truck
HDD = heavy-duty diesel truck
MC = motorcycle
13
-------
Because heavy-duty vehicles were not observed during cruising periods,® these
percentages were redistributed to the LDV, LDT, and LDD classes, and the
following distribution was used in this analysis for Main and Douglas Streets-
LDV LDT1 LDT2 HDG LDDV LOOT HOD MC
07797 Ol4 07U54 (770 OT ~TO S70 OS5
These distributions were used in the base year (1983) and all subsequent
projection year analyses (1984-1987).
3.3.4 Vehicle Registrations
The vehicle age distribution observed^ during a Friday night cruising
period (July 13-14, 1984) appeared to be skewed toward somewhat older vehi-
cles than those in the MOBILE-3 default distribution. To account for the
greater number of older automobiles, the national average mix in MOBILE-3
adjusted for the LDV and LDDV classes. The adjustment involved moving the
age of 10 percent of the vehicles back 2 years each year starting with the
1984 year. This resulted in fewer new cars on the downtown Wichita streets
during the late-night periods.
3.3.5 Vehicle Mileage Accrual Distributions
Because of the lack of local information, the national averages con-
tained in the MOBILE-3 model were used for vehicle mileage accrual distribu-
tions for both the base year and projection year emission calculations.
3.3.6 Ambient Air Temperatures
Temperatures are discussed under meteorological considerations; however
because CO emissions are a direct function of ambient temperature, they are
summarized here. Because CO emissions are dependent on temperature, a sea-
sonal and even daily variation in emissions could occur. For this analysis
the winter and summer months were thought to provide representative analyst^
14
-------
periods. Two cases (January and July) were reviewed and analyzed for both
the baseline and projection years. In an attempt to correlate the modeled
and measured CO concentrations, average temperatures were documented during
selected high CO events. Temperatures for each 8-hour period were taken from
Local CIimatological Data, Wichita, Kansas, 1983. During the 8-hour monitor-
ing period of January 15-16, 1983, the average temperature was 24°F; during
the August 5-6, 1983, period (the maximum in 1983), the average temperature
was 80°F. These two average temperatures were used in both the baseline and
projection year analyses.
3.3.7 Cold Start/Hot Start Percentages
In the absence of local data to support specific cold- and hot-start
percentages, the Federal Test Procedure percentages were used, as specified
in the MOBILE-3 user manual:
20.6 percent cold start of noncatalyst LDV
27.3 percent hot start of catalyst LDV
20.6 percent cold start of catalyst LDV
These values were used in both the baseline and projection year calculations.
3.3.8 Inspection/Maintenance Credits
The city of Wichita currently conducts a voluntary inspection/mainte-
nance (I/M) program. A total of 81,403 cars were tested from April 1981 to
December 1984. Because the program is voluntary, it is difficult to assess
the overall pass/fail percentage (i.e., stringency level) within the context
of the entire Wichita vehicle fleet. Even though the fail rate in 1983 was
35.4 percent,* only 1954 of the 5513 cars that failed returned for a retest.
Of these, 785 failed a second time. The effect of voluntary inspection,
*Wichita TCM Summary, July 13, 1984, in a letter from Robert Eye, Kansas
Department of Health and Welfare, to Carl Walker, EPA Region VII.
15
-------
therefore, was to have 1169 vehicles repaired, which represents a 7.5 percent
stringency level in 1983. The lowest stringency level option available in
MOBILE-3 is 10 percent, which was selected as representative of Wichita's
voluntary program, given the other uncertainties in projecting the 1/H pro-
gram on the overall vehicle fleet.
Only the LDV class was assumed to be affected by I/M. The idling test
at the 3 percent CO/300 ppm HC level was assumed to be in effect. These
assumptions were used for both the baseline and projection year analyses.
3.4 METEOROLOGY
Inasmuch as event-by-event modeling of specific CO measurements is
nearly impossible because of uncertainties in the emissions, traffic, and
meteorology at a particular site, a worst-case modeling analysis was per-
formed 1n order to model the maximum concentrations of CO. Airport meteoro-
logical data were not used because they may not be representative of the
urban core. Ho site-specific data were available. In an attempt to simulate
worst-case conditions at the SPM site, wind directions were incremented ever,
10 degrees from west to east. Local meteorological measurements were re-
viewed to ensure reasonableness in all other data selections. For most of
the dates showing high CO concentrations at the SPM, local etiological
sundries from the airport and from the Wichita Health Department indicated
windspeeds of about 1.5 m/s or greater for all days where the SPM exceeded
the 8-hour NAAQS. Only for the August 5-6, 1983. exceedance did windspeeds
measure as low as 1 m/s. Thus, a windspeed of 1.5 m/s is used for the Jen-
uary analysis, and 1.0 m/s for the July analysis.
Other conditions included a mixing height of 100 meters (conservative
nighttime mixing height) and a neutral atmospheric stability for the „rt»n
5
area.
16
-------
3.5 CALINE-3 MODEL
The CALINE-3 Model was used to simulate the dispersion of CO emission
plumes from vehicles on roadways. Each roadway was broken into through-
traffic links and queuing vehicle links as appropriate. The end coordinates
and the width of each link were specified in the model. All links near the
SPM site were modeled coincidentally to obtain a total roadway impact as well
as to ascertain each link's contribution to the total concentration. Traffic
volumes of all moving vehicles and MOBILE-3 emission factors were used for
each through-link. Volumes and emissions for 1983 were input for the base
year, and growth-adjusted volumes and MOBILE-3 projected emissions were
specified for 1984 through 1987. Queue-link traffic volumes were adjusted to
reflect total idling CO emissions projected by MOBILE-3 for future years.
Deposition and settling velocities were assumed to be negligible because
CO is a gaseous emission. An averaging time of 60 minutes was selected. A
surface roughness of 321 cm was assigned to the analysis area, which was
consistent with the CALINE-3 guidance for surface roughness in a central
business district. The coordinates and the vertical displacement of the SPM
site were input as appropriate. Meteorological conditions were assigned as
discussed in Section 3.4. Background concentrations are discussed in Section
3.6.
Results obtained from the CALINE-3 Model were calculated as 1-hour CO
concentrations in parts per million. For calculation of the 1-hour concen-
trations in mg/m , the 1-hour values (in ppm) were divided by a conversion
factor of 0.875.
17
-------
3.6 URBAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS
Because the SPM site was located in an urban area and because the data
described herein were analyzed only for nearby roadways, the background
concentration must reflect all other CO concentrations. In this case the
background concentration will be called an "urban background." This type of
background concentration must include more than the natural background; it
must also include the upwind contributions from other CO sources in the area
during the same time period.
Examination of the two permanent monitor sites shown in Figure 1 and the
average wind directions during high CO concentrations at the SPM site (gen-
erally from the south) indicates that the Wichita Fire Department No. 2 (WFD
No. 2) CO monitor may be appropriate to serve as an urban background site.
This site is near the intersection of Lewis and Topeka, about four blocks
south and three blocks east of the SPM site. The WFD No. 2 monitor is far
enough from the urban core and from major thoroughfares to prevent it from
being subjected to high direct CO impacts from any major roadway. The WFD
No. 2 monitor is also generally upwind of the SPM site during high CO
periods, and it is situated in an area that is impacted by a major portion
of the CO emissions in Wichita.
For this analysis, the CO concentrations at the WFD No. 2 monitor were
judged to be the best suited to represent urban background concentrations.
The highest concentrations were examined at the WFD No. 2 monitor for the
same periods as the maximum 8-hour concentrations at the SPM site. For each
of the analysis months (January and July), the WFD No. 2 concentrations were
selected on the basis of the highest value for the season (which included any
exceedance periods in December, January, and February and June, July, and
18
-------
August). The 8-hour mg/m3 concentration was converted to a 1-hour ppm value
by multiplying by 0.875 (the mg/m3 to ppm conversion) and dividing by 0.7
(the volume 10 recommended 1-hour to 8-hour ratio. ).
Table 4 presents the selected WFD No. 2 8-hour CO concentrations and the
converted 1-hour counterpart in parts per million for input to the CALINE-3
Model for 1983 through 1987. An estimate of 1984 through 1987 background
concentrations of CO were obtained by adjusting the measured 1983 values.
The adjustments were made by multiplying by the VMT growth rates for each
year and by the approximate future year to 1983 M0BILE-3 emission ratios. At
speeds varying from 10 to 25 miles per hour, the ratio varies less than 5
percent; 15 miles per hour was chosen as the representative speed to perform
the ratios. Table 4 presents the measured WFD No. 2 concentrations and the
derived values for each future year. A composite MOBILE-3 ratio was derived
by combining the CO emission factor ratios for each ambient temperature
(January: 24°F and July: 80°F) and for both an I/M and no I/M case.
TABLE 4. URBAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS
Month of
analysis
Measured
8-hour
concentration,
mg/m3
Derived 1983
1-hour
background
concentration,
ppm
Projected 1-hour urban background
concentration, ppm
1984
1985
1986
1987
January
July
2.6a
1.2b
3.3
1.5
3.2
1.4
3.0
1.3
2.8
1.3
2.7
1.2
aMeasured on 1/16/83.
Measured on 8/6/83.
19
-------
3.7 CALIBRATION OF CALINE-3 RESULTS
To estimate future-year concentrations of CO at the SPM site and to make
practical recommendations as to the attainment/nonattainmerit status of the
area, measured and calculated values were compared. This evaluation provided
a method of allowing the 1983 and 1984 maximum CO concentrations to be con-
pared with the measured values at the SPM site and the CALINE-3 estimates.
Table 5 presents the seasonal maximum and second-maximum CO concentrations
measured at the SPM site in 1983 and 1984 (only for the seasons and years
showing a maximum concentration above the 8-hour NAAQS and that are part of
this analysis, i.e., winter and summer).
TABLE 5. OBSERVED 8-HOUR AND CALCULATED 1-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS
USED FOR MODEL CALIBRATION
Season
Year
Measured 8-hour CO
concentration,
mg/m3
Estimated
1-hour CO
maximum
concentration,a
mg/m3
Ratio of 8-hour to
1-hour concentration
Maximum
Second-
maximum
Maximum
Second-
maximum
Summer
1983
12.2
10.8
13.1
0.93
0.82
Winter
1983
11.0
8.8
13.4
0.82
0.66
Winter
1984
11.0
8.5
11.5
0.96
0.74
aIncludes background.
The ratios for the maximum 8-hour concentrations ranged from 0.82 to
0.96. These ratios were deemed inappropriate for calibration for two rea-
sons. The Volume 103 calculations recommend a 1-hour to 8-hour conversion of
0 7 ± 0.2. The ratios for the maximum concentrations in Table 5 were not 1r>
this range in two cases. Also, if the maximum concentrations are used for
calibration, all future-year estimates are likely to be equivalent to the
20
-------
maximum for each future year. Under the current NAAQS, one exceedance is
allowed per year. Thus, the use of maximum concentrations may not be appro-
priate for calibration.
Use of the second-maximum concentrations and the derived ratios to the
modeled 1-hour estimates was deemed representative for this analysis. The
average of the two winter 1983 and 1984 ratios was used as the January cali-
bration (e.g., (0.66 + 0.72)/2 = 0.70). The 0.82 ratio in the summer of 1983
was used to adjust all estimates made for July. All estimates of CO for the
various scenarios in Section 4, which are referred to as 8-hour calibrated
values, are derived from the 1-hour CALINE-3 estimates adjusted for the
observed 8-hour to modeled 1-hour ratios in Table 5.
21
-------
SECTION 4
ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The special purpose monitor is located at 111 West Douglas Street, near
the intersection of Main and Douglas Streets (see Figure 3). The approximate
route of the late Friday and Saturday night cruising prior to January 1985 is
also shown in this figure. Traffic moves in both directions on Douglas
Street. The loop for the return trips from the west proceeded south on Main
and around Century II Drive or north on Water, east on 1st, and south on
Main. The east return loop was made by going south on St. Francis, west on
William, and north on Emporia. In January 1985, a left-turn ban from west-
bound Douglas to southbound Main was enacted. The effect of this ban was to
eliminate those vehicles remaining in the queue for left turns and thereby
reduce the CO impact from these links,
Onsite observations6 indicated heavy congestion in both directions on
Douglas Street. The heaviest congestion was in the center lanes next to the
median. Of primary concern in this analysis was the impact of the inter-
section at Main and Douglas on the SPM site. With this in mind, queuing
vehicles were also observed during this period. Table 6 presents the result-,
ing queue analysis for each leg of the intersection at Main and Douglas
Streets. This table also shows the number of vehicles selected for this
analysis as being representative of each queue and the estimated queue length
for each lane {using 4.35 m per vehicle].
22
-------
1/1
u
toJ
—I
c
a,
0
KOSlS IC1SS
o
'IjO^O A &3i3 g IZil g
&0D3 J
*!
1112 C\ .Qgfc'i
BO
^ ioots
rJ
O
f4
L'SPM,
m.
JLEsO^
•'< i
1/1
iw2 Ln an a ssbo % siw
a
31&1 S 3
WFD
40115 S SR127
«•
r-
Figure 3. Location of SPM site and approximate route of Friday and
Saturday night street congestion and dragging.
23
-------
TABLE 6. QUEUE ANALYSIS FOR THE INTERSECTION AT MAIN AND DOUGLAS
Intersection
leg
Main, southbound
Douglas, westbound
Douglas, eastbound
Link/ .
lane No.1
H/1,2,3
1/4
J/2a,3
K/l
L/l,2a
M/2b
N/3
0/2
P/l
Q/5
R/3
Location
West
1-Left turn
West
Left queue
Left queue
Left queue
Near median
Center
Right turn
East near
median
Residual near
median
Vehicles
in
queue
1-5
10-15
1-5
5
5
3-5
8-10
6-8
1-3
30-40
2-4
Modeled
queue
number
3
12
3
5
5
5
9
7
2
38
Modeled
queue
length, ,
13.1
52.2
13.1
21.8
21.8
21.8
39.2
30.5
8.7
165.0
13.1
aSee Figure 5.
bFor Douglas westbound at Main with no left turns, queue links K L and M
eliminated. The additional vehicles from the banned left turn areassum^ri*1"*
to clear the intersection in the allotted 34.8-second green time. The ext
vehicles are assigned to Link J at the rate of one per cycle per lane whi u
increases the Link J queue length to 17.4 meters. ' wn'Ch
24
-------
4.2 EMISSION/ROADWAY SCENARIOS
The intersection at Main and Douglas was modeled to estimate the impact
of CO emissions on the Special Purpose Monitor. For this analysis, the
intersection was modeled for two I/M scenarios and two left-hand turn scenar-
ios (Douglas to Main) for the years 1983 to 1987. Some of the combinations
of these scenarios do not apply to 1983 or 1984 (such as no I/M and left-hand
turn ban), but all scenarios for all years are shown for comparison.
The scenarios modeled for I/M and left turns and the years for which
they apply include:
° I/M with left turns; 1983-1984.
° I/M with no left turns; 1985
0 No I/M with left turns
° No I/M with no left turns
All cases are possible scenarios for 1986 and 1987 and are modeled to deter-
mine the differences and to allow the recommendation of possible alternatives
for meeting the NAAQS.
Figure 4 shows the roadway configuration and the location of the SPM.
Each leg of the intersection was broken into through vehicle and queue
vehicle roadway links. Queuing vehicles were represented by short links
equal in length to those described in Table 6. In cases where vehicles moved
from one queue into a subsequent queue (i.e., were delayed more than one
total signal cycle), additional end-to-end links were constructed. These
queue links are shown along with the east-west (x) and north-south (y) coor-
dinates in Figure 5, where the center of the intersection is considered to be
the center of the coordinate system (0,0) and all units are in meters. Queue
links K, L, and M are eliminated from analysis when the left-turn ban is
considered.
25
-------
N
I
^ ^ po ^
O
TO
DOUGLAS - WEST
Ir
DOUGLAS - EAST
12'
•*-
~ -
11.5'
12'
~-
*•"
12'
12'
«-
>•-
12'
10
. MEDIAN.
r~
HEOIAN Jll
IT
IT
11'
-*¦
11'
12'
-f ~
11.5'
• SPM (Monitor)
50ft
i
SCALE
-J
lit
'i ro * ! ro
90'
Figure 4. Intersection at Main and Douglas in Wichita showing traffic
direction (including the left-hand turns) and the location of the Special
Purpose Monitor.
26
-------
Y1
X2
Y2
Link H
-1.8
14.2
-1.8
27.3
Link I
5.5
14.2
5.5
66.4
Link J
9.6
7.0
22.7
7.0
Link K
9.6
1.7
31.4
1.7
Link L
31 .4
1.7
53.2
5.2
Link N
-9.6
-1.68
-48.8
-1.68
Link 0
-9.6
-5.02
-40.1
-5.02
Link P
-9.6
-8.53
-18.3
-8.53
Link M
53.2
5.2
75.0
5.2
Link Q
22.7
-1.68
150.
-1.68
Link R
-48.8
-1.68
-61.9
-1.68
tv>
DOUGLAS
DOUGLAS - WEST
PARKING
LINK M
MEDIAN
MEDIAN
LINK R
LINK_N
lTnk 6
PARKING
SPM (Monitor)
SCALE
"i r\j l n ! r\j I r\> f
II - - - • Ul
Figure 5. Queue link layout at the intersection of Main and Douglas including
left-turns from Douglas to Main.
-------
In a like mariner, the through traffic was characterized by links extend-
ing into the intersection and assigned a length of 300 m, which should be
sufficient considering the proximity to the SPM site. Figure 6 shows these
links and the end coordinates of each link.
The signal cycle time for the intersection is 60 seconds during the
off-peak hours when the cruising occurs. The green for southbound Main
Street lasts 25.2 seconds. Westbound left-turn and through traffic on
Douglas has a green light lasting 34.8 seconds (9 seconds for left turns) and
eastbound Douglas traffic has a green light of 25.8 seconds. The cycle time
with the left-turn ban is the same for all intersection legs with the 9-
second left signal covered.
Vehicle counts for the streets at this intersection were obtained from
the permanent monitor located on Main Street south of the intersection
(Station No. 5-630-9000-70). This monitor was assumed to be applicable to
both the north and south legs because the ADT on both legs is nearly identi-
cal (see Figure 2). Traffic volumes for Douglas were obtained from a tem-
porary hose counter placed on the western leg of Douglas for two weekend
periods: July 13-15, 1984 and March 29-31, 1985. Average derived ADT values
were obtained from the City of Wichita. Volumes on the east leg of Douglas
were estimated by adjusting the east leg volumes by the ratio of the 1983 ADT
for the east leg and west leg (east leg ADT = 18061; west leg ADT = 16,718*
ratio = 1.08). For this worst-case analysis, the traffic volumes between the
hours of 8:00 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. were reviewed, and the hour with the highest
traffic was selected for analysis regardless of whether the hours coincided
on the various links.
28
-------
N
I
rv n ^
X1
Y1
*2
Y2
Link A
0
0
0
300
Link B
0
0
0
-300
Link C
0
8.5
-300
8.5
Link D
0
5.2
44.7
5.2
Link E
44.7
7.0
300
7.0
Link F
0
-5.0
-300
-5.0
Link G
0
-3.4
300
-3.4
DOUGLAS
DOUGLAS - WEST
PARKING
l7nk~d
LINK C
LINK E
MCDYAW ;.|11'
LINK G
PARKING
LINK F
• SPH (Monitor)
SCALE
n lv> • r\> ! ro I no >•
• tn
Figure 6. Through roadway link layout at the intersection of Main
and Douglas (left through link of Link D is eliminated for
cases with left turn ban).
-------
Each link was characterized according to EPA Region I Mobile Source
Modeling Procedures, which include the queuing link analysis as outlined
here and in Section 3.3 for idle emission consideration. (See Appendix B for
an example calculation.)
The selected meteorological conditions were a 1.5 m/s windspeed for
January and 1.0 m/s for July, neutral stability, and a 100-m mixing height.
Wind direction was varied from 270 degrees (from the west) to 90 degrees
(from the east) in 10-degree intervals from west to north back to east.
Section 3.4 discusses these meteorological conditions further.
Background concentrations were assigned to the CALINE-3 modeling as
described in Section 3.6. Calibration of all estimates was described in
Section 3.7.
4.3 CO IMPACT WITH LEFT TURNS
Individual link characteristics including vehicle speed, number of
lanes, CO emission factors, and number of vehicles for through-links are
presented in Tables 7 through 10 along with delay time and the equivalent
number of vehicles for queue-links. These tables include data on left turns
from Douglas westbound to Main southbound. Estimates are made for 1983
through 1987 for both I/M and no I/M scenarios (even though the no I/M
scenario does not apply for 1983, 1984, or thus far in 1985). The tables are
arranged by through-links with I/M, queue-links with I/M, through-links with
no I/M, and queue-links with no I/M, respectively. All factors discussed in
Sections 2 and 3 were included in the estimates shown in Tables 7 through 10.
The CO concentration estimates for each meteorological condition for
each season and year of analysis are shown in Tables C-l through C-4 in
Appendix C. Tables C-l and C-3 present 1-hour CO values for all links
30
-------
TABLE 7. THROUGH TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
WITH I/M AMD LEFT TURNS FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
January (24«F)
July (80°F)
Vehicle
Number
CO emission
Traffic
CO emission
Traffic
Though-!ink
speed.
of
factor,
volume,
factor.
voJume,
Link
identification
mph
lanes
/ear
g/mile
vph
g/mile
vph
A
Main N-S8
25
4
1983
49.68
665
28.69
665
1984
44.98
675
25.03
675
1985
41.60
686
22.31
686
1986
38.88
696
20.10
696
1987
36.49
707
18.16
707
B
Main S-SB
25
4
1983
49.68
670
28.69
670
1984
44.98
681
25.03
681
1985
41.60
692
22.31
692
1986
38.88
702
20.10
702
1987
36.49
713
18.16
713
C
Douglas W-WB
20
3
1963
62.17
666
35.83
666
1984
56.45
677
31.36
677
1985
52.29
687
28.02
687
1986
48.93
697
25.30
697
1987
45.97
708
22.91
708
D
Douglas E-WB3
10
3
1983
112.75
719
66.03
719
(left turn
1984
101.04
731
57.23
731
included)
1985
92.34
742
50.57
742
1986
85.27
753
45.15
753
1987
79.13
765
40.40
765
E
Douglas E-UB2
10
2
1983
112.75
719
66.03
719
1984
101.04
731
57.23
731
1985
92.34
742
50,57
742
1986
85.27
753
45.15
753
1987
79.13
765
40.40
765
F
Douglas W-Efi
15
3
1983
79.92
595
46.18
595
1984
72.47
605
40.41
605
1985
67.00
614
36.06
614
1986
62.57
623
32.52
623
1987
58.68
633
29.40
633
G
Douglas E-EB
10
2
1983
112.75
642
66.03
642
1984
101.04
653
57.23
653
1985
92.34
663
50.57
663
1986
85.27
673
45.15
673
1987
79.13
684
40.40
684
aDouglas Westbound to Main.
31
-------
TABLE 8. QUEUE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE
EMISSIONS WlTfTT7M AND LEFT TURNS FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
Equivalent number of vehicles
per hour
Queue link
identification
Number
of
lanes
Delay timea
Year of analysis
Link
Seconds
Percent
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
H
I
J
K
Main N, Ll-3
Main N, L4
Douglas E, Lla-3
Douglas E, Left 1
3
1
2
1
34.8
34.8
25.2
51.0
0.58
0.58
0.42
0.85
2874
958
1387
1404
2356
785
1137
1151
2047
682
988
1000
1827
609
882
892
1642
547
792
802
L
Douglas E, Left
l-2b
1
60.0
1.00
1652
1354
1177
1050
943
M
Douglas E, Left
2b
1
60.0
1.00
1652
1354
1177
1050
943
N
0
P
Q
R
Douglas W, L3
Douglas W, L2
Douglas W, LI
Douglas E, L5
Douglas W, L3 Ext
1
1
1
1
. 1
1
34.2
34.2
34.2
60.0
60.0
0.57
0.57
0.57
1.00
1.00
941
941
941
1652
1652
772
772
772
1354
1354
671
671
671
1177
1177
598
598
598
1050
1050
538
538
538
943
943
aDelay time equals the red time at the intersection of Main and Douglas
Streets. The percent delay time is the red time total cycle time ratio.
Delay on Links L, Q, and R are 100 percent because these vehicles may be
in these queue links more than a full signal cycle.
bSee Appendix B for example calculation; the CO emission factor equals 100
g/mi (input to CALINE-3). The emission rates in micrograms per meter per
second per lane are found in Table B-l.
32
-------
TABLE 9. THROUGH TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
WITH NO I/M BUT WITH LEFT TURNS FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
J« nua ry
24°F)
July (B0°F)
Vehicle
Number
CO emission
Traffic
CO emission
Traffic
Though-link
speed.
of
factor,'
volume.
factor.
volume,
Link
identification
mph
lanes
Year
g/mile
vph
g/mile
vph
A
Main N-SB
25
4
1983
56.53
665
32.74
665
1984
53.38
675
29.96
675
1985
50.47
686
27.40
686
1986
47.86
696
25.13
696
1987
45.55
707
23.07
707
B
Main 5-SB
25
4
1983
56.63
670
32.74
670
1984
53.38
661
29.96
681
1985
50.47
692
27.40
692
1986
47.86
702
25.13
702
1967
45.55
713
23.07
713
C
Douglas U-WE
20
3
1983
70.76
666
40.89
666
1984
66.99
677
37.54
677
1985
63.43
667
34.41
687
1986
60.21
697
31.61
697
1S£7
t; .34
708
29.07
708
D
Douglas E-W63
10
3
1983
128.52
719
75.48
715
(left turn
1984
120.26
731
68.67
731
includes)
1985
112.32
742
62.24
742
1986
105.15
753
56.47
753
1987
98.81
765
51.29
765
E
Douglas E-WB2
10
2
1983
128.52
719
75.48
719
1984
120.26
731
68.67
731
1965
112.32
74;
e;.2
-------
TABLE 10. QUEUE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE
EMISSIONS WITH NTTI7M BUT WITH LEFT TURNS FOR MATN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
Equivalent number, of vehicles
per hour
Queue link
identification
Number
of
lanes
Delay time9
Year of analysis
Link
Seconds
Percent
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
H
Main N, Ll-3
3
34.8
0.58
3909
3619
3357
3121
2920
I
Main N, L4
1
34.8
0.58
1303
1206
1119
1040
973
J
Douglas E, L2a-3
2
25.2
0.42
1887
1747
1620
1507
1410
K
Douglas E,
Left 1
1
51.0
0.85
1909
1768
1640
1525
1426
L
Douglas E,
Left 2b
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
M
Douglas E,
Left 2b
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
N
Douglas W, L3
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
0
Douglas W, L2
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
P
Douglas E, L5
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
Q
Douglas, W, LI
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
R
Douglas W, L3 Ext.
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
Delay time equals the red time at the intersection of Main and Douglas
Streets. The percent delay time is the red time total cycle time ratio.
Delay on Links L, Q, and R are 100 percent because these vehicles may be
in these queue links more than a full signal cycle.
^See Appendix B for example calculation; the CO emission factor equals 100
g/mi (input to CALINE-3). The emission rates in micrograms per meter per
second per lane are found in Table B-l.
34
-------
combined. As shown in these two tables, the maximum concentration typically
occurs in January of each year with winds from the east northeast (wind
direction 60-80 degrees). Tables C-2 and C-4 present individual link contri-
butions to the maximum study period concentration. Through-links F and G and
queue-links K,N,0,P, and Q contribute the greatest percentages to the total.
These links tend to be located nearest the SPM site and upwind for the
critical wind directions.
The maximum calibrated 8-hour CO concentration of 10.8 ug/m3 for I/M and
left turns occurred in July 1983. All other years for this case were less
than the 8-hour NAAQS of 10 mg/m3. With no I/M but including left turns, the
maximum 8-hour concentration was estimated in July 1983 at 13.6 mg/m3.
Although this case did not actually occur, it provides a comparison to the
case with I/M and for future years. Table 11 presents the 8-hour values for
the cases with left turns allowed.
4.4 CO IMPACT WITH NO LEFT TURNS
Individual link characteristics including vehicle speed, number of
lanes, CO emission factors, and number of vehicles for through-1inks are
presented in Tables 12 through 15 along with delay time and the equivalent
number of vehicles for queue-links for the case of no left turns from Douglas
westbound to Main southbound. Estimates are made for 1983 through 1987 for
both I/M and no I/M scenarios (even though the I/M scenario only applies to
the first part of 1985). The tables are arranged by through-links with I/M,
queue-links with I/M, through-links with no I/M, and queue-lir.ks with no I/M,
respectively.
35
-------
TABLE 11. MAXIMUM ESTIMATED 8-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF CO AT THE
SPM SITE IN WICHITA, KANSAS, ALLOWING LEFT-HAND TURNS
(mg/m3)
Year
Month
1983
January
1984
January
1985
January
1986
January
1987
January
1983
July
1984
July
1985
July
1986
July
1987
July
10.8
9.0
8.1
7.4
6.6
I/M,
left turns
No I/M,
left turns
9.4
11.2
8.1
10.6
7.4
10.0
6.9
9.2
6.5
8.9
13.6
12.5
11.6
11.0
10.3
36
-------
TABLE 12. THROUGH TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
WITH I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
Jtnuary (24°F)
July (80°F)
Vehicle
Number
CO mission
Traffic
CO emission
Traffic
Though-1 ink
speed.
of
factor.
volume.
factor,
volume,
Link
identification
itiph
lanes
Year
g/mile
vph
g/mile
vph
A
Main N-SB
25
4
1963
49.68
719
26.69
719
1964
44.98
730
25.03
730
1985
41.60
741
22.31
741
1986
38.88
753
20.10
753
1987
36.49
764
18.16
764
B
Main S-SB
25
4
1983
49.68
670
28.69
670
1984
44.98
661
25.03
681
1985
41.60
692
22.31
692
1986
38.88
702
20.10
702
1987
36.49
713
18.16
713
C
Douglas W-WB
20
3
1983
62.17
719
35.83
719
1984
56.45
731
31.36
731
1985
52.29
742
28.02
742
1986
48.93
753
25.30
753
19B7
45.97
765
22.91
765
D
Douglas E-UB2
10
2
1983
112.75
719
66.03
719
1984
101.04
731
57.23
731
1985
92.34
742
50.57
742
1986
85.27
753
45.15
753
1987
79.13
765
40.40
765
E
Douglas E-W62
10
2
1983
112.75
719
66.03
719
1984
101.04
731
57,23
731
1985
92.34
742
50.57
742
1986
85.27
753
45.15
753
1987
79.13
765
40.40
765
F
Douglas W-EB
15
3
1983
79.92
595
46.18
595
1984
72.47
605
40.41
605
1985
67.00
614
36.06
614
1986
62.57
623
32.52
623
1987
58.68
633
29.40
633
G
Douglas £-^B
10
2
1983
112.75
642
66.03
642
1984
101.04
653
57.23
653
1985
92.34
663
50.57
663
1986
85.27
673
45.15
673
1987
79.13
684
40.40
684
37
-------
TABLE 13 QUEUE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
WITTT7H FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS AND NO LEFT TURNS
Equivalent number.of vehicles
per hour
Queue link
identification
Number
of
lanes
Delay timea
Year of analysis
Link
Seconds
Percent
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
H
Main N, Ll-3
3
34.8
0.58
2874
2356
2047
1827
1642
I
Main N, L4
1
34.8
0.5B
958
785
682
609
547
J
Douglas E, L2a-3
2
25.2
0.42
1387
1137
988
882
792
N
Douglas W, L3
1
34.2
0.57
941
772
671
598
538
0
Douglas W, L2
1
34.2
0.57
941
772
671
598
538
P
Douglas W, LI
1
34.2
0.57
941
772
671
598
538
Q
Douglas E, L5
1
60.0
1.00
1652
1354
1177
1050
943
R
Douglas W, L3 Ext. 1
60.0
1.00
1652
1354
1177
1050
943
aDelay time equals the red time at the intersection of Main and Douglas
Streets. The percent delay time is the red time total cycle time ratio.
Delay on Links L, Q, and R are 100 percent because these vehicles may be
in these queue links more than a full signal cycle.
bSee Appendix B for example calculation; the CO emission factor equals 100
g/mi (input to CALINE-3). The emission rates tn micrograms per meter per
second per lane are found in Table B-l.
38
-------
TABLE 14. THROUGH TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
WITH NO I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
January (24°F)
July (80°F)
Vehicle
Number
CO emission
Traffic
CO emission
Traffic
Thougti-1 ink
speed.
of
factor,
volume,
factor,
volume,
Link
Identification
mph
lanes
Year
g/mlle
vph
g/mi1e
vph
A
Main N-SB
25
4
1983
56.53
719
32.74
719
1964
53.38
730
29.96
730
1985
50.47
741
27.40
741
1966
47.86
753
25.13
753
1987
45.55
764
23.07
764
E
Main S-SB
25
4
1983
56.53
670
32.74
670
1984
53.38
681
29.96
681
1985
50.47
692
27.40
692
1986
47.86
702
25.13
702
1987
45.55
713
23.07
713
C
Douglas W-WB
10
3
1983
70.76
719
40.89
719
1984
66.99
731
37.54
731
1985
63.43
742
34.41
742
1986
60.21
753
31.61
753
1987
57.34
765
29.07
765
D
Douglas F-WB2
10
2
1983
128.52
719
75.45
719
(left turn
1984
120.26
731
68.67
731
included)
1985
112.32
742
62.24
742
1986
105.15
753
56.47
753
1987
9B.81
765
51.29
765
I
Douglas E-UB2
10
2
1983
128.52
719
75.4B
719
1984
120.26
731
6B.67
731
1985
112.32
742
62.24
742
1966
105.15
753
56.47
753
1987
98.81
765
51.29
765
F
Douglas W-EB
15
3
19B3
90.99
595
52.74
595
1984
86.05
505
48.39
605
1985
81.31
614
44.30
614
1986
77.00
623
40.62
623
1987
73.17
633
37.30
633
G
Douglas E-EB
10
2
1983
128.52
642
75.48
642
1984
120.26
653
68.67
653
1985
112.32
663
62.24
663
1986
105.15
673
56.47
673
1987
98.81
684
51.29
684
39
-------
TABLE 15. QUEUE TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CARBON MONOXIDE
EMISSIONS WITH Wl/M FOR MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS AND NO LEFT TURNS
Equivalent number.of vehicles
per hour
Queue link
identification
Number
of
lanes
Delay time3
Year of analysis
Link
Seconds
Percent
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
H
Main N, LI-3
3
34.8
0.58
3909
3619
3357
3121
2920
I
Main N, L4
1
34.8
0.58
1303
1206
1119
1040
973
J
Douglas E» L2a-3
2
25.2
0.42
18 87
1747
1620
1507
1410
N
Douglas W, L3
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
0
Douglas W, L2
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
P
Douglas W, LI
1
34.2
0.57
1280
1186
1100
1022
957
0
Douglas E, L5
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
R
Douglas W, L3 Ext
. 1
1
60.0
1.00
2246
2080
1929
1794
1678
aDelay time equals the red time at the intersection of Main and Douglas
Streets. The percent delay time is the red time total cycle time ratio.
Delay on Links L, Q, and R are 100 percent because these vehicles may be
in these queue links more than a full signal cycle.
^See Appendix B for example calculation; the CO emission factor equals 100
g/mi (input to CAL1NE-3). The emission rates in micrograms per meter per
second per lane are found in Table B-l.
40
-------
The CO concentration estimates for the no left turn cases for each
meteorological condition for each season and year of analysis are shown in
Tables C-5 through C-8 in Appendix C. Tables C-5 and C-7 present the 1-hour
CO values for all links combined. As shown in these two tables, the maximum
concentration typically occurs in January of each year with winds from the
east northeast (wind direction 60 to 80 degrees). Tables C-6 and C-8 present
the individual link contributions to the maximum study period concentration.
Through-links F and G and queue-links N,0,P, and Q contribute the greatest
percentages to the total.
The maximum calibrated 8-hour CO concentration of 9.9 yg/m3 for I/M and
no left turns allowed occurred in July 1983. Other years for this case were
less than the 8-hour NAAQS of 10 mg/m3 for both seasons. With no I/M and no
left turns, the maximum 8-hour concentration was estimated in July 1983 at
12.2 mg/m3. Table 16 presents the 8-hour values for the cases with no left
turns allowed.
4.5 SUMMARY OF SPM SITE CO IMPACTS
The results presented in Sections 4.3 and 4.4 indicate that the SPM site
is less than the 1-hour NAAQS for all cases, which agrees with measured
values over the lifetime of the monitor. For an 8-hour averaging period, CO
concentrations are estimated for several cases, which will enable the Wichita
nonattainment area to meet the NAAQS for future years. Table 17 summarizes
the 8-hour concentration estimates for all scenarios (presented separately in
Tables 11 and 16). This table shows the general progression of CO concentra-
tions for each year from 1983 to 1987 under each I/M and left-turn scenario
for the two seasons.
41
-------
TABLE 16. MAXIMUM ESTIMATED 8-HOUR CONCENTRATION OF CO
AT THE SPM SITE IN WICHITA, KANSAS, WITH NO LEFT-HAND TURNS
(mg/m3)
I/M,
No I/M,
Year
Month
no left turns
no left turns
1983
January
8.6
10.2
1984
January
7.7
9.7
1985
January
7.0
9.1
1986
January
6.5
8.5
1987
January
6.1
8.2
1983
July
9.9
12.2
1984
July
8.3
11.4
1985
July
7.5
10.8
1986
July
6.7
10.0
1987
July
6.2
9.2
42
-------
TABLE 17. MAXIMUM ESTIMATED 8-HOUR CONCENTRATION OF CO AT
THE SPECIAL PURPOSE MONITOR IN WICHITA, KANSAS
(Calibrated mg/rn3)
I/M,
No I/M,
I/M,
No I/M,
Year
Month
left turn
left turn
no left turn
no left turn
1983
January
9.4
11.2
8.6
10.2
1984
January
8.1
10.6
7.7
9.7
1985
January
7.4
10.0
7.0
9.1
1986
January
6.9
9.2
6.5
8.5
1987
January
6.5
B.9
6.1
8.2
1983
July
10.8
13.6
9.9
12.2
1984
July
9.0
12.5
8.3
11.4
1985
July
8.1
11.6
7.5
10.8
1986
July
7.4
11.0
6.7
10.0
1987
July
6.6
10.3
6.2
9.2
43
-------
In terms of actual case occurrences for 1983, 1984, and 1985, the
scenarios were as follows (the second maximum 8-hour concentration for the
year is included):
1983 I/M with left turns 10.8 mg/m3
1984 I/M with left turns 9.0 mg/m3
1985 I/M with no left turns 7.5 mg/m3
The logical progression to ensure future-year attainment is to include 1/M.
As shown in Table 17, with I/M included, the area will be in attainment in
1985, 1986, and 1987. The scenarios are:
1985
I/M with left turns
8.1 mg/m3
1985
I/M and no left turns
7.5 mg/m3
1986
I/M with left turns
7.4 mg/m3
1986
I/M and no left turns
6.7 mg/m3
1987
I/M with left turns
6.6 mg/m3
1987
I/M and no left turns
6.2 mg/m3
The effect of no left turns from westbound Douglas to southbound Main ranged
from 0.4 to 0.7 mg/m3; a ban on left turns does not appear to be required if
I/M is maintained. In all cases, the July estimates were greater than the
January concentrations.
Further review of Table 17 for the no I/M case indicates that if I/M is
dropped, the area will be in attainment by 1987 if the left-hand turn ban is
maintained. With left turns allowed and no I/M program, the second maximum
was predicted to continue to exceed the 8-hour NAAQS.
44
-------
SECTION 5
CALCULATION OF TOTAL CO EXHAUST EMISSIONS
Total CO exhaust emissions from vehicular traffic was calculated for the
nonattainment area. Because several facility types were located within the
nonattainment area, a weighted emission calculation was performed. The
roadway types included local traffic on arterials and collectors, and traffic
on freeways and interstates.
CO emission factors were generated for calendar years 1983 through 1987
for vehicle speeds of 22, 27, and 46 mph representing local, arterial/col-
4
lector, and freeway/interstate facility types respectively. All MOBILE-3
calculations were performed using an annual average ambient temperature of
56°F. All other input parameters were consistent with previous KDOT analyses
using the vehicle mixes recommended for the individual roadway types. Emis-
sion factors were generated with and without I/M improvements in calendar
years 1986 and 1987.
All traffic data, based on 1982 VMT's, were determined for the year of
interest by interpolating between the years 1982 and 2000. Estimated daily
VMT's in the nonattainment area, by facility type, were obtained from a TCM
4
status report prepared by the Wichita Metropolitan Area Planning Department.
This report lists the following 1982 VMT's.
Local: 37,945 VMT/day
° Arterials/collectors: 357,921 VMT/day
° Freeways/expressways: 113,142 VMT/day
45
-------
The interpolation method yields the estimated daily VMT for each facility
type. These estimates are given in Table 18. The daily VMT in Table 18 was
used in conjunction with the MOBILE-3 composite emission factors developed as
a function of vehicle speed or estimates of the total nonattainment area CO
emissions. Table 19 presents the Mobile-3 factors used for 1983 through 1987
by facility type.
Tables 20 and 21 present calculated CO emissions for the nonattainment
area as a function of calendar year and facility type. Estimates were also
prepared for 1986 and 1987 without an I/M program. As shown in Table 21, the
total annual CO emissions are expected to decrease in each subsequent year,
even given the increase in VMT. This decrease is due to the introduction of
newer vehicles into the vehicle fleet and their associated emission control
requirements, and also due to the retirement of late vintage vehicles. The
effect of the voluntary I/M program in 1986 and 1987 can also be quite dra-
matic. The voluntary program is predicted to reduce CO emissions by 20
percent when compared with no program.
46
-------
TABLE 18. TOTAL VMT/DAY BY FACILITY TYPE
Facility
type
1983
1984
1985
1986
1986
Local
38,561
39,178
39,794
40,411
41,027
Arterial/collector
363,736
369,550
375,365
381,179
386,994
Freeway/interstate
114,980
116,818
118,656
120,494
122,332
Total
517,277
525,546
533,815
542,084
550,353
TABLE 19. ANNUAL AVERAGE COMPOSITE EXHAUST CO EMISSION FACTORS
BY FACILITY TYPE, g/mile
Facility
type
1983
I/M
1984
I/M
1985
I/M
19
36
198
7
I/M
No I/M
I/M
No I/M
Local
Arterial/collector
F reeway/i nterstate
39.17
32.20
18.15
35.13
28.79
15.96
32.15
26.39
14.46
29.61
24.12
12.89
35.63
29.06
15.39
27.33
22.07
11.48
33.31
26.97
13.91
TABLE 20. AVERAGE DAILY EXHAUST CO EMISSIONS IN THE NONATTAINMENT AREA
Faci1ity
type
1983
I/M
1984
I/M
1985
I/M
1986
1987
I/M
No I/M
I/M
No I/M
Local
3,327
3,032
2,818
2,636
3,171
2,470
3,010
Arterial/collector
25,800
23,435
21,819
20,251
24,399
18,813
22,989
Freeway/interstate
4,597
4,107
3,779
3,421
4,084
3,093
3,748
Total
33,724
30,574
28,416
26,308
31,654
24,376
29,747
TABLE 21. ANNUAL EXHAUST CO EMISSIONS IN THE NONATTAINMENT AREA
(tons/yr)
Facility
type
1983
I/M
1984
I/M
1985
I/M
1986
1987
I/M
No I/M
I/M
No I/M
Local
607
553
514
481
579
451
549
Arterial/collector
4,708
4,277
3,982
3,696
4,453
3,433
4,196
Freeway/interstate
839
749
690
624
745
564
684
Total
6,154
5,579
5,186
4,801
5,777
4,448
5,429
47
-------
SECTION 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 CONCLUSIONS
A dispersion modeling analysis of vehicle emissions affecting the
special purpose monitor at 111 W. Douglas was conducted. The combination of
MOBILE-3 CO emission factors and the CALINE-3 Model provided a reasonable
modeling methodology. Considering the great variability in emissions, source
characteristics, and the influencing meteorological conditions, the model-
versus-rnonitor calibration was accurate taking into account the nature of the
8-hour concentrations.
Based on the representativeness and calibration of the 1983 and 1984
modeled concentrations at the SPM site, the SPM site will probably show
attainment by 1986 or 1987. The maximum 8-hour concentrations estimated for
1987 were for no I/M and no left-hand turn ban. Including the I/M program,
concentration estimates of the second-maximum CO value fell below the NAAQS.
The results of this modeling analysis should be included as part of the State
Implementation Plan for CO in Wichita in addition to the Transportation
Control Measures already presented.
6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
The dispersion modeling performed in the vicinity of the SPM site showed
attainment of the CO NAAQS by 1985 if the voluntary I/M program is main-
tained. With I/M, no additional transportation control measures are required;
i.e., the ban on left turns from Douglas to Main is not needed {although it
48
-------
provides about a 0.5-mg/m3 margin of safety). The recommendation here is to
continue the voluntary I/M program through 1986 and continue monitoring at
the SPM site until eight or more quarters are obtained with no exceedance of
the NAAQS. If the monitoring program progresses as it has in 1984 and thus
far in 1985, attainment should be assured.
49
-------
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. User's Guide to MOBILE-3 (Mobile
Source Emission Model). EPA-460/3-84-002. Ann Arbor, Michigan. June
1984.
2. Benson, P. E. CALINE-3 - A Versatile Dispersion Model for Predicting
Air Pollutant Levels Near Highways and Arterial Streets. Report No.
FHWA/CA/TL-79/23. California Department of Transportation. Sacramento
California. November 1979. *
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidelines for Air Quality Main-
tenance Planning and Analysis, Volume 10 (Revised): Procedures for
Evaluating Air Quality Impact of New Stationary Sources. EPA-450/4-
77-001. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. October 1977.
4. Kansas Department of Transportation. Wichita Carbon Monoxide Dispersion
Modeling Study. Topeka, Kansas. March 1980.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region I Mobile Source Modeling
Procedures. Boston, Massachusetts. No date.
6. PEI Associates, Inc. On-Site Observations. July 13-14, 1984. No
report.
50
-------
APPENDIX A
TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR MAIN
AND DOUGLAS STREETS
A-l
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
dfpartmf.nt op operatic:;: a\s it:,ky.cz
TRArriC E^GItTEEIviNa.
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
O
DON'T USE
~ I 9! Ol TRAN ~
12 l»w
START: HOUR -3,Orn DATE: YR lstEED MO 1^171 Dft|/ \3\
'•¦10 10-71 B-23
STOP: HOilt DATE: YR 1S»[Fptl MO I7H71 DAfTTZl
STREET OH.
(t P)
SIS420CO
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN Q P
H
VEHICLE Q V
COUNTER NUM3ER B
LOCATION lr^ \ n'lCviL
24 HOUR TOTAL FACTOrI I
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
DAY OF WEEK
SU!\
HON
TUE
WED
THU
FRI
SAT
FtAK HR
DATE
111*;
Tllf,
111;>
lh4
HOUR AW
It -1
W-ir
4K2-
1 -Z
4{,
.3-75
2-3
.V5"-/
/.?-
.S/.a
3-4
,9^.
'¦?
/P^
4-5
1 nn
I(?
ICjf
5-6
3/
3?)
6-7
'4!
CJI
7-8
4 k
^/Qf
iOh
8-9
35
A3l-
9-10
11/,
.0 PI
10-U
I5U
4fff
11-12
rn
PM
12-1
r^ll
4.5k
1-Z
i/W
2-3
JS'l'i
4-try
„37A
3-4
ijfc
4-5
^11
5-6
i.n
6-/
•3.as-
JXQI
rW
7-8
Mb
3\3
?k)&
B-9
£/
-7/.5S
I AVG WK DAY
SURFACE TVPE rb PA-LB-' CONDITION.
REMARKS
284-01-010
(Rev. 4/fil)
See Procedure SIS-15 <;Tr,nrn ((vJ'lj 1
A-2
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
TRAFFIC E'4Gl!:EE?ONi
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
~
DON'T USE
D I 9l ol TRAN ~
ti i>.ia Tr
START: HOUR
DATE: YR 19(£03 MO EEB DaHE
JO-ai 12-23
STOP: HOUR P.Arr, DATE: YR 19^0] MO \d\1\ DA[77^1
STREET ON ClN Ifjtr> sv We,.
SIS420C0
(CHECK, ONE)
PEDESTRIAN Q P
»«
VEHICLE
\%
COUNTER NUMBER
LOCATION |lVl ItsUI DUixIl Ifl.l
24 HOUR TOTAL I / I5J419 1^ FACTOrC
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC.
DAY OF WEEK
SUN
HON
TUE
WED
THU
FR!
SAT . PEAK HR
DATE
3115
Tllt>
1111
1114 1
HOUR ' AH
1M
4pf)
1-2
LIS Z
Wir
Yn
2-3
4*1
<4
Jibi
3-4
•}.7~
irn
4-5
p,(>
7JSL
(c>
5-6
ittn
J5
6-7
IICJ
lr*
7-8
lA
Am
III
8-9
F,(.n
9-10
HpQ
io-n
Wl
11-12
1
mi
PK
12-1 I
.'in
*411
1-2
<981
mi
2-3
a h
3-4
Q5Z
MM
4-5
Ifjlrf)
5-6
AUlr,
iM.q
6-7
AID
Mqp.
7-8
JIM
Jf.S-
8-9
JJ\^
3 a f*
ai#
9-10
io-n
r3j4
/tin | aw
11-12
LfP-
'jfW i
TOTAL
SU'11
KM
fmni \iiJu
X AVG WX DAY
'
SURFACE TYPE
REMARKS
JUUL«l£.
CONDITION.
2B-WU-CUO
(Rev. 4/61) See Procedure SIS-15
SIGNED,
Ostvfil.'iC fik /
A-3
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
~
DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING.
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
DON'T USE
~ I 9l ol tranD
12 13-14 15
SIS42OC0
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN Q p
16
VEHICLE [3~~"V
16
START: HOURlp^ DATE: YR 1S@P HO Hp DAggl
STOP: HOUR*! DATE: YR 19)MO 031 dAEDJ_L1
street on
LOCATION
COUNTER NUMBER
Vfl In If I N\|ftJfk,
24 HOUR TOTAL
FACTOR!
54-58
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
59-62
DAY OF WEEK
SUN
HON
TUE
WED
DATE
3-31
THU
1-12
11-12
TOTAL
% AVG UK DAY
SURFACE TYPE
c'5
CONDITION
REMARKS 'X^^V.C X rv .0 m,'> iJ-.i
284-01-010 '
(Riiv. 4/81) See Procedure SIS-15 A_4
SIGNED _
-------
TRAFFIC RECORD
DEPARTMENT OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING.
STREET INVENTORY SYSTEM
~
2-6
DON'T USE
] ~
12
gTol TRAN ~
13-14 15
START: HOUR t fim DATE: YR lfEEl WO lfH3l DaBM
1 18-19 20-21 22.23
STOP: HOUR 74™ DATE: YR 191 X16\ MO [fiffl DAfflf/l
STREET ON C) Q11 YC. fo.
LOCATION
SIS420C0
(CHECK ONE)
PEDESTRIAN ~ P
16
VEHICLE 0-^
COUNTER NUMBER
17
W1 lc~4VI ifVll nl 11 d~l
24-53
EHI
24 HOUR TOTAL
5»-58
factor! I j 1
Sfr-62
24 HOUR AVERAGE TRAFFIC
DAY OF WEEK
SUN
MON
\ TUE
WED
THU
FRI
SAT
PEAK HR
DATE
3-3!
4-1
L£>i
i
S1! 0
HOUR AM
12-1
W
n 'in
b3l)
1-2
Z03
n
Al/?l
2-3
an
ft*
74
3-4
si
'/n
-
4Q\
4-5
3a
5-6
M
6-7
dfS
,
(/S5
7-8
QU
.*/7
OA
8-9
W*
MQp
9-10
jmq.
31*4
1ST!
ciAQ
11-12
MO
SMI
12-1 3QD
5sa.\
i
10-n
TT-12
t6tal
% AVG WK DAY
SURFACE TYPE ^ JIO
CONDITION.
REMftRKS
284-01-010
CRcv. 4/81") Spp Procerfurp ^-5
CTPMCn
Os* rtiJi A
-------
CCMFNUnuS TPAFFIC CCIM STATICN - V\ F F K L Y 7F£FF[( SUGARY
KANSAS DEPARTVEM CF TP/SNSFCPT/'TICN
P LPEAL CP TP AN5Pf~0 T 5T I T N Pt ANN INT
STATICN M^EEP 5-63C-90CC-7C
..... \-ET- K 9 E GI . N M h G _KC* O Y _ J * N U ri"
29
" 24"
2 C
ThU
1-12
60
p?r
46
22""
22
240
P 4 3
587
794"
899
Tl-l'2~AM~rCB'0"
12- I PM 1273
" I" "2 p"v" " l i 94"
?- 3 PM 1035
" "4" " 'A 1214""
5 P M 1474
¦ " f> ~P"m 146 8 "
6- 7 PM 575
7-" 8 f>,5 ~"4'S2"
6- 9 PM 239
' PM 245"
10-II PM 191
"11- 3'?' °M t 50"
TOTAL 14572
43
224
£83"
961
•
824
-"1T2~fL
total
1329
wr
575
"3 25-
226
"264
1361
46 99"
5532
4789
5293
"6T10-
7247
" 6930
6612
7014
ft 121
8201
3738
3424-
2255
2 27T
2150
"2004"
91865
700.0
-------
•. • »
• < i <
i,
v r
<( " ^ ^ J ••* '
- ^ l
v T '! ¦* •"
3'-
•1 m A.-y
r ^ T >
- -j -r - r
T
;* a u $ F 'J
I: I-v
'Sc'^ f/J 01
f j • r
: " s W
•re ;
-
• ~ 'i ;
— 7"
- - v r
1 > ' , V » V
,
:> r-« r t
-
1 -"
. T
i. '.
T ;
/ — ¦ ¦
T '¦ J.
-- \
5' T,
CM'.
V *
T Li T A L
.,
ft
..
- •?
- •;
1 1 u
j " i
135 3
v- >
?
H
¦7 -
li 5
9 E
_ 7
A y
1
i.
"<7
'< t
t.
r. ¦'
»• ¦'
703
\ - 4
f, V
C
17
11
*>
7 T
1' i
—J_15 )
3?9
4 - r
*
t r
u
7 7
^ -»
i
b ».
A3
3r
222
i>1
4 ¦:
i r
*+ >
7 7
4 ,;•
AO
1
t ?¦ 2
1— 7
n ¦. •
T
^ ^ *"i
i '
j
¦?C7
1 r 3
5 7'
125 3
i— ?- ¦-
¦\i
° r i
- ^ '¦¦
^
-v •? -
~ >' J
'U1
21 i.
1 14
4^ ;
'
111,
' >• i<
1::"
¦*, ' /. •
r • -i
104 7
- 3 <.
1 15
56
'•-n
!
¦\ i-
" *¦> i
7 .••.
7
T T
"7 4
53 1
> 2 «
4.rV.
i 1 " ~ i i
£ v
t 7 '
^ 7
'+
1 "*01
61 "
-1 r 4
H3-;
r
A 1
1 1 7.
1 t. r. ;
1:3-
71 3
^ 7 4
6 5 7.7
i "1
0 V;
1 - ;"
1:<;¦'
1 ^
11-J
U17
7^3
c ;"i
7o 6 5
i -1 - ?
i
•T ^
1*
11"!
1 1 •: 1
1 - '!
117*
c - ~J
4 75
7071
! '* -« ""
I
r>\
¦i i 7
' I
¦»#»* —
J : t
; *>
11 i
'¦¦ 7 1
c ^
4 6*1
| L
7' *A
1 ^: "
1"•: ;
11:/
> 14
1 1 U :J
61 :•
4 •" 7
677 3
i
r a
1 -
1"¦
1 ?;'
1
rw
5 5 c
"',9'"
7 *P 5
! 7- - <:•
n *'
1 ••.. 1-
*
» ' *
1:. 1
1^7 6
s 7 ..
"*: 4
7 7 >'•
rw.»
¦ "x **
7 1.
- ' ^
1
:.c' 1
771
414-
-- ¦ " ;
¦? *
'» i •
" '
- ,1 •*;
r '
¦ * *
31 5
7 1 :"
3 2 •' 4
1 . ^ ¦;
-¦ ^
- -
:"c
/ '
. * *<•
! /' - ?¦ 7 "v
;¦ ".
"> 7 *5 *
1 -
r 4
"" -
' ^ •*•
14 0
1 4:
71 4.1
i r> 11
? V
I "
' *t T
595
5 > -
1 ".1
71 *•:
ii~i:
1 ;¦ '
•* »• v
i .
* ~ f
1 7 .;
6*1
: 1
1 -¦;
1-'?3
T "j T
A L
1 . s-
1 ¦' 7
i ^ 7
1 ¦: •• 1 ¦
1
' 0 ' 1
^ •
9 2071
^ v
/ r •
1r
* i:
i *
c •
1 ; i . t
• , • T - T' »
' '
1 ..
--1 v
1*.. 7>
v: i .
-7 r ~
4 7.
770. C
¦
A-7
-------
CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC COUNT STATION - WEEKLY T?AFCIC SUMMARY
KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
3UR=AU Gc TRANSPORTATION PLANNJ"^
STATION NUH3ER 5-630"9000-70
WfcEK . B. = G INN I.NG_M?NQ A Y JUL Y 2\r 1*3 L
DAY MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN
DATE 7-23 7~24 7-25 7-26 7-27 7-23 7-29
>•*» swo r/j ^
total
HOUR
l-'TJIR
1136
2
3- 9 AM
9-ITT AM
10-11 AN
^ T-1T"A Hi 0S5
12-1 PM 1103
P"R
4T63
h 385
1054
1097
1075
1053
6537
TlT3
11^1
PM 1220
1312
6 B1 5
TO 5
T795
12?5
7TB?-
9058
60 94
63284
ft- 7 PM 494
?-~£ PM 39 «T
S- 5 PM 322
9-TCF~P7l 29 y
10-11 PM 221
TJ-1 2~ PM—132
total 13150
1,C-7
* inoicates
SOB
537
545
3~5T "
5 sr
—4«2
306
361
34 5
3T3
" UtT
3U5
2 62
335
294
—20?
131 67
1 3473
13202 i 51 42
113.2 111.0 127.3 76.1
REVIS5D HOURLY VOLUME.
51 .2
700.0
A-8
-------
APPENDIX B
EXAMPLE CALCULATION OF IDLE AND
QUEUE EMISSION FACTORS
B-l
-------
Idle Emission Factors for CO - Example Calculations
1983: CO idle emissions =7.44 g/veh min = E
To convert to emissions per length per time per lane multiply idle emissions
by unit conversions and divide by average vehicle length:
E' (7.44 g/veh min) X pg) (55^) (77^) = 28505.7 pg/m sec lane
Total emissions (Q,) are obtained by multiplying by the number of lanes in
the queue and the aelay time percentage:
Qj = (28505.7 pg/m sec lane) (No. lanes) (percent red time)
Noting that this Q, is the same as the resulting total link emissions in
CALINE-3 and that the equation used in Caline-3 is:
Qx = (0.1726) (EF) (VPH)
where:
EF is the CO emission factor in g/mi
VPH is the number of vehicles per hour
Because Q, is calculated above for queue links but CALINE-3 requires EF and
VPH to be input, EF is arbitrarily specified at 100 g/mi and VPH is calcu-
lated:
Q1
VPH = (0.1726) (100 g/mi)
Specifying these EF and VPH as inputs to CALINE-3 results in the appropriate
emissions assigned to the queuing links.
Table B-l presents the CO idle emissions (E) and the idle emission rate per
second per lane (E1) for each year.
B-2
-------
TABLE B-l. IDLE CO EMISSION RATE
(by year)
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
CO idle emissions,3
g/veh per min
With I/M
7.44
6.10
5.30
4.73
4.25
Without I/M
10.12
9.37
8.69
8.08
7.56
CO emission rate,^
pg/m per s per lane
With I/M
28505.7
23371.6
20306.5
18122.6
16283.5
Without I/M
38773.9
35900.4
33295.0
30957.9
28965.5
aE = idle emissions.
^E' = idle emission rate.
B-3
-------
APPENDIX C
1-HOUR ESTIMATED CONCENTRATIONS
OF CO AT THE SPM SITE
C-l
-------
TABLE C-l. ESTIMATED 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF CO AT THE SPECIAL-PURPOSE MONITOR
FOR I/M AND LEFT TURNS FROM DOUGLAS
(ppm)
Ui nd
direction,
degrees
January
1983
July
1983
January
1984
July
1984
January
1985
July
1985
January
1986
July
1986
January
1987
July
1987
270
5.3
3.3
4.9
3.0
4.6
2.7
4.4
2.6
4.2
2.3
280
6.2
4.3
5.7
3.7
5.4
3.4
5.0
3.2
4.8
2.9
290
6.6
4.9
6.1
4.3
5.6
3.8
5.3
3.7
5.0
3.4
300
6.9
5.4
6.4
4.8
6.0
4.2
5.5
4.0
5.1
3.8
310
7.0
5.8
6.4
4.9
5.8
4.4
5.4
4.1
5.1
3.7
320
6.9
5.7
6.3
5.0
5.8
4.5
5.4
4.2
5.0
3.8
330
6.7
5.6
6.2
4.9
5.7
4.4
5.2
4.0
4.9
3.7
340
6.6
5.6
6.2
5.1
5.7
4.3
5.2
4.1
4.9
3.7
350
6.9
6.0
6.3
5.2
5.7
4.6
5.2
4.2
5.0
3.8
360
7.3
6.4
6.7
5.6
6.0
4.9
5.5
4.6
5.3
4.1
10
7.7
6.8
7.1
6.0
6.5
5.3
6.0
5.0
5.6
4.5
20
8.3
7.7
7.6
6.8
6.8
5.7
6.3
5.4
5.9
4.9
30
9.1
8.8
8.2
7.5
7.4
6.4
6.9
6.1
6.3
5.5
40
9.9
9.8
8.8
6.4
7.9
7.2
7.2
6.8
6.9
6.1
50
10.4
10.5
9.3
8.9
8.6
7.9
7.7
7.2
7.3
6.6
60
11.3.
11.2.
9.8.
9-4h
9.2
6.5.
8.5,
7.5.
7.8,
6.8.
70
11.7b
11.5b
io. r
9.6
9-2h
8.6
8.6
7.9
8.1
7.0
80
11.0
10.7
9.9
9.3
9.3
8.2
8.3
7.6
7.9
6.6
90
9.1
8.0
8.4
6.9
7.7
6.2
6.9
5.9
6.4
5.3
aCALINE-3 output.
^Maximum concentrations.
-------
TABLE C-2. LINK CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO ESTIMATES
FOR I/M AND LEFT TURNS
Source contribution of CO/1 ink (ppm) for I/M with left turns
Date
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
January 1983
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.7
0.0
July 1983
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.3
1.3
2.1
0.7
1.1
0.0
January 1984
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.7
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.0
July 1984
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.2
1.0
1.7
0.6
0.9
0.0
January 1985
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.8
0.0
July 1985
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.8
0.0
January 1986
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.9
0.3
0.5
0.0
July 1986
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.8
1.3
0.4
0.7
0.0
January 1987
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.8
0.3
0.4
0.0
July 1987
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.7
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.0
-------
TABLE C-3. ESTIMATED 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF CO AT THE SPECIAL-PURPOSE MONITOR FOR
NO I/H AND LEFT TURNS FROM DOUGLAS
(ppm)
Wind
direction,
degrees
January
1983
July
1983
January
1984
July
1984
January
1985
July
1985
January
1986
July
1986
January
1987
July
1987
270
5.6
3.6
5.4
3.3
5.1
3.2
4.8
3.0
4.7
2.8
280
6.8
4.8
6.5
4.5
6.0
4.3
5.8
4.0
5.5
3.7
290
7.4
5.9
7.0
5.5
6.6
5.1
6.2
4.9
6.0
4.5
300
7.7
6.5
7.3
6.2
7.0
5.7
6.6
5.3
6.2
4.9
310
7.8
7.1
7.6
6.4
7.0
6.1
6.7
5.6
6.3
5.3
320
7.9
7.0
7.5
6.5
7.1
6.0
6.5
5.7
6.3
5.4
330
7.6
6.9
7.3
6.4
6.9
5.9
6.4
5.7
6.1
5.2
340
7.8
6.9
7.4
6.4
6.9
6.0
6.4
5.6
6.1
5.3
350
8.1
7.3
7.7
6.9
7.2
6.3
6.6
6.0
6.3
5.6
360
8.5
R.l
8.1
7.3
7.6
6.8
7.0
6.5
6.7
6.0
10
9.0
8.7
8.5
8.1
8.0
7.3
7.4
7.0
7.2
6.5
20
9.7
9.8
9.3
9.0
8.7
8.3
8.2
7.9
7.7
7.4
30
10.9
11.0
10.3
10.2
9.6
9.5
9.0
9.1
8.5
8.5
40
11.8
12.4
11.2
11.4
10.5
10.8
9.9
10.1
9.3
9.4
50
12.7
13.3
11.9
12.5
11.2
11.4
10.4
10.7
9.9
10.1
60
13.5
]4.0b
12.5
13.2
11.9.
12-"h
11.0.
11.3.
10.6.
10.5.
70
14.0
14.5
13.2b
13.3b
12.5b
12.4b
11.Sb
11.7b
11. lb
11.Ob
80
13.5
13.5
12.5
12.5
11.7
11.6
11.1
11.1
10.5
10.1
90
10.5
10.0
10.0
9.3
9.3
8.7
8.8
8.1
8.4
7.5
aCALINE-3 output.
^Haximuiti concentrations.
-------
TABLE C-4. LINK CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO ESTIMATES
FOR NO I/M AND LEFT TURNS
Date
Source contribution of CO/1 ink (ppm) for no I/M with left turns
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
January 1983
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.2
1.2
2.0
0.7
1.0
0.0
July 1983
0.1
0.1
0.2
in
•
o
0.4
1.0
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.3
1.7
2.9
0.9
1.4
0.0
January 1984
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.2
1.1
1.0
0.6
0.9
0.0
July 1984
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.3
1.6
2.7
0.9
1.3
0.0
January 1985
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.2
1.0
1.7
0.6
0.9
0.0
July 1985
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.3
1.5
2.5
0.8
1.2
0.0
January 1986
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.0
1.6
0.5
0.8
0.0
July 1986
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.3
1.4
2.3
0.7
1.2
0.0
July 1986a
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.7
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
1.3
1.8
0.4
0.3
0.0
January 1987
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.8
0.0
July 1987
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.3
1.3
2.2
0.7
1.1
0.0
-------
TABLE C-5. ESTIMATED 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF CO FOR EACH YEAR AT THE SPECIAL-PURPOSE MONITOR
FOR I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS FROM DOUGLAS
(ppm)
Wind
direction,
degrees
January
1983
July
1983
January
1984
July
1984
January
1985
July
1985
January
1986
July
1986
January
1987
July
1987
270
5.3
3.3
5.0
3.0
4.7
2.8
4.4
2.6
4.2
2.3
280
6.2
4.3
5.7
3.8
5.5
3.4
5.0
3.2
4.8
3.0
290
6.6
5.0
6.2
4.3
5.6
3.9
5.3
3.7
5.1
3.4
300
6.9
5.5
6.4
4.8
6.0
4.3
5.6
4.0
5.2
3.8
310
7.1
5.8
6.4
5.0
5.9
4.4
5.4
4.1
5.1
3.8
320
6.9
5.8
6.4
5.0
5.8
4.5
5.4
4.3
5.1
3.8
330
6.8
5.7
6.2
4.9
5.7
4.5
5.3
4.0
5.0
3.7
340
6.7
5.7
6.2
5.1
5.7
4.4
5.3
4.1
4.9
3.7
350
7.1
6.0
6.3
5.2
5.7
4.7
5.3
4.2
5.0
3.8
360
7.4
6.4
6.7
5.6
6.2
5.0
5.6
4.6
5.3
4.1
10
7.8
6.9
7.1
6.0
6.6
5.4
6.1
5.0
5.7
4.5
20
8.4
7.7
7.6
6.8
7.0
5.9
6.4
5.4
5.9
4.9
30
9.2
8.9
8.2
7.5
7.5
6.6
7.0
6.1
6.3
5.5
40
20.0
9.8
8.8
8.5
8.0
7.3
7.3
6.8
6.9
6.2.
50
10.5.
10-3b
9.2
8.7.
8.5.
7.8.
7.7,
7.1.
7.3
6.6
60
10.8°
10.6b
9'4b
8.9
8.8
8.0
8.1
7.2
7-5k
6.4
70
10.8°
10.2
9.6
8.7
8.5
7.7
8.0
7.0
7,6
6.4
80
10.0
9.3
9.0
8.0
8.6
7.3
7.6
6.7
7.3
5.9
90
8.3
7.1
7.8
6.1
7.1
5.5
6.4
5.1
6.0
4.7
dCALINE-3 output.
^Maximum concentrations.
-------
TABLE C-6. LINK CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO ESTIMATES
FOR I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS
Date
Source contribution of CO/1 ink (ppm) for I/M with no
left turns
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
N
0
P
Q
R
January 1983
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.7
0.0
January 1983
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.2
1.0
0.3
0.7
0.3
0.3
1.2
1.7
0.4
0.3
0.0
July 1983
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.9
0.3
0.9
0.4
0.4
1.7
2.5
0.5
0.4
0.0
January 1984
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.7
1.2
0.4
0.6
0.0
July 1984
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.7
0.3
0.3
1.4
2.0
0.4
0.4
0.0
January 1985
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.9
0.3
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.9
1.2
0.3
0.2
0.0
July 1985
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.7
0.2
0.7
0.3
0.3
1.2
1.7
0.4
0.3
0.0
January 1986
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.9
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.8
1.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
July 1986
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.6
0.2
0.2
1.1
1.6
0.3
0.3
0.0
January 1987
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.8
0.3
0.4
0.0
July 1987
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.6
0.1
0.8
0.4
0.1
1.1
1.4
0.2
0.1
0.0
-------
TABLE C-7. ESTIMATED 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF CO FOR EACH YEAR AT THE SPECIAL-PURPOSE MONITOR
FOR NO I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS FROM DOUGLAS
(ppm)
Wind
direction,
January
July
January
July
January
July
January
July
January
July
degrees
1983
1983
1984
1984
1985
1985
1986
1986
1987
1987
270
5.7
3.7
5.4
3.3
5.1
3.2
4.8
3.0
4.7
2.8
280
6.8
4.9
6.5
4.5
6.1
4.3
5.9
4.1
5.5
3.7
290
7.4
6.0
7.1
5.5
6.7
5.2
6.2
4.9
6.0
4.5
300
7.8
6.5
7.4
6.2
7.0
5.8
6.6
5.3
6.3
5.0
310
7.8
7.1
7.6
6.5
7.1
6.1
6.8
5.7
6.3
5.4
320
8.0
7.0
7.6
6.5
7.1
6.1
6.5
5.7
6.4
5.4
330
7.7
6.9
7.3
6.4
6.9
6.0
6.5
5.7
6.2
5.2
340
7.8
6.9
7.4
6.5
6.9
6.0
6.5
5.6
6.2
5.3
350
8.1
7.3
7.7
7.0
7.3
6.3
6.8
6.0
6.4
5.6
360
8.5
8.1
8.1
7.5
7.7
6.8
7.1
6.5
6.7
6.0
10
9.0
8.7
8.6
8.2
8.2
7.4
7.5
7.0
7.2
6.5
20
9.8
9.8
9.4
9.2
8.8
8.3
8.3
7.9
7.7
7.4
30
11.0
11.1
10.4
10.3
9.6
9.6
9.1
9.1
8.6
8.5
40
11.8
12-3b
11.2
n.5.
10.6
10.8
10.0
10.0
9.4
9.5
50
12-5h
13.
11.8
12-2b
11.0
11.2
10'3h
10-5b
9.9
9.8b
60
12-8b
13.0b
11.9.
12.2b
11.4b
11.5b
10.6b
10.7b
10.1.
9.8
70
12.8b
12.9
12. lb
11.8
11.4b
10.9
10.6
10.5
10.2b
9.7
BO
12.1
11.6
11.3
10.8
10.4
9.9
9.9
9.5
9.5
8.7
90
9.6
8.6
9.1
8.0
8.4
7.5
7.9
7.0
7.6
6.6
aCALINE-3 output.
concentrations.
-------
TABLE C-8. LINK CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO ESTIMATES
FOR NO I/M AND NO LEFT TURNS
Source contribution of CO/link (ppm) - no I/M and no left turns
Date
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
N
0
P
Q
R
January 1983
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.2
1.2
0.4
0.9
0.4
0.3
1.6
2.3
0.5
0.4
0.0
July 1983
0.3
0.0
0.4
0.3
o
•
o
0.9
0.1
1.8
0.9
0.3
2.7
3.4
0.4
0.1
0.0
January 1984
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.4
1.1
1.9
0.6
0.1
0.2
July 1984
0.3
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.9
0.1
1.7
o
CO
0.3
2.5
3.2
0.3
0.1
0.0
January 1985
0.2
0.2
CvJ
«
o
0.5
0.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.3
1.0
1.7
0.6
0.9
0.0
January 1985
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.2
1.1
0.3
0.8
0.3
0.3
1.4
2.0
0.4
0.4
0.0
July 1985
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.9
0.3
1.1
0.5
0.4
2.0
2.9
0.6
0.5
0.0
January 1986
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.3
0.1
0.3
1.0
1.6
0.5
0.8
0.0
July 1986
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.2
1.0
0.4
0.4
1.9
2.7
0.5
0.5
0.0
January 1987
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.4
1.0
0.6
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.8
0.0
July 1987
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.7
0.1
1.3
0.6
0.2
2.0
2.6
0.3
0.1
0.0
-------
APPENDIX D
MOBILE-3 CALCULATIONS
MAIN AND DOUGLAS STREETS
D-l
-------
o
ro
HYOT HflBI! C] .
MAPNINt*; oo; Mr).: SUH (JHi = 1, (WILL NORMALIZE)
WARNING: 1.00 myp sum not = 1. (MILL NORMALIZE^
MARKING: .995 MYR SUM NOT = 1. (DILI NORMALIZE)
WARM TNG; .999 hyp SUM NOT = 1. ('JILL NORMAL IZE ^
-*** MAIN AMD P9U61AS THR1J 15,20 MRH -'AMltART - JULY +I/H
},'M PROGRAM SELECTED:
START YEAR < JANUARY 1 i ; l?gi
PRE-1901 HYP STRINGENCY RATF; 107,
MECHANIC TRAINING PROGRAM? ; Nfl
FIRST MODEL YEAR COHERE?: 1949
LAST NOBEL yfaR COVERED; 2020
VEHICLE TYPES CO'-'tRETi; LDGV
tPfft i LATER MYR TEST TYPE; IDLE
1V81 S LATER MYR TEST OUTPOINTS: 3,OX ICQ / 300 PPM IHC
!QTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCL'JDK EMAP0RAT JME HC EMISSION FACTORS:
USES' SUPPLIED 'JFH REGISTRATION D T STRIBIJT IONS,
i.'AL. YEAR* 99 3 J/M program; YES AHBTEHT TEMP; 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20,6 / 27.3 •' 20.6 ALTITUDE; 500, FT.
VEH, TYPE: LDGU L5GTt LUST 2 LDGT HDGM L.PS>\> LDBT HDItU Mr. ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 15,0 15.0 15,0 15.0 15,0 15.0 15=0 15.0
I'MT MIX: .797 .094 , 094 .000 ,010 ,000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
EXHAUST CO: 49,98 121.19 132.90 127.04 .00 1.49 .00 =00 47.9=; 79.92
HOT STABI!IZEP IDLE EMISSION FACTORS 1GM/MIN >
IDLE CO; 4.84 10.21 10.41 10,41 .00 . 18 .00 ,00 -2.79 7.4 A
USFP SUPPLIED UEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1954 I 'M PROGRAM; YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (f j REGION; LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 ¦' 27,3 f 20.4 ALTITUDE: 50'!. FT,,
UFH, TYRE: LD6» LDht 1 !.pr>T2 Lt'RT HDGU LDD'J LDPT NHpu «r ALL UFH
•JFH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15,« 15,0 15.0 15.0 15,0 15,0 15.
VMT MIX; ,.7Q7 ,094 .094 ,000 ,010 .000 .000 .005
rOMPflSITf EMISSION FACTORS 'GN/NILE)
rXHAUST CO: 6U6? 119.0? 124.40 122,75 . 0^ 1,70 .00 . 00 46.#4 '. 4 .•
'-IflT SIAftl' IJF p I TILE EMISSMIIX ifiil'WS . tl M M r! 1
iri'.i r
-------
itsrp SUPPLIED ueh S'F'if^TpfirrnN nTSTffJpi.ri 10^3.
('61. , YEAR' 19S5 I/H PRnfiKAfl; t F s AKfiXFflT TFMP; 74 0 iri RFRinW; I nu
AHTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING NODE: 20.6 / 2?.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT,
UFH. TYPEs LUGO LDfiTI t D0T2 1. DOT HnS3V LPD'* LDD1 HDD'1 hC ALL VEH
UEH, SPEEDS; 15,0 15,0 15,0 '5.0 15,0 15,0 15.0 15,0
VMI H1X.: .797 ,(>04 ,0?4 =000 ,01^ .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EHISSI OH FACTORS f 8H/MILE >
FXHAUST CO: 56.15 115.30 11R. 73 117,01 .00 1.71 .00 .00 46. n* 6 > - 00
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS REGION; LOU
ANTI-TAN, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 AL11 RIDE: 500. FT.
'JEM.- TYPE: LDG'J LPGT1 LBGT2 LDGT HDG'J LDf" LDDT HDPM MC ALL UEH
MEM. SPEE5S: 15.0 15,0 15,0 15.0 15,0 15.0 15,0 15.0
MNT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 ,010 .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 51.9? 111,03 111.15 111,09 .00 1.71 .00 .00 45.6? 62,57
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 4,14 7,5.3 7.52 7.53 .00 . 19 .00 .00 2.54 4.71
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAl. YEAR: 198? I/H PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MOPE: 20,6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LD0T1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDI'V LOOT HDHV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15,0 15.0
VMT MI*: .7?7 .094 .094 .000 .01 0 .000 .000 „005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
FXHAUST CO: 48.50 106,55 103,89 10*.22 -00 1.72 =00 .00 45,51 58.68
HOT STABILIZE!' IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
-------
ii'JLP SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION nISTti kht ton.
I 41 t Vt^R; 1 Oft 3 I/f* M" 6 !*, ; U «! A r H T PHI !<•*!>» no . 1 (F i
flNTI-TAM, PROGRAM: MM 0PEP6rIwft ftsifiEs 20.i / 2?,3 / 20.
VEH. TVPE:
LI' G "
1 5.0
L I|!; T 1
i nm?
UFH, SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 1^,0
VMT NIX: «??? .0^4 .0**
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS '(?M/MILE>
! * Hail ST CO: 39.27 71 .02 94.55
t_ riRT
23
MO1 STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS < G* >!«'
IDLE CO: A,86 10.21 10.61 10=41
H p G V
15.0
,000
,00
,00
Lnri!)
15.0
o i o
PER I ON: LOU
6 A L T I T! I p E r -1,
I riTiT HLI III1
1j . 0 15,0
.000 .000
. 0 0
,00
.00
,00
F f -
hi:
1 5, o
, 0 01
2 9, H 6
9 7 Q
ALL 'JIM
4A „ 1 g
7.4 4
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION B!STRIBUT10NS,
CAL. YEAR: 1984 J/H PROGRAM; YES AMBIENT TEMP; 80.0
ANTI-TftM. PROGRAM: MO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20,
UFH , TYPE; I fin'J L D G11 LPGT2 LPGT HPG1-1 L n D
REGION: LOU
6 ALTHuriE: 500.
LB [iT HPI'V
o VEH. SF'EESS; 15.0 15,0 15.0
¦k. ydT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GH./MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 32.90 6?,53 79.63 74.58
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS 'GH/M TN)
T ft!. E CO; 5.41 9.30 9.52 9,41
T5.0
.000
.00
.00
15.ft
,010
1 .70
.10
15.0
.000
.00
.10
15.0
.ooo
.00
.00
FT.
fIC
15.0
,00'
79.69
2, . A4
ALL '--TH
40. 41
6.10
USFR SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1"85 I/Ji PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F)
AWTI — 1 AM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MOPE: 20.6 ! 27.3 / 20,
'.'EH. TYPE: LDGV LPGT 1 LDGl 2 LDGT HPGV LBDV
REGION: LOU
6 ALTITUDE: 500.
LPPT H.DDU
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 is.o 15,0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 ,(>?a , aoo
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (G^/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 28.52 66.0* 74.03 70.05 .00
wrtT STABILIZE" ipi.E Emission factors
'RLE CO: 4.64 g,40 gr44 ,00
1 5 ,0
.01 0
15.0 15.0
.000 .000
FT .
Mr:
15.0
.0 05
,00
.00
.00
.00
A! I UFH
36,0/;
S 30
-------
liSEP S»J*Rl FED REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTION';.
¦ £i Yrac; I'M prorpam: Yr9 AMBIENT TEMP: f?o.O REGION; LOU
ANTI-TAh, PROGRAM: NO OPERA JIN6 MODE: 20,6 t 2 7,3 •' 20,6 ALTITUDE: 500.
f T
t'F.H, TYPE: LDGU LDGT1 l.nfiT? l_DGT HDG1-1 I.DDV LDDT Hnpu Mi.1 ALL ME4
'¦•EH. SPEEDS? ?5,0 15,0 15,0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15,0 15.0
VHT fi IX - ,797 .094 .094 .000 .010 ,000 .000 ,O0j
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS 'G«/"1LE)
EXHAUST CO ¦ 25.13 62,54 68.71 65.62 .00 t. •! ,oo , 00 11 32.5?
HOT STABILIZED ID'E EMISSION FACTORS (GM-'MIN?
IDLE CO: 4.14 7,53 7.52 7.-53 ,00 .1? .00 .00 2,4 4.73
USE* SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL, YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP; 80.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 27.3 / 20.6 ALT 1 TMTif ; 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV I.DI1U LDDT HDD'J Hi" ALL MEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 ,0!0 .000 .000 ."05
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS . tfi .00 .00 -'.7'-' 7.44
-------
It SIR SUf'Pt. T.ril VtH RFGT^TRA r I ON riT^TRlfclU TONS,
i a; , YFAff; i q»4 t / ^ program* vr <; A fi R' c »J r TfMf- 74 o > (,^Rinn; LOU
AMI J.-TA*. PROGRAM: Nil OPERA!1 «.G MOPE; 20.6 / 2-' 5 / 20.6 ALU TUflh: 500. I i.
UEH. TYPE: L T« R LI'GT1 l_ no F 2 LDGT HPGV LTinu LDDT Hjip'j «r A!! »>£••
VLH. SPEEDS; 20.0 20.0 20.0 20 0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
UWT MIX; .797 ,094 .0?4 ,000 ,010 .000 .000 .(W>
''OPPOSITE EMISSION FACTOR? <8H/!1ILE)
F. V HA«^T CO: 48.42 92,72 95.32 94.02 -00 1.2? .00 .00 35.22 56„45
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
IDLE CO: 5.41 ' ,0'0 . 000 ,000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (6M/MJLE)
EXHAUST CO: 41 .05 86.4® 84.02 -95. , 00 4 .2° . oo .00 34.36 4? ,93
MAT STABILIZED fDLE EMISSION FACTORS 'GK
rpif cp: 4,14 ?.5*» oo i Q ,oo ,oo -•„r, n a. y.
-------
USER SUPPLIED 'JEM REGISTPATI CM DISTRIBUTION*.
f'H. YEAR: i ? P. 7 I./fi PROGRAM: YES AfiB 117 NT TEMP: 24.0 «f • GION; LOU
AMTI-fAM. PROGRAM: Nf rtt'fC:AINS MO'if: 20.6 / ??.-3 / 20.4 ALTITljlifs 50C. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LI'6T2 LPGT HP8M l.riFiu LI>PT Hnfi'-f mc ALL vEH
5 P t E D S j 20, Q 7^.0 2^,0 "'0.0 ?0 .0 20.0 20, 0 20.0
UHT MI*: .79? ,n?4 -094 .000 .01 0 .000 ,0r;0 .rift*.
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS OlM/fllLE)
F.X HAL'S T CO: 39.37 83.04 73.67 SO. "6 .00 1 .30 .00 .00 34.2"? *5.07
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN*
'IMF CO- 3.74 A.75 6,65 6,7" 00 .i
IDLE CO: 6.86 10.21 10.61 10.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.7? 7.44
USER SULLIED VEH REGISTRATION PISTRIBUTIOWS-
f;AI, YEAR: 1984 I'M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80,0 REGION: LOU
ANT I-I Ah. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 AL TI TL'DE: 500,, FT,
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LPGM LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 20.0 20.0 20.0 20=0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 =000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MH.E?
FXHAUST CO: 25.72 54.11 60.18 57,14 .00 '.28 .00 ,.00 21,58 31 .34
HOT STABILIZE" ID'.E FMI9ST0N FACTORS ' G M / to T N >
ttiLE rnj 5.41 O.30 ',5? 9. it ,00 -1R .00 .00 2 = 46 . 10
-------
, • tj. ¦•rn f' r r, T c. 1 P 4 T 1 0 W Tl T T P I f: 11T JO H .
! . y f a(f; 1 Qfes T - m pBQ&PAft; Y fc ^ A f* U J t_ W r 'EM*'! SQ.ft ptfiiOKI. >_ _,u
ANTI-TA*. PROGRAM; NO 0 !-¦ l fr A TIM G «0Dl; 20,6 .* 7 '. i ! 20,6 AL' T r Ll'1L " H
'.'ph = TYPE; !.DGU ; rigTi LnGt? lurt mtiqu iripu t nriT Hpp'J Mr all vjeh
t,0 20.0 20.0 20 „o
\?MT Mi a ; ,797 ,(I?1 , $¦-}& ro/}f) ,010 ,000 ,000 .005
('OPPOSITE EMISSION FAC1OPS (SM/MILE?
EXHAUST CO: 22.3=1 .40 55.96 53.68 .00 1.29 .00 .00 21 ,00 l-'H.o;
HOT ?IARH. I ZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS <6H/i1lN'
II"i £ en; 4.64 0,40 3.48 8 = 44 ,00 =13 .00 .00 2.5" 5,o!
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTPIpUT10N3,
CAL. YEAR; 1986 I/H PROGRAM; YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0
-------
(U1U
(WILL
(DILL
(WILL
PXBT N0B1LE3.
"ARMING: .995 MYR SUM NOT - 1.
WARNING: 1.00 MYR SUM NOT = 1.
WARNING: .995 MYR SUM NOT = 1.
WARNING." .99? #1YR SUM HOT = 1.
-*** MAIN AND DOUGLAS THRU 10,25 MF'H
I/M PROGRAM SELECTED:
START YEAR (JANUARY 1);
PRE-1981 MYR STRINGENCY RATE:
MECHANIC TRAINING PROGRAM?:
FIRST MODEL YEAR COVERED:
LAST MODEL YEAR COVERED:
VEHICLE TYPES COVERED:
1981 8 LATER MYR TEST TYPE:
1931 * LATER MYR TEST OUTPOINTS:
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATI'-
NQRHALl'ZE)
NORMALIZE!
NORMALIZE)
NORMALIZE)
JANUARY-JULY +I/M
1?81
102
NO
1968
2020
LDGV
IDLE
3.OX ICO
/ 300 PPM IHC
HC EMISSION FACTORS,
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
(AL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F> REGION: LOU
ANT I-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
9 •=.
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 97.67 169.91 197.21 183.56 .00 2.34 .00 .00 74.07 1
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 6.86 10.21 10.61 10.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.7? 7.44
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F> REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDG12 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV HC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
I XHAUST CO: 84.78 165.89 186.08 '75."?? .00 2.36 .00 .00 72.33 101.04
MOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 5.41 g.?0 9.52 9.*1 .00 ,tg .00 .00 2.66 6.10
-------
USES' SUPPL IEf| VF H REGISTRATION D JSTRI RiJT t nwq ,
C4L, VTAR; 10P.C. I/* PROGF'AH; YEc. AMBIENT TF.NP: 24.0 >'*".• REGION: LOW
AMTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MOPEs 20.6 , 2?.3 / 20,6 ALT ITUI'E: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDOT1 LPGT? LP Hi HDGV LDBV LDDT HPDV MC ALL " E H
'¦'EH. SPEEDS: ' j, 0 K'.O 10.0 10,0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VHT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 ,000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS < GH/Mti_E )
EXHAUST CO: 76.16 159.31 1 73.25 1 66.29 .00 2.37 .00 .00 ;?0.v4 92.34
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GH/MIN)
IDLE CO: 4.64 8.40 8.48 8.44 .00 .18 .00 ,00 2.57 5,30
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1986 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
MEM. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
V'MT MIX; . 797 .094 .094 .000 .01 0 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
I: XHAUST CO: 69.60 152. 23 1 60.76 156.49 .00 2.38 .00 .00 70.35 85,2?
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GH/MIN)
IDLE CO: 4.14 7.53 7.52 7,53 .00 .1? .00 .00 2.54 4.73
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM ? NO OPERATING MODE: 20,6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH, TYPE: LDGV LPGT1 LUGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VHT MIX: .797 .094 ,094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE?
EXHAUST CO: 64.15 145.03 148,85 146.94 .00 2.38 .00 .00 70.03 79.13
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION ^ACTORS '
IDLE CO: 3.74 6.75 6.65 6.70 .00 .19 .00 .00 2.5? 4.25
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL, YLAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAN. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LD6T2 LDGT HDGV LDPV LDDT HDPV «C ALL '-'EH
VEH, SPEEDS: 10.0 '0.0 10.0 10.0 '0.0 10,0 10.0 10.0
VftT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 =005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS Gfl/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 55.76 101.57 125.48 113.52 ,00 2.34 .00 .00 46.04 66.07
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GK'MIN)
IDLE CO: 6.86 10.21 10.61 10.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2,7? 7.44
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LD6V Lt'GTI LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LI'DV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
F XHAUST CO: 46. 15 97.55 1 17.35 107.45 .00 2.36 .00 .00 44.24 57.23
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 5.41 9.30 9.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.66 6.10
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1985 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OFERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HBDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 39.53 92.01 108.26 100.14 .00 2.3? .00 .00 43.00 50.57
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
-------
il?£ (.• '".HF'Pl Iff! "EH PEG I ST RAT I ON PIS T S' I E> U T10 " S .
1 AL. YE-R: 1-?6 I/M PROGRAM: YES ANBIET TEW: 80,0 • F > fr E GIQ N: LOU
flUII-lflfi, PROGRAM: NO OPERA! 1NG MODE: 20.6 2-V3 / .'0.6 ALTITIJl'E; 500 , FT.
VLH, 1 *pE; LDG" IDOU LDGT2 LDGT HDGV Lt'TiV LDPT HDDV Hf A|j_ VE^
''EH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10,0 10.1 10,0 ift.9 10.0 10.0 10.0
y*T NIX; .79? .o°4 .0OJ .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
i. ONPOSHE EMISSION FAC tors < GM/MIL E)
l VHAU5T CO: 34.40 86.4"' 99.66 93.0? =00 2.38 .00 .00 42.4? 45.15
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GH/MI*-'>
I f! L E CO: 4.14 7.53 7.52 7.53 .00 .19 . 00 .00 2.54 4.73
USER SUPPLIED UEH REGISTRATION DISTRIPUlIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1 987 I/(I PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F) REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 ! 2?.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LUGV LDGT1 LPGT2 LDGT HPGV LDDV L DDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VNT NIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
CQWOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE!
EXHAUST CO: 30.08 80.79 91.50 86.14 ,00 2.38 .00 .00 42.26 40.40
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO; 3,74 6.75 6.65 6.?0 .00 .19 .00 .00 2.52 4.2'
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRICTIO«S,
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/tt PRQfiftAn: YES AMBIENT 1EW: 24.0 (F ) REGION: LOU
AMTI-TAN. PROGRAM r NO OPERATING MODE: 20.4 / 27.3 / 20,6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LPDT HDDV HC ALL VEH
UEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
UMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 = f>00 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (CM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 43.88 75.57 79.23 77.43 .00 1.01 .00 ' ,00 28.91 49.68
WOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 6.86 10.21 10,61 10.41 .00 ,18 .00 ,P<) 2,7* 7.44
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH RE6I5TPATT0N DISTRIBUTIONS.
REGION: LOU
ANn-TAfi. PROGRAM: HQ OPERA!ING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LPGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HPGV LBDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
FXHAUST CO: 38.74 73.60 74.88 74.24 .00 1.02 .00 .00 23.16 44.9
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 5.41 9.30 9.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.66 6.1
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1985 I/H PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 ./ 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS fGM/MILE)
FXHftlJST CO: 35.34 71 .09 70.23 70. A6 .00 1.02 .00 .00 27.64 41.Ai
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTOR 'GM./M!N>
TDLF. TO: 4.64 8.^^ P.48 8.4* .00 . 1 fi .00 .00 2 .5' 5.3'
-------
USER SUPPLIED UPH REGISTRATION riT<5TRipi.ir;n«S.
f:Al . Yf6S-; 1986 t/m PROGRAM: YES AMRlf.NT TEMP: 2«.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING KOBE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LOOT HDGU LDBV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
UEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (KM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 24.58 44.96 50.77 47.87 .00 1.01 .00 .00 18.07 28.69
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 6.86 10.21 10.61 10.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.7? 7.4'
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1984 I/H PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP; 80.0 (F) REGION; LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20,6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 5Q0, FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT H.DGV LDBV LDDT HDM tfC ft|j_ ufh
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 .0'4 .094 .000 =010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
-------
o
¦
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
CAt. YE Aft j !VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 ,094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM.'MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 1 7.87 40.7"? 43.97 42.39 .00 1 .02 .00 .00 16.78 22.31
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
IDLE CO: 4.A4 8.40 8.48 8.44 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.57 5.30
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
'JAt. YEAR: 1.996 l/H PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LBGV LBGT1 LDGT2 LBGT HB6M LBBV LDDT HBDV MC ALL VF.N
VEH. SPEEDS: 23.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .797 ,094 .094 ,000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (6M/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 15.76 38.52 40.72 39.62 .00 1.02 .00 .00 16.58 20.10
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN >
IDLE CQ: 4.14 7.53 7.52 7.53 .00 .1? .00 .00 2.54 4.73
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 19P7 I/M PROGRAM: YES AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 2?.3 ! 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDOT 1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LBBV LBBT HBBV HC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25,0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMf MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MRE)
EXHAUST CO: 13.96 36.15 37.67 36.91 .00 1.03 .00 .00 16,50 18.16
HOT STABILIZED Il'LE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 3.74 6.75 6,65 6.70 .00 .19 .00 .00 '2.c>2 4.'15
IJBRKPT PRINT*
I 11 f 1253
0: >
-------
pxqt rfORUE?.
UAPWTNR? ,99?; HYP SUM NOT - 1, < u 11_ L NHPHAL I 2E >
WARNING; 1.00 AYR SUN N0T = 1. (MILL NORMALISE)
WARNING: .??5 NYR SUM NOT = 1. (UILL NORMALIZE)
UARNING: »VfR SUN MO1 = 1, '.'JUL NORMAL12E1
¦it* ft6lN AND DOUGLAS THRU 15,20 MPH JANUARY-JULY NO I/M
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATIVE HC EMISSION FACTORS.
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGIS I PAT ION DISTRIB!JTIGNS
PAL. YEAR: 1933 I/M PROGRAM
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM
NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
NO OPERATING MQT'E: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.A ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
VEH, TYPE; |_DGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LI'GT HBGV LDDV IDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
'¦JEN. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15,0 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .0^4 .000 .010 .000 .000 .oos
COMPOSITE EM.ISSIQH f ACT MS <
-------
USE" SUPPLIED '.'EM REGISfPAUON BISTRTRLfJONS.
r-6! . VFAP; iocs i/« PROGRAM: NO AflBtENT T F M P; 2-1.0
-------
USES'' SUF'F'LU P Vf'l REGISTRATION DISTf IBUT70«S,
Cfti, YEnf.': to?'. i /f p6*; Nn A»»Ricfn hhp- ?<> ,n
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61 10,41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.7? 10.12
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR; 1984 I/rt PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT,
"EH. TYPE: LUGO LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LPDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. S?€EBS: 15.0 15,<> 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .7?7 .094 .0?4 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/HILE)
EXHAUST CO: 42.92 69.53 79.63 74.58 .00 1.70 .00 .00 28.6? 48.3?
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/M IN)
IDLE CO; 9.51 9.30 9.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.66 9,37
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
(AL, YEAR: 1985 I/fl PROGRAM; NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F? REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500,, FT.
VEH, TYPE: LB6V l.liRTI LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15.0 15,0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .01 0 .000 .000 ,<>05i
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS ^M.'MILE1
EXHAUST CO: 38.36 66.06 74.03 70.05 .00 i .71 .00 ,0« 27.v44.30
I'fU STABILIZED I PLE EMISSION VAC tops 'fin/mm
T n l F CO: 8.8" $.*¦'> ?.4-? :-:.u .00 .18 .00 . 00 2.5? M.6g
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
( $l, t-FAp; 19?6 I/» PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP; 80.0 REGION: LOU
MTI-TAH. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20,6 / 2'. 3 / 20,6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT >
UEH. TYPE: LBGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LPGT HDGV L DnV L0[iI HDI'V HC ALL 'JEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 15.0 15,0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 '5,0
V(4T MIX: ,797 ,9
EXHAUST CO; 35.30 62.54 68.71 65.62 .00 1.71 .00 .00 27.41 40.62
MOJ STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (Gfi/HTN)
IDLE CO: 8.35 7.53 7.52 7.53 .00 .1? .00 .00 >,54 8„OB
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL, YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TFftf: 80.0 REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 ! 27.3 ! 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LPGT2 LOOT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDD'J MC AIL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 20.0 20.0 20.0 20,0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 65.53 94.64 100.38 97.51 .00 1.28 .00 .00 36.06 70.76
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM'MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10,61 10.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2. -,0 1 n. 1 ?
-------
USER SUPPLIt" ''EH FLGIS1 RftT 1 PISTPIBl_iT T HNS r
CAL. TLA*: ,": '1 I/ft PROGRAH: NO AHBILHr TEMP: 24.0 - ) REGIO"; LOU
ANTI-TA«, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LBGV LL1 bT1 LDGT2 LDG\ HDHV Lri0u LDDT Hlinu MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS; 20.0 20,0 20,0 20.0 2^.0 20=0 20.0 20.0
VMT MIX: .797 ,094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS
IDLE CO: 9.51 9.30 V.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.66 9.37
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1985 I/M PROGRAM: MO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F> REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
MEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LUDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 20.0 20.0 20,0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
VMT MIX: .797 .0?4 ,o?4 ,000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 58.19 09.78 89.63 89.70 .00 1.29 .00 .00 34.61 63„43
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
IDLE CO; 8.89 8,40 8.48 8.44 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.57 8.69
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1986 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMF: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 f 2?.3 ! 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
MEM. TYPE: LPGV LDGT 1 LDG 12 LDGT HDGV LBDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL H
VEH. SPEEDS: 20.0 20,0 20.0 20,0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20,0
VMT MIX: .797 ,094 .094 .000 .010 ,000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (CM/MILE*
EXHAUST CO: 55.20 86.49 84,02 85.25 .00 '.29 .00 .00 34..36 60.21
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION PACTORS (OM/«IN>
IDLE CO: 8.35 7.53 -',52 7.53 ,00 ,1? .00 ,00 J. 54 S.08
-------
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
Ijfil, year? 1?fl? I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAN. PR0GR4M: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE? 50<\ FT
VEH, TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV M
VEH. SPEEDS; 20.0 20,0 20.0
V«1 MIX: .??? .0*4 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST COS 52.64 83.04 78.67 80.86
enT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS <6H/HIN>
IDLE CO: 7.8" 6.75 6.65 6,^0
20,0
.000
.00
,00
20.0
.010
1 .30
,19
20.0
.000
20.0
.000
.00
no
.00
.00
?0
34
ALL yEH
o
005
57„34
IISEP SUPPLIED '-'EH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL YEAR: i
ANT I-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6
REGION: LOU
ALTITUDE: 500,
VEH. TYPE:
LDGV
LDGTJ
ldgt:
LP6T
VEH. SPEEDS: 20.0 20.0 20.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 36.98 56.13 64.03 60.08
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61 10.41
HDGV
20.0
.00 0
.00
.00
LDDV
20.0
. 0 f 0
! .28
.18
LDDT
20.0
.000
.00
.00
HDHV
20.0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
MC
20.0
.005
22.50
2.7?
ALL VEH
40.39
10.12
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0
-------
J'SEP SUPPLIED VEH REGl^AT ? OW D IS TP I Bin TONS.
PAL. YEAR: 19B5 I/M PROGRAM: HO Aftp. 1 EHT TEMP: 80.0 «F) REGION: '.riu
ANTI-TAM, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 27.3 ' 20.6 A! T ITtJDE: 500: FT.
VEH. TYPE: t DGV LDGT1 I DGT2 LDGT HDGV LDI'V LBUT HDDV MC ALL t'FN
vEH. SPEEDS; 20,0 20.0 20.0 20,0 20.0 20.0 ?o.0 20.0
VHT MIX; ,797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS < 6M/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 30.37 51.40 55.?6 53.68 .00 1.2? .00 .00 21.00 34.41
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/HIN)
IDLE CO; 8.89 8.40 8.48 8.44 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.5? 8.6?
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAE. YEAR: 19R6 I/H PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAH. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE; 20.6 / 27.3 / 20,A ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE; LUGV LPGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HD6V LDDV LDIU HDDV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 20,0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.Q
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 ,000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
fXHAUST CO: 27.65 4 ft.6 6 51.97 50.31 .00 1.29 .00 .00 20.77 31.6!
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.35 7,53 7.52 7,53 .00 .1? .00 .00 2.54 8.08
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80,0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 590. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LOOM LDGT2 LDGT H n fi V LDDV LDDT HDDV MC ALL VEH
-EH. SPEEDS: 20=0 20.0 20.0 2^.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20,0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 ,010 ,000 ,000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE'
EXHAUST CO: 25.25 45.7? 48. 18 46,?ft .00 1 .30 .00 .00 20-67 29,07
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/«I«)
IDLE CO: 7,89 6.75 6.65 6.70 .00 .19 .00 .00 2.'':>? \54
-------
ra*Q T "PBILK3.
UARIJ'Nfi; ,9?5
WARNING: 1.00
'MINING; ,995
WARNING; .990
*** HA IN AND DOUGLAS
HYf
MY'R
M YF
MYR
SUM NOT = 1.
SUM WD J - 1.
SUM MOT = 1.
SUM NOT = 1 .
THRU 10,25 HPH
(U]LL NORMALIZE)
(UILL NORMALIZE)
(UTi_L NORMALIZE)
(UILL NORMALIZE)
JANUARY-JULY NO l/M
TOTAL HC EMISSION FACTORS INCLUDE EVAPORATIVE HC EMISSION FACTORS,
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
CAL. YEAR: 1983 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24,0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANT I-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MOPE: 20,6 / 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500= FT.
VEH, TYPE: LDOV LI'GTI LD6T2 LPGT HDG'J IDI'V LDDT HL'I'V iiC
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10,0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 ,094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 117.46 169.91 197.21 183.56
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 10.23 10.21 10.61 10.41
10,0
,000
,00
,00
10.0
,010
2.34
.19
10.0
,000
10,0
.000
.00
.00
.00
.00
1 0.0
.00 5
74.07
ALL VEH
128,52
10,1 2
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 ! 27.3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HPGV LDDV LDDT HDDV HC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 io,g 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 ,094 .000 .010 ,000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 108.90 165.89 186.08 175.93 ,00 2.36 .00 .00 72.33 120.26
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN>
IDLE CO: 9.51 9.30 9.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 7.hb 9.37
-------
USER SUPPLIED t'FM REGISTRATION rtTIftiJT 10^5 ,
(A!.. -fPAP: ' °85 I/« PPORPttM: NO AMBIENT TF«P; 24.0
I'XH6'.'ST CO; 101 .24 15?. 31 173.25 166.28
Mm STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.8.40 8,48 g.44
10.0
, ooo
.00
.00
Liiriu
10.0
.010
?.37
.18
PEG I ON:
?0„ A fll_ ! ! T !JT|F - v;{
LDDT M !!!!'•
10.0
. 000
.00
.00
10.0
.000
, 00
.00
F: T „
fir
10.0
. 005
70.94
all urn
112,32
R.A9
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGIS!RATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. if EAR: 1986 I/ft PROGRAM; NO AMBIENT TEMP; 24.0 REGION; LOU
AHTI-TAH. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 i 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500,
VEH. TYPE;
LDGV
LDGT 1
LDGT 2
.DGT
'¦¦'EH. SPEEDS: 1O.0 10,0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 .0^4 .094
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (6H/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 94.55 152,23 160.76 156.4?
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.35 7.53 7.52 7,53
HBGV
10.0
.000
.00
.00
LDDV
10.0
.010
2.38
.19
LDDT
10.0
.000
.00
.00
HDDV
10 = 0
.000
.00
.00
FT.
HC
10.0
,005
70.,35
2.54
ALL VEH
105.15
8.08
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1987 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27,3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500, FT,
MEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT 1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV I.DDV LDDT HDD'-1 MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10,0 10.0 10.0 '0.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX: .797 ,094 ,0?4 ,000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
f VHAU5T CO: 88.85 145,03 1 48.85 14A.94 . 00 2 .IB .00 =00 70,03 98,81
HOT T A B T LIZ F P IDLE EMISSION F AC TOPS 'OH'MIN*
Ir! L F ¦ (I; 7.P-9 A. 7 S A , Ac> A . 7 0 t M) , 1 9 AO . n 0 .5 2 '. A
-------
USER SUPPLIED '-'EH REGISTRATION L'1-TFIFll!"JONS,
CAL, YEAR: 1?8.' I/M fPQGRArt: «n fiHBlEW IEWP: 80-0 < F 1 REGION: LiJU
ANT I-TAM. PROGS Ah r NO OPERATING MODE: 20 .6 / 27,3 •' 20.6 ALT I HJl'E; 50{>. fT„
ijFH . TYPE: LBRV LDGTi LP6T2 LDGT HDGV LBBV I DDT HDBV HC ALL MEH
•JfH. SPEEDS; 1.0.0 10.0 10.0 10 = 0 10,0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VNT {4IX; .797 .fl?4 ,0?4 .000 >010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION factors (GM/HILE)
F ,*HAUST CO; 47.61 101.57 i?5,48 113.32 .00 2.34 .00 .00 46.04 7j.«8
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM-'HIN)
IRE CO; 10,23 10.21 10,6' 10.41 ,00 = 1 5 .00 .00 2.7? 10.1?
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
GAL, YEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMPs 80.0 'F> REGION: LOSJ
ANTI-TAH. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MOPE: 20.6 / 27,3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500., FT.
VEH. TYPE? LDGV LDGT1 LDBT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HBDV MC ALL "EH
VEH. SPEEDS; 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10,0
VMT MIX: .797 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 60.51 97.55 117.35 107.45 .00 2.36 .00 .00 44.24 63.6?
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIfO
IDLE CO: 9.51 ?.30 9.52 9.41 ,00 .18 .00 .00 2,66 9.37
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1985 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0 REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20,6 ! 27,3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HUPV MC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS; 10,0 10.0 10,0 10=0 10.0 10,0 10.0 10.0
yHT MIX: ,797 =094 .094 .000 ,01 0 .000 ,000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GN/fflLEJ
EXHAUST CO; 54,1 7 92,01 108.26 1 00. 1 4 ,00 2,3-' .00 ,00 43.0.0 62.21
HfiT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (CM/MIN*
IDLE CO: 8.89 8.40 8.43 8.4 4 .00 .1 8 ,00 .00 2.5-' ?„6y
-------
~
I
ro
cy>
•'•jtp si.if'Pl jFfi ttFH "E5T?T^AT10H DISTRIBUTIONS.
ypftp; 1 ?gA t ;rt pKfiG*A«' «0 Af>RIc.«T TEW: > REGION: LOW
ANT I - TA«, PFObRAh: NO OPERATING MODE: ?0.£ f 20,6 ALTPUDf; ->0'V FT.
VfcP TYPE: LBGV LDGT1 LUST 2 LD6[ HBGV LI'DV LDDT HDUV HC ALL UFH
'•'EH. SPEEDS: 10.0 10,0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.Q
VHT MIX: .797 .094 .094 ,000 .01 0 ,<>00 ,000 .005
i.'QNPQSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/'M ILE>
! ?HAUST CO: 48,61 86. 47 99,66 93.07 .00 2.38 .00 .00 42,49 5-5.47
!-'0T STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (6M/MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.35 7.53 7,52 7,53 .00 .1? .00 .00 2.54 8.00
USER SUPPLIED !»EH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
CAL. tEAR; 1987 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 80,0 (F) REGION: LOW
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27.3 / 20,6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT„
WEH. TYPE: LDGV LP0T1 LPGT2 LOOT HDGV LDDV LDDI HDDV HC ALL MEH
UEH, SPEEDS: 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0
VMT MIX; .797 .094 ,0?4 ,000 .010 .000 .000 ,005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 43.74 80.7? 91.50 86.14 .00 2.38 .00 .00 42.26 51.??
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS .00 .00 2.52 7.56
IIS' » SUPPLIED VEH PFGISTPATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
(A!.., YEAK: 1933 I'M PP'JfiPAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP; 24.0 ' F) REGION; LOU
ANTI-TAM, PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE: 20.6 / 27. 3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
VEH, TYPE: LDG'J LDGT1. LDGT2 LDG1 HD6V tpnu LDDT HDD« rtC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25,0 25.0 25,0 25.0 25.0 ?5,0 25.0
¦JUT MIX; .797 .094 .A94 .000 ,010 ,000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACT HPS W"ILE>
? XHAUST CO: 52,47 75.5? 79.28 77.43 .00 1.01 .00 .00 '28.91 56-rj 3
STARTLI/E'i IDLE EMISSION FACTflPS (Grt'HIf»
nu f rn- W',23 io,2' '0,61 1 (}.41 .00 .1« soo .ov 10, ¦1
-------
USE? SUPPLIED "EH F.'f GI^l t'ATI OM DISTRIBUTIONS.
f ALYEAR: 1984 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP; 24.0 (H REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAH. PROGRAM: NO OPERATING MODE; 20,6 / 27.3 / 20,6 ALTITUDE; 500, FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDG'-» IL'GT1 LBGT2 LDGr HDGV LDOV LPDT HI'M NC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS; 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25 .0 25,0 25.0 25 ,0
VilT flix; ,797 ,094 ,o?j! ,000 .01 0 . 000 ,000 .'K-5
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (OH/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 49.27 73,60 74.88 74,24 .00 1.02 .00 .00 28.16 53.38
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS !G«/MIN>
IDLE CO; 9.51 9,30 9.52 9.41 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.64 9,37
USER SUPPLIED MEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS,
CAL, YEAR: 1785 I/M PROGRAM; NO AHBIENT TEMP: 24.0 (F) REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAM. PROGRAM; NO OPERATING MODE: 20,A / 27,3 / 20.6 ALTITUDE; 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LUGO LDGT1 LDGT2 LDGT HDGV LDDV LDDT HDDV HC ALL 1JFH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VMT MIX: .7?? .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOS ITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO: 46.48 71.09 70.23 70.66 .00 1.02 .00 .00 27.64 50.47
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.8? 8.40 8.48 8.44 ,00 .18 .00 .00 2.57 8.69
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS.
CAL. YEAR: 1986 I/M PROGRAM: NO AMBIENT TEMP: 24.0
-------
USER SUPPLIED urn REGISTRATION [il$TRlpiir 'ONS,
CAL. YtAR; 1) REGION: LOU
ANT I-7 AM, PROGRAH: NO OPERATING HODEs 20,6 / 27,3 ' 20.6 ALTITUDE: 500. FT.
VEH. TYPE: LDGV LDGT1 LDGT7 LDGI HBGV LDBV LDI'T HDDV MC At L VF.H
'JFH, SPEEDS: 25.0 2">,0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VKT MIX; ,7?7 .094 .094 .000 .010 .000 .000 .005
( QMPOSUE EMISSION FACTORS (GN/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 41.?? 65.51 61.4? 63.47 .00 1.03 .00 .00 27.32
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (G M / MIN >
IDLE CO: 7.8? 6.75 6.65 6.70 .00 .1* .00 .00 2.52
USER SUPPLIED OEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTION0.
rai_ s YEAR; i
-------
mtP SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION DISTRIBUTIONS
CAU YEA6: !'?"c I'M f-c-06»Art: NO AMBIENT TE«P; 30,o in REGION: LOU
ANTI-TAN. PROGR AH; NO OPERATING MOPE: 20.6 / 21.3 ! 20.6 Alt ITU&E: 500 . FT.
UEH. TYPE.: LBGV LDGT1 IUQT2 LDGT HDGV LBDV LDDT HUDV HC ALL VEH
VEH. SPEEDS: 25.0 25.0 25,0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0
VM ,77? .094 ,000 .010 .000 .000 .005
COMPOSITE EMISSION FACTORS (GM/MILE)
EXHAUST CO; 24.2? 4ft.?? *3.97 ,00 t.02 .00 .00 16,78 27.40
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GM.-'MIN)
IDLE CO: 8.8? 8.40 8,48 8.44 .00 .18 .00 .00 2.5? 8.6?
USER SUPPLIED VEH REGISTRATION PISTRIPUTIOWS.
CAL. YEAR: 1986 I/« PROGRAM; »Q AMBIENT TEMP: 80.0
EXHAUST CO: 20.12 36.15 37.67 36.91 .00 1.03 .00 ,00 16.50 23.0^
HOT STABILIZED IDLE EMISSION FACTORS (GN/HIN)
IDLE CO: 7.8? 6.75 6.65 6.7ft .00 .19 .00 .00 2.52 7.5/
ftPPIfPI PR f NT$
(.-(if . ;?iO
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instruction! on the reverse before completing/
1. REPORT NO. 2.
EPA 907/9-85-004
3 RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Carbon Monoxide Analysis of Future Attainment
of the NAAQS in Wichita, Kansas
6 REPORT DATE
June 1985
6 performing organization code
7. AUTHOH(S)
8. performing organization report no.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND AODRESS
lO. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-02-3890
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII
Air Branch
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, Kansas 66101
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
In order to comply with the NAAQS for CO in Wichita, Kansas, a special study was
performed to demonstrate that CO concentrations at a special purpose monitor
(SPM) located near Douglas and Main Streets would give results less than the
NAAQS by 1987. The SPM site is located near the urban core in an area char-
acterized by high nighttime traffic volumes and congested traffic flow. Exceed-
ances of the 8-hour NAAQS were measured in 1983 and early 1984 with no exceed-
ances since January 8, 1984. A dispersion modeling analysis was performed
using the CALINE-3 Model for dispersion, the M0BILE-3 Model for vehicle emis-
sions, and local or national traffic and ambient conditions. Background con-
centrations were derived from other monitors in the area. Results of modeling
the SPM site for baseline (1983) emissions were calibrated with maximum measured
CO concentrations. Several scenarios were analyzed in this analysis including
with and without the inspection/maintenance program and with and without the
left-turn ban from Douglas to Main Streets. Results indicate attainment in 1985
continuing through 1987 if I/M is maintained.
17 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDEDTERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution
Mathematical Model
Carbon Monoxide
Highways
Vehicles
IE. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thupoft)
22. PRICE
EPA Farm 2220-1 (Rav. 4-77) previous coition it OMOLCTE
------- |