18
a. HC Controls

The data in Table 5 show that control techniques
designed to reduce HC emissions from pre-controlled vehicles and
service stations are clearly the most cost-effective. However, one must
not confuse cost-effectiveness with the relative importance of a control
technique in eliminating a regional air pollution problem. The figures in
parentheses in Table 5 show the reductions in total HC emissions from the

1/

implementation of each control technique.—' These data show that the use
of pre-controlled vehicle retrofits in 1977 (Air Bleed or VSAD) will reduce
total HC emissions in the air quality region by only approximately 1%.
Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of pre-controlled vehicle retrofits are
very high, but they achieve relatively little in the way of improvements

in air quality. Conversely, measures such as I/M and catalytic retrofits,
which are applicable to controlled vehicles, have relatively low cost-
effectiveness but higher air quality impact. Gasoline marketing controls
prove to be both important and cost-effective in eliminating regional HC
emissions. Finally, it should be noted that I/M is a pre-requisite for

all retrofit measures owing to the need to keep the retrofit devices in

1 calculations based on a region with 30% stationary source HC contri-
bution such as Philadelphia, Baltimore and Indianapolis.


39

- Air Quality Projection Sensitivity

Projections of emissions and air quality, and the resultant deter-
mination of which regions will or will not meet the standards are
critically dependent upon numerous assumptions. Emissions projec-
tions in each region are characterized by a given baseline pollutant
level (observed peak CO and oxidant levels in a given year), the rela-
tive degree of emissions contribution from various sources, the pro-
jected trends in emissions sources' growth, the types of controls to be
initiated and continued, and the emissions reduction effectiveness of
control measures. The air quality projections are very sensitive to
minor variations in the assumptions cited above.

The analysis of the oxidant and carbon monoxide compliance
schedule presented above is based on our best present knowledge of the
factors contributing to the achievement or non-achievement of the
standards. However, because of the sensitivity of any air quality pro-
jection to relatively small uncertainties in input data, this analysis is
fraught with uncertainties. The air quality impact of shifts in some of
the key inputs is discussed below.

1. Emissions Inventory
The emissions inventory is an attempt to identify and

quantify the sources of emissions in our urban areas. Both the


35
control measures. In this section the combinations of measures
included in regional transportation control plans are discussed; the
effects on air quality of these groups of measures are assessed, and
some important uncertainties in forecasts of the air quality effects of
transportation controls are identified.

It was noted earlier that the application of stringent stationary
source controls and the Federal new car emissions standards should
of themselves reduce the number of AQCRs projected to exceed the
ambient air quality standards in 1975 to about 29, EPA is in the process
of finalizing and approving in-use vehicle control plans for these 29 air
quality control regions. These plans, depending upon the magnitude
of the problem in the individual regions, include some combination of
the measures discussed previously, along with specific measures
tailored to the needs or circumstances of the individual region.

Of these 29 regions, it is expected that El Paso, Rochester and
Cincinnati can achieve the standards by 1975 through the implementation
of an inspection/maintenance program and improvements in existing
transit systems. However, these three regions are projected to
achieve the air quality standards by 1977 through the influx of new

vehicles alone.


44
TABLE 8
IMPACT OF ANALYTICAL UNCERTAINTIES

ON REGIONS REQUIRING IN-USE VEHICLE CONTROLS
IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH OXIDANT AND CO STANDARDS

Impact of Uncertainties Do not Comply in 1977* Comply in 1977

Base Case 14 15
Favorable** 10 19
Unfavorable*** 25 4

*Assuming VMT reduction over 20 percent is not feasible.
**Baseline air quality and stationary source contribution over-estimated;
growth rate and control effectiveness assumed correct.
***Baseline air quality and stationary source contribution under-
estimated; growth rate and control effectiveness assumed correct.

- Improvements in Air Quality

In spite of the analytical uncertainties in this compliance analysis
and our serious doubts that several large cities will be able to comply
with the 1977 deadline, there is no doubt that the air in the United States
will be cleaner in the next decade than it has been in the last two decades.
Figures 1 and 2 give a comparison of air quality now and that expected
in 1977. The plots show cumulative population of the regions vs. the

maximum level of pollution observed in that region; for all regions


12

range of $20 to $30 for those vehicles failing the inspection test. How-
ever, the annual average maintenance cost to all vehicles subject to
inspection is estimated to be about $3 per vehicle when the cost of main-
tenance which would normally have been performed voluntarily is netted
out of the estimated maintenance cost.

The impact of I/M programs on fuel economy has not been
adequately determined.

2. Heavy Duty Vehicle and Motorcycle I/M

I/M programs for HDV's and motorcycles are potentially
applicable, but programs have not yet been carried out to accurately
assess the degree of control achievable for these vehicles.

- Implementation Time Frame

The dates at which the control techniques discussed above can
be implemented vary according to the time needed to develop and evaluate
each control measure, to manufacture control devices and build or
modify automobile service facilities, to conduct pilot studies and to phase
in or install the control system. Table 2 summarizes the best estimate
of the time requirements for each of these technical implementation con-
straints. It should be noted that these estimates do not reflect those

aspects (primarily institutional) of the implementation programs of


10.

11.

12,

13.

14,

15.

17.

18.

INSTRUCTIONS

REPORT NUMBER .
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication,

LEAVE BLANK

RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient.

TITLE AND SUBTITLE . , wate i ‘

Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. ‘When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.

REPORT DATE ; a.
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e,g., date of issue, date of
approval, date of preparation, etc.).

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank.

AUTHOR(S) » rere i:
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.). List author’s affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation,

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS .
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.

PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER + .
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared, Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.

CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.

SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code.

TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.

SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Leave blank.

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.

ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report. If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.

KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.

(>) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.

(©) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-

jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human

cadeavor or type of physical object, The application(s) wil be cros-zeferenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
e primary posting(s).

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

Denote releasability to the public ot fimitation for reasons other than security for example “Release Unlimited.” Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price. /

19. & 20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

21.

22.

10 NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.

NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.

PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.

‘US. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 58.2-412/26

EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (Reverse)


22
control of HC) will not substantially reduce total regional emissions
because they can be installed on only a relatively small group of
vehicles (pre-1968).

d. Catalyst - the control of 1968-1974 automotive emis-
sions with catalyst retrofits will generally provide a substantial
reduction in total regional emissions. However, the high initial cost
of catalytic systems makes this control technique somewhat less cost-

effective than those designed for pre-controlled cars.

C. Reductions of Auto Use

Increasing public awareness of the adverse effects of the auto-
mobile on the urban environment, and legislation such as the Clean Air
Act that has resulted from this awareness, make it clear that urban
development policies that have encouraged and relied upon unrestricted
use of the automobile must be changed. Controls must be placed on
automobile use; transit must be subsidized to at least the same extent
as the automobile, and means must be found to prevent future urban
growth from generating large volumes of traffic. The need to reduce

urban area auto use is no longer at issue. The problem is how to do it

without excessively restricting the mobility of urban area residents.


40

magnitude of the emissions and the role they play in the development of
the observed high pollutant concentration are difficult to define. Partic-
ularly in the case of hydrocarbon control, errors in the inventory can
significantly alter the outcome of an emissions projection, The con-
tribution of stationary sources (gasoline marketing, petroleum industry,
paint and organic solvent use) is about 20 to 40 percent in most metro-
politan areas. However, our knowledge concerning these types of
emissions sources and the exact quantities and types of hydrocarbons
they emit, is limited. Furthermore, an error in assessing the
importance (reactivity) of these emissions in the formation of oxidant
will also have a marked impact on the air quality predicted.

2. Growth Rates

The growth rates of emission sources are another possible

source of error in these projections. If the number of sources or size
of the sources grow faster than we have predicted, the percentage
reduction in emissions needed for achieving and maintaining the air
standards will be greater.

3. Control Strategy Effectiveness

The projections of emissions reflect reductions in emis-

sions due to in-use vehicle controls; Federal new vehicle emission


3
controls on stationary sources (power plants, industrial facilities and
general area sources), the Federal new car emissions standards and
in-use vehicle emissions controls. The anticipated reductions in
pollutant concentrations resulting from the implementation of stationary
source controls and new vehicle emissions standards are projected to
reduce the number of AQCR's exceeding the air quality standards to 29
by 1975 (see Table 7), These include approximately 40 percent of the
nation's population, .

Having controlled the emissions from stationary sources and new
vehicles to the extent possible, those States containing the AQCR's still
projected to exceed the air quality standards will be required to imple-
ment appropriate transportation controls (i.e., controls of in-use
vehicles) to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. The control
of emissions from these vehicles is essential because although motor
vehicles are not the only source of HC, CO and NO, emissions, they are
the primary source of these pollutants in our urban areas. Table 1 shows
the general range of relative contributions of emission sources in our

urban areas.


33

About 45 percent of downtown parkers are commuters. It thus appears
that downtown parking restrictions will be most effective if they are
directed at both off- and on-street parking, are structured to take
account of varying degrees of excess capacity among parking facilities,
and are designed to encourage commuters to use transit or carpools.

Increasing the cost of auto travel relative to other modes
is another frequently suggested approach to reducing auto use. Measures
to raise auto costs include increased registration fees, increased fuel
costs, road use charges, parking taxes, and the sale of daily licenses
for access to selected areas within a city. There has been little
experience with any of these measures. Indeed present public policy
tends to work in the opposite direction from the one desired: registration
fees are often lower for old, heavily polluting cars than for newer and
cleaner ones; tolls are imposed to pay for facilities when they are new
and uncrowded but are removed when the facilities are paid for, which
is when they are most needed; monthly auto commuter tickets are avail-
able at a discount under daily tickets; and all-day parking is frequently
cheaper per hour than short-term parking.

When auto charges are keyed to daily auto use, the net
cost per trip is presumably what influences people's decisions as to

mode and frequency of travel. In the discussion of transit it was


19
good operating condition. Hence, it is not possible in practice to select
an approach such as VSAD, for example, based on its high cost-effect-

tiveness and implement it without inspection/maintenance.

TABLE 5

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF HC CONTROL TECHNIQUES*

Date of Program Implementation**

1977 1980
I/M (all cars) 1. 64 (3. 6%) ~54 (1. 5%)
Catalyst ('72-'74) 1.79 (3. 77%) 1.31 (3.0%)
Catalyst ('68-'74) 1.90 (5.5%) 1.23 (3.6%)
Air Bleed (pre-1968) 5.48 (1. 0%) 5.20 ( .5%)
VSAD (pre-1968) 6.91 (1.2%) 8.36 ( .6%)
Gasoline Station Controls 10. 67 (7. 1%) 11.56 (9.6%)

*Cost-effectiveness increases with the size of the figure.
**The cost-effectiveness of the 1976 HC standard is 3.7.

b. CO Controls
The cost-effectiveness calculations for CO controls
follow a progression similar to that seen for HC controls. Retrofit

devices for pre-controlled vehicles again prove to be the most


25
auto use is expensive or difficult. For example, the Shirley Highway
Express in the Washington area, whose buses operate in lanes that
are separated from automobile traffic, has achieved a peak period
ridership of nearly 40 percent. Before the service started, ridership
was 27 percent. Average ridership in the Washington area is only
19 percent. In Los Angeles charter buses are being used to carry
workers from outlying residential locations to industrial employment
centers. Service is provided on a subscription basis at a cost less
than that of the automobile. The bus operator.estimates that the bus
service carries over 90 percent of potential users and is now constrained
from expanding the service by lack of vehicles. In Chicago, and New
York City, where downtown auto use is difficult and expensive, 70 to
90 percent of downtown trips take place by transit. In addition, EPA
studies suggest that if transit travel times can be made comparable
with auto travel times, as many as 50 percent of work trips would take
place by transit. If auto drivers had to pay $2.00 to $5.00 per day to
park, work trip transit ridership could exceed 90 percent if the transit
were available. These considerations indicate that high quality transit
can achieve high levels of ridership without the imposition of such

extreme measures as gasoline rationing, In other words, the most


21
- Summary
The data cited above on the cost-effectiveness and importance
of various emissions controls lead to a number of conclusions about
these control techniques:

a. Service station vapor controls - the control of service
station vapor losses is both highly cost-effective and important in con-
trolling regional HC emissions (these factors also grow with time),
Therefore, these control systems should be developed and implemented
as early as is technologically feasible.

b. Inspection/maintenance - although relatively cost
ineffective, I/M is an essential component of nearly all transportation
control plans, because it is needed to assure the proper installation
and performance of vehicle retrofits as well as new car emissions
control devices. In addition, its effectiveness in improving air quality
is relatively high as it is applicable to both :pre-controlled and can-
trolled vehicles.

c. VSAD and Air Bleed - retrofit devices designed to
control the emissions of pre-controlled cars are relatively more cost-
effective than other retrofit devices. However, having said this, it

must also be pointed out that the use of these devices (particularly in


34
suggested that a $2.00 to $5.00 per day charge for auto work trips could
cause substantial shifts of commuters to transit if adequate transit were
available. Daily costs in this range could be imposed directly through
parking or access license fees. An equivalent mileage charge would be
$0.10 to $0.25 per mile for a 10 mile commute. A fuel tax of $1.40 to
$3.50 per gallon might be roughly equivalent, although the effect of
the fuel tax on a given commuter would depend on the fuel consumption
of his car.

There is evidence that non-work trips, particularly shop-
ping trips, are at least as sensitive to fees as work trips. However, it
is not known to what extent this sensitivity reflects changes of mode,
destination, or trip frequency in response to costs. Thus, while it is
likely that auto use fees will be effective in discouraging non-work
auto travel, the effects of such fees on discouraged travellers and on

economic activity cannot be assessed at present,

AIR QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

The foregoing sections have considered the effects on auto emissions
of various emissions control approaches when each is implemented
independently of the others. However, transportation controls in most

regions needing them will involve combinations of two or more individual


16

TABLE 4

ANNUAL EXPENDITURES FROM VARIOUS FINANCING TECHNIQUES

Household Income Groups ($Thous)

0-3 3-5 5-7.5 7.5-10 10-15 15+
Average # of Cars/household .48 - 81 1.18 1.29 1.48 1.75
Average Age of Car 7.0 6.1 5.7 4.8 4.6 4.0
State Financing*
1. Fee per Car $22.00 $22.00 $22.00 $22.00 $22.00 $22.00
% of Income 1.5 ~6 -4 3 2 al
2. Avg fee/household $10.87 $18.35 $26.73 $29.22 $33.52 $39.64
% of Income 7 5 4 3 23 +2
Consumer Financing**
1. Cost per Car $48.18 $48.34 $50.02 $50.94 $51.58 $53.42
% of Income 3.2 12 8 6 4 3
2. Avg Cost/household $14.98 $26.29 $37.88 $42.46 $49.49 $61.33
% of Income 9 7 6 5 4 3

*Assumes that the AQCR using transportation controls will finance hardware
controls with a 5-year 8% loan, the cost of which is passed on to all vehicle

owners over 5 years as an increased registration tax.

**Assumes the owner of the vehicle being modified will finance the capital
of the control hardware with a 3-year loan at 18%, the loan is paid off in

3 equal annual payments,

The date in Table 3 clearly indicate that the poor generally own

fewer and older cars and therefore in absolute dollar terms, in-use

vehicle controls will cost the average poor family less than the average


8
of 4% is associated with the use of this device which would reduce operating
costs by $1.20 per 1,000 miles of operation,
3. Oxidation Catalyst

Because of the automotive industry commitment to the use
of catalysts in meeting future federal emission standards, it follows that
catalyst systems are being identified as retrofit candidates as well.
Catalyst retrofits are applicable to cars capable of running adequately
and without excessive engine wear on a commercially available lead free
gasoline. Our best estimate of the proportion of cars to which catalytic
systems are applicable is 20% of pre-1971 and 75% of 1971-1974 model
year vehicles,

Low mileage emissions tests conducted for EPA showed
mean emissions reductions of 68% for HC, 63% for CO and 48% for NO,
for catalyst systems (plus VSAD) installed on 11 pre-controlled vehicles.
Emissions tests on a fleet of cars being run by the State of California
show low mileage reductions of 70% for HC, 70% for CO and 14% for NO,
for controlled cars equipped with air pumps. Tests on cars without air
pumps showed very unsatisfactory results.

The durability data generated for catalyst retrofit systems

are limited and the results are mixed. No firm conclusions on retrofit


31

Total traffic bans are the only forms of vehicular restraints
with which there has been extensive experience. Traffic is banned from
portions of the central districts of over 100 cities in Europe and Japan.
The affected areas are typically small (less than 1 km maximum
dimension) owing to the need to provide foot access to the zones. Reduc-
tions in 5 to 10 hour CO concentrations of 50 percent to 80 percent have
been reported. No effects on oxidant have been reported, but they are
undoubtedly small.

Available evidence from Europe and Japan indicates that
traffic bans have a beneficial effect on retail business in the ban areas.
Indeed, some merchants in Rome are reported to have gone on strike
to protest their street's exclusion from a traffic free zone. Long-term
traffic bans have tended to be linked with measures to increase parking
and transit availability on the periphery of the ban areas, There is no
evidence of increased pollution or congestion in peripheral areas.

Traffic free zones are necessarily restricted in size
owing to the need to provide foot access. Restricted areas might be
expanded considerably (perhaps to one square mile) through the use of
partial traffic bans. These could consist of applying restrictions only
to private autos; enforcing restrictions only during selected portions

of the day; enforcing restrictions only on selected roadways; linking


28
least four persons, these statistics suggest that substantial reductions
in automobile use may be achievable through increased use of carpools.
The use of carpools as an emissions control approach has the additional
attraction of having a low, possibly negative, cost.

The principal problem with increased carpooling is that
carpools are highly restrictive in terms of the service offered. Car-
poolers must have trip origins and destinations that are close to each
other, must desire to travel at the same times of day, and, to minimize
the problems of locating carpool partners, must make trips that are
repetitive from day to day. These considerations suggest that the
greatest potential for increased carpool usage is in connection with peak
period work trips, particularly those to areas of high employment
density.

Experience to date with carpool programs suggests that
policies to encourage carpooling might double auto occupancies for down-
town peak period work trips. These trips are responsible for about
seven percent of urban area auto travel. Non-downtown peak period
work trips account for roughly 20 percent of urban area auto travel.
There has been very little experience with carpooling programs in

connection with these trips. However, if a 10 percent to 50 percent


5
slowness of vehicle turnover greatly reduce the impact of these standards
in the time period of the mandated attainment of the air quality standards.
For example, relative to 1972, automotive CO and HC emissions will be
reduced by only about 35% by 1975 and 50% by 1977. Therefore a reduc-
tion in the emissions of vehicles presently on the road are key to the

efforts to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

EMISSIONS CONTROL TECHNIQUES

The control of in-use vehicle emissions generally takes three
forms:

A. The retrofitting of vehicles with systems or devices which
directly reduce exhaust emissions.

B. The inspection and maintenance of vehicles to ascertain and
maintain adequate emissions performance.

C. The reduction of vehicle miles travelled through the use of

traffic controls, mass transit, parking taxes, etc.

A. Retrofit Devices
A retrofit approach can be defined as the addition of any device
or system and/or any modification or adjustment made on a motor vehicle

after its initial manufacture to achieve a reduction in emissions. The


4
TABLE1

MIX OF EMISSION SOURCES IN URBAN AREAS - 1971

Percent of Total Emissions

Pollutant Automobiles Trucks, Buses Stationary
& Motorcycles Sources
co 77-87 8-10 3-15
HC 50-65 5-10 25-45
NO, 40-50 8-13 37-52

The data clearly indicate the importance of automotive emission con-
trols. The Federal new car emissions standards, particularly for cars
produced in 1975 and beyond, will go a long way towards reducing the role
of the automobile in the pollution of our cities. In many urban areas
presently exceeding the air quality standards, the reduction in new car
emissions alone will eventually bring regional air quality within the
standards. However, there are other regions which must look to trans-
portation controls as a long run complement to the Federal new car
emissions standards, because reductions in new car emissions alone will
never bring the achievement of the air quality standards. In either case,
the full impact of the new car standards will not be realized for some

time. Vehicle population growth, in-use vehicle deterioration and the


17

rich family, no matter what the financing technique. However, the
relative impact of the costs incurred is always regressive. Whether
the control plan is financed through an increased vehicle registration
taxlor consumer loan, the poor household will always pay relatively
more of its income. It should be noted however that using our financing
assumptions the data indicate that a uniform registration tax is no less
regressive than consumer financing (assuming the rich and poor can get
similar financing terms) and that in absolute terms the poor family would
actually pay less if it could finance the installation of emissions control
systems itself ($14. 98 for 3 years compared to $10. 87 for 5 years), 2/

- Cost-Effectiveness

The cost-effectiveness of the control techniques shown in
Table 2 can best be described in terms-of the pounds of pollutants con-
trolled per dollar expended on the control device. Tables 5 and 6

describe the cost-effectiveness of HC and CO control devices respectively.

1/

—' The regressiveness of a registration tax can be reduced by reducing
the tax with the age of the vehicle.

2/ with a registration tax the poor are forced to share in the control
costs of the multi-car rich,


7
maintenance can probably be limited to an annual readjustment of the
idle air/fuel ratio and would cost about $5.00. A minor fuel economy
reduction of approximately 2% is associated with the ignition timing
adjustment achieved by this retrofit technique. This would increase
vehicle operating costs about $.60 per 1,000 miles of operation.

2. Air Bleed to the Intake System

Many devices have been designed to introduce, by one means
or another, excess air into the intake system of a vehicle, The effect is
one of reducing HC and CO levels, possibly with some small increase
in NO, levels. The reductions achieved vary directly with the amount of
air allowed into the intake system. This technique is applicable to some
extent to all light duty vehicles, but because of the relatively lean air/
fuel ratios on controlled vehicles the technique is primarily applicable
to pre-controlled vehicles.

Tests conducted on this system for EPA indicate an expected
reduction of 21% for HC, 58% for CO and 5% for NO,. Durability data on
the system are not adequate for judging the performance of this control
technique over time.

The installed cost of the air bleed system tested for EPA

is estimated to lie in the range $56 to $64, A fuel economy improvement


23

Among the possible approaches to the solution of this problem,
increased transit usage and quality seem to offer the greatest potential
for success over the long run. Other possible approaches include
increased carpooling, reducing trip frequencies or trip lengths, and
direct vehicular restraints (e.g., vehicle free zones). The potential
merits and limitations of transit improvements, increased use of car-
pools, and direct vehicular restraints are discussed in the following
sections. Present knowledge does not permit meaningful discussion of
the problem of reducing trip frequencies or lengths without excessively
impairing mobility.

1. Improved Transit

It is well known that transit usage in the United States is

extremely low. Only about four percent of person trips in urban areas
take place by transit, and transit carries only about 14 percent of work
trips. However, transit vehicles emit less carbon monoxide and hydro-
carbons per passenger mile than cars do. Thus, total vehicle emissions
could be considerably reduced if more people would travel by transit
instead of by car. For example, if the percentage of work trips using
transit could be increased to 50 percent, urban area vehicle emiss ions
of HC and CO might be reduced by 15 percent. If 90 percent of workers

used transit, vehicle emissions could decrease by one third.


EPA-400/9-74-001

THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND
TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS

AN EPA WHITE PAPER

TED ST
» es

SZ
%,
ty prot

V AGENCY

2?
—
%

Ke)

OFFICE OF AIR
AND WATER PROGRAMS

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, B.C. 20460
AUGUST 1973


FIGURE 1
= NATIONAL OXIDANTS
2 STANDARD
2 ‘

4
: 120
100 |
8 | | 1970-72
o
G 80
te |
ic
3 60
Zz
6
9
E40
3
a 20
i)
if
0

0 -08 .16 .24 .32 .40 .48 .56 .64
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION (PPM)

~ FIGURE 2
2 NATIONAL CARBON MONOXIDE

fe) STANDARD

4

I 100 v

wn

2 80

Q

9

& 60

4

fy

o 40

Zz

z

< 20

=|

p

8 o

A 0 9 18 27 36 45

MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION (PPM)

*Assuming I/M, retrofits, stationary source controls and 20 percent
reduction in auto use.


10
that their control can legitimately be thought of as a transportation
control,

The average service station sells approximately 25,000
gallons of gasoline per month and in the process is estimated to emit
nearly 400 pounds of hydrocarbon vapor. By 1975 uncontrolled vapor
losses of this magnitude will make the service station as important a
source of HC emissions as some of the vehicles it serves. Translated
into grams/mile the HC emissions from the service station exceed the
1976 new car HC standards.

Service station vapor losses result primarily from vehicle
fueling and tank truck unloading. Vapors emitted in these processes
account for over 90% of the total vapor loss. Vapor displacement con-
trol techniques are presently being developed which show the potential
for reducing these emissions by over 80% by 1977 ( a reduction of over
75% in total service station vapor losses). The annualized cost of
service station vapor controls is estimated to be approximately $3.20 per

car serviced by the controlled service station,

B. Inspection/Maintenance (I/M)

All inspection/maintenance approaches include two phases:

an inspection phase used to screen the vehicle population to determine


9
catalyst durability can be drawn at this time. The fleet test in California
should provide a great deal of useful data en catalyst durability as the
test progresses.

Estimates of the cost to be borne by the consumer for a
catalyst retrofit package will vary according to the type and age of the
consumer's vehicle, and the organizational structyre selected for retro-
fit installation. With an installation program run in State-owned (or
franchised) inspection and installation centers, the average initial cost
would be approximately $125. However, with an installation program
designed to make use of traditional distribution channels and local service
establishments, the initial price cauld rise to well over $300. The fud
penalty of catalyst systems is negligible (perhaps 1%).

Retrofit packages similar to those discussed above for
light duty vehicles are also potentially applicable for heavy duty vehicles
and motorcycles. However, a great deal more research will need to be
carried out on the cost, effectiveness and applicability of these tech-
niques before their use can be considered for these motor vehicles,

4, Service Station Vapor Controls

Although the hydrocarbon vapors emitted to the air from
service stations cannot be considered in-use vehicle exhaust emissions,

the relationship between these vapor losses and vehicle use is so direct


42

solvent users are written. That is, many regulations now on the books
restrict emissions of only the more reactive classes of hydrocarbons,
The true effectiveness of such regulations and the possible impact on
air quality of not controlling the less reactive (but not inert) hydro-
carbons is not known at this time.

4, Baseline Air Quality

High concentration of air pollution are the result of adverse

(stagnant) meteorological conditions and the accumulation of emissions
in the air under these conditions. In determining the allowable amount
of emissions for a given region, one must know the maximum observed
pollutant levels (the second highest level is used in some air quality

/

projections)+ and the rate of emissions during that year.

Unfortunately, meteorological conditions are not consistent
from year to year. Because of this, the meteorological conditions
causing the observed high levels of pollutants used in our projections
may not be representative of a region's real potential for achieving the
air quality standard in a given time period. In addition, one must keep

in mind that even if the baseline air quality levels assumed in our

VU . .
— The air quality regulations allow the standard to be exceeded once
a year.


30
$0.6 million per year. If this system achieves a three percent increase
in auto occupancies for peak period downtown work trips, the savings it
achieves in auto operating costs will equal the annualized costs of the
system.
3. Vehicular Restraints

Traffic and emissions in urban areas can be reduced
through the use of vehicular restraints such as traffic free zones,
partial traffic bans, parking restrictions, and vehicle use charges.
With the exception of traffic free zones, all of these approaches to
traffic restriction are applicable, in principle, over entire urban areas,
However, to minimize community disruption, their widespread use can
be effected only if suitable transit facilities are available. The possible
effects of restraint measures are discussed here with the assumption
that either the necessary transit is available or the restricted zones

1/

are small enough to be accessible on foot.—

1/the complementarity between transit and vehicular restraints serves
to facilitate transit as well as the restraints. By relieving congestion
in high density areas, vehicular restraints can significantly contribute
to fast, reliable transit service. Indeed, the effect of vehicular
restraints combined with transit improvements could be to make
transit travel faster and more reliable than cars were under congested,
pre-restraint conditions. The quality of the transportation system
would, thus, be improved for all travellers including former auto
users who switched to transit.


APPENDIX A - Regions exceeding the Air Quality
Standards for CO, NO2 and Oxidants
(1969 to 1971 monitoring data)

Pollutant Pollutant

AQCR Ox CO NO2 AQCR Ox CO NO2
Birmingham x Xx Boston x Xx
Mobile - Pensacola x Toledo x
N. Alaska x Minn. -St. Paul x
Clark - Mohave x xX New Jersey x
Phoenix - Tucson x XxX Alb. -Mid Rio Grande x
Memphis x El Paso-Las Cruces x x
Los Angeles x Xx Genesse-Finger Lakes x
N. Central Coast x Niagara Frontier x xX
Sacramento Valley x xX Charlotte x
San Diego x x Cleveland x
San Francisco x x Columbus x
San Joaquin x Xx Central Oklahoma x
S.E. Desert x N.E, Oklahoma x
Denver x xX Portland x x
Hartford - New Haven x xX S.W. Pennsylvania x x
NY-NJ-Conn x xX Middle Tenn, x
Philadelphia x xX Austin-Waco x
National Capital x Xx Corpus-Christi x
Jacksonville-Brunswick X Dallas-Ft. Worth x
E. Wash. -N. Idaho x Houston-Galveston x
Chicago x xX San Antonio x
St. Louis x x Wasatch Front xX Xx
Louisville x Hampton Roads x
Cincinnati x State Capital x
Indianapolis x xX Puget Sound x xX
S. Central Iowa x S.E. Wisconsin x
Kansas City x XxX Central N.Y. x
S. Central Kansas x Dayton x
S. Louisiana-S,E., Texas X
Baltimore x xX


29

increase in auto occupancy is adopted as a realistic range of possible
effects, the net effect of carpool policies on total urban area auto use
might be a five to ten percent reduction. 7

Carpooling and transit appear to be competitive, not
complementary, approaches to reducing auto use. Both approaches
operate most easily in connection with peak period work trips to high
density areas, and transit improvements tend to attract carpoolers
from their pools. It is therefore unlikely that the effects of transit and
carpooling on auto use will be additive. For example, if transit
improvements alone can achieve a 15 percent reduction in auto use and
carpooling alone can achieve a 10 percent reduction, the auto use reduc-
tion obtained from implementing both approaches together is likely to
be less than 25 percent. Since, in addition, transit appears to have a
greater long-term potential for reducing auto use than does carpooling,
carpooling may be most suitable as an interim approach to auto use
reduction that can be replaced by improved transit as it becomes available.

Carpooling programs appear capable of achieving net cost
savings. A carpool program for the Washington, D.C. area based ona
locator system and increased parking fees has been estimated to require

an initial investment of $1.3 million and to have operating costs of


6
retrofit packages most commonly discussed for use in light duty vehicles
include:

1. Vacuum Spark Advance Disconnect (VSAD) with Lean Idie

Two basic engine modifications employed by the motor
vehicle manufacturers in meeting Federal exhaust emissions standards
have been the leaning of air/fuel ratios and the modification of ignition
(spark) timing. Therefore, the modification of these parameters in
pre-controlled (pre-1968) vehicles should reduce exhaust emissions.
Because 1968 and newer vehicles have utilized these modifications to some
extent to meet Federal emissions standards, this retrofit technique is
considered to be applicable primarily to pre-controlled vehicles, but not
to approximately 10% of those pre-controlled vehicles which do not employ
vacuum spark advance.

Low mileage EPA tests of this system indicate average
emissions reductions of 25% for HC, 9% for CO and 23% for NO, from a
tuned baseline. Durability data developed by General Motors over 25,000
miles without maintenance show no deterioration in the reduction of HC
and NO, over time, but do show approximately a 20% deterioration for CO.

The initial cost of purchase and installation of this system,

which is commercially available, is estimated to be $20. Device


20
cost-effective but measures for controlled vehicles have the greatest
impact on air quality. However, the CO emissions reductions (shown
in parentheses) achieved by these control techniques are considerably
higher than those achieved for HC. Air bleed retrofits, for example,
yield a 7.1% reduction in total CO emissions in 1977, while air bleed
only yielded a 1% reduction for HC. The relative importance of CO
control techniques is generally higher because regional CO problems
are caused primarily by motor vehicles. Again, inspection/maintenance

is a pre-requisite for retrofit.

TABLE 6

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF CO CONTROL TECHNIQUES*

Date of Program Implementation**

197. 1980
I/M 17.5 (7.7%) 8.8 (6.3%)
Catalyst ('72-'74) 20.0 (8.4%) 15.2 (9.2%)
Catalyst ('68-'74) 24.7 (14.5%) 15.5 (11. 8%)
VSAD (pre-1968) 31.8 (1.1%) 40.9 (.7%)
Air Bleed (pre-1968) 194.0 (7.1%) 192.7 (4.9%)

*Based on an AQCR with 5% stationary source contribution such as Seattle,
Phoenix and Minneapolis.
**The cost-effectiveness of the 1976 new car CO standard is 32.9.


37

Based on EPA's present analysis, the remaining 14 regions of
Phoenix, Baltimore, Boston, Denver, New York City (OX only),
San Joaquin, San Diego, Southeast Desert, Sacramento, Los Angeles,
San Francisco, Houston, Beaumont, and Fairbanks probably cannot
be reasonably expected to meet the air quality standards even by 1977.
Compliance with the air quality standards in these regions appears to
require not only inspection/maintenance and the fullest possible vehicle
retrofit, but also reductions in vehicle use of substantially more than
20 percent. In light of the limitations on the short-run potential for
reducing auto use, achieving the air quality standards by 1977 is likely
to require unreasonable changes in the present life styles of those
regions and could result in the paralysis of entire urban areas. Final
determination however, of both the exact reductions in traffic required
and the feasibility of achieving those reductions cannot be made until
information presented during the public hearings on the plans can be
analyzed to determine exactly what each of the regions can do in terms
of transit improvement and traffic reduction by 1977.

Additional reductions due to the influx of new, cleaner vehicles
will make compliance in nearly half of these remaining 14 regions a
reasonable post-1977 goal. However, those regions with the most

severe oxidant problems are not expected to achieve the standard


38
without improvements in transit systems, land use, and stationary
source control technology which are not presently available.
Table 7 summarizes EPA's present assessment of a feasible com.

pliance schedule.
TABLE 7

STATUS OF REGIONS REQUIRING IN-USE VEHICLE
EMISSIONS CONTROLS TO MEET THE OXIDANT AND CARBON MONOXIDE STANDARDS 1/

Projected Year

Group Regions Planned Strategy of Compliance
I El Paso Stringent stationary sources 1975
Rochester control; automotive inspec-
Cincinnati tion and maintenance
Ir Springfield Same as Group I + major transit 1975
Seattle improvements
Spokane
Dallas
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Chicago
Portland ‘
Ur Philadelphia Same as Group II + hardware 1977
Pittsburgh retrofit + reductions in

National Capital vehicle miles travelled
Salt Lake City (VMT) of up to 20%

San Antonio

Downtown NYC (CO)

Iv Los Angeles 2/ Same as Group III but with VMT Post-1977
San Francisco reductions over 20%
Denver
Boston

Phoenix-Tucson

Beaumont 3/

Fairbanks

Sacramento

San Diego

San Joaquin

S. E. Desert 4/
Interstate NYC Region(0Xx)
Baltimore

Houston

1/ This allocation of regions represents the findings of our analysis at this
time, Public hearings being held in these regions could lead to some shifts
in this categorization. . .

2/ Group IV regions include some which may require only marginally more than
20% reduction in vehicle miles travelled (Boston, San Joaquin) and some which
have -sérious stationary source problems (Houston, Beaumont).

3/ Measures still being considered.

4/ Standards to be achieved through Los Angeles plan.


26
important transit problem is not one of finding ways to generate demand
but one of creating high quality transit systems to serve the potential
demand,

Planning and implementing substantial transit improve-
ments are likely to present severe problems in the period 1973-77 owing
to the difficulties of designing suitable transit systems and acquiring
the necessary vehicles. Existing transit does not have the capacity to
achieve large reductions in auto use. Most urban transit systems
operate at more than 75 percent of capacity during periods of peak
work travel. EPA calculations indicate that with this level of capacity
usage, the maximum reduction in auto use that can be achieved by
existing transit fleets is about five percent. Achieving a 10 to 20
percent reduction in auto use could require expansions of current
transit fleets of at least 50 percent and possibly over 300 percent.
Threefold fleet expansions in many urban areas could exceed the short-
run production capacity of the bus manufacturing industry. In addition
to bus production problems, there appear to be significant short-run
planning problems. Most existing urban area transit plans are pro-
jected to achieve decreases in auto use of less than 10 percent. The
most ambitious transit plan that has come to EPA's attention, that for

the Washington Metro System, is projected to be capable of achieving


BACKGROUND

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 directed EPA to set national
air quality standards which would protect the public health and welfare
from the known effects of the major air pollutants. In 1971, such air
quality standards were established for six pollutants, including the four
primarily associated with motor vehicles, i.e., carbon monoxide (CO),
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), photochemical oxidant (OX), and hydrocarbons (HC).
Hydrocarbons are reactants in the formation of oxidants and at ambient
concentrations have no known health effects.

The standards for the motor vehicle related pollutants have been
exceeded in a number of our major urban areas. Out of the 247 Air
Quality Control Regions (AQCR's) in the United States, in the period
1970-1971 54 regions exceeded the air quality standard for oxidant,

29 exceeded the carbon monoxide standard and 2 exceeded the nitrogen

dioxide standard (under the old monitoring technique it was believed

that 47 AQCR's exceeded the NO2 standard). In all, 58 AQCR's repre-

senting nearly 55 percent of the nation's population exceeded the ambient

air quality standards for one or more of these pollutants (see Appendix A).
The Environmental Protection Agency's plan to achieve the air

quality standards on a national basis includes the implementation of


45
exceeding the standard. Obviously, not every person in a region will
be exposed to the maximum level for that region and these plots must
not be construed as representative of actual individual exposures.
These plots do, however, give a relative indication of the magnitude
of the air pollution problem today and the amount of improvement we
can expect by 1977. One can see that even in those areas still in excess
of the standards in 1977, great reductions in the air pollution levels will
have been accomplished. In addition, most of these regions will be very

near to the standard,


43
analysis are statistically representative of a once-a-year occurrence,
that is no assurance that meteorological conditions in some AQCR's
won't lead to violations of the ambient air quality standards at some
point in the future.

- Sensitivity of Compliance Schedule for 1977

Many of the AQCR's have projected air quality levels very near
the standards in 1977. For this reason, slight errors in the assump-
tions used to predict the air quality can greatly affect our count of
those regions which will or will not comply with the standards.
Table 8 shows the impact of overestimating or underestimating two
of the most critical variables: baseline air quality and base-year con-
tribution of stationary sources. The data show that if errors were
consistently made in one direction or the other a difference of 15 regions
in or out of compliance could result. It also indicates that our estimate
of only 14 regions not being in compliance by 1977 is probably optimistic.
This high degree of sensitivity and uncertainty would further
suggest that our ability, or anyone else's ability, to make a firm
commitment on exactly which regions will or will not comply by a given
date is somewhat limited unless, of course, one applies a very large

margin of safety to the allowable emissions ceiling.


13
particular air quality regions which would facilitate or delay the use of

these control techniques.

TABLE 2

IMPLEMENTATION TIME PHASING

Technique Development Facilities Prep Pilot Phase-in Date
& Evaluation or Manufacturing Study

LDV Retrofit

VSAD 1 6 12 1/75

Air Bleed 18 6 12 6/76

Catalyst 18 6 18 1/77
LDV I/M

Idle* 12 3 12 9/75

Loaded* 12 6 12 12/75
HDV Strategies

Retrofit 29 6 12 6/77

I/M 21 6 6 12 5/77
Gas Station Control

Stage I** 12 12 6/75

Stage Ils 18 18 6/76

*Subtract 6 months if facilities already exist.
**Stage I is control of tank trunk to storage tank losses,
***Stage II is control of automobile fueling vapor losses.

- Consumer Costs
The cost of the emissions control measures discussed above can
be viewed in terms of the incremental out-of-pocket costs likely to be

incurred by various automobile owners in the initial year of the control


15.

The data in Table 3 show that the initial cost of the hardware
oriented emissions controls can be substantial if the vehicle owner is
forced to finance the cost entirely in the first year. However, financing
techniques available to both the individual vehicle owner and the impacted
AQCR can be used to spread these costs (over time and to other individuals)
and lower their impact.

Table 4 details the impact of various financing schemes on
individual income groups. The dollar costs represent those that would
be incurred in a city which employs a full complement of the control
techniques discussed above (Appendix B sets forth these costs for each
device), Therefore these costs can be viewed as the upper bound of
annual costs to be incurred in any AQCR employing hardware oriented

transportation controls.


THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS:
AN EPA WHITE PAPER ‘

INTRODUCTION

The proposal of transportation control plans formulated to bring the
air quality of our major urban areas into compliance with the mandates
of the Clean Air Act has created considerable public concern about the
social and economic implications of these controls. The purpose of this
paper is to analyze the impact and feasibility of key components of the
plans being proposed and to examine the relationship between the
implementation of a set of feasible transportation controls and the
attainment of the air quality standards. The important inspection/
maintenance and hardware retrofit approaches to motor vehicle emissions
control are described in Sections A and B of this paper, and estimates of
their effectiveness and costs are presented. Measures designed to con-
trol emissions through reducing auto use, such as improved mass transit,
are discussed in Section C. In Section D the various individual control
measures are related to actual trans portation control plans. The effects
on air quality of the combinations of control measures are assessed, and
several significant sources of uncertainty in our forecasts of the air

quality impact of transportation controls are identified.


36

An additional 7 regions, including Springfield, Seattle, Spokane,
Dallas, Mpls-St. Paul, Chicago and Portland, are projected to meet
the air quality standards by 1975 through the use of an inspection/
maintenance system and substantial improvements in transit. The
remaining 19 regions all require hardware retrofits, an inspection/
maintenance program, and/or significant reductions in vehicle usage
to achieve the standards by 1975. However, lead time constraints on
the implementation of major traffic controls and transit improvements,
and on the installation of various emissions hardware controls have
pushed the date of air quality standard attainment beyond 1975 for
these regions.

Of the 19 regions sighted above, only six regions, including
Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, National Capital, Salt Lake City, San Antonio
and New York City (CO only), can achieve the air quality standards
by 1977, but only with the use of emissions control retrofits as well as
major transit improvements and/or other measures that substantially

reduce vehicle use by up to 20 percent.

— The downtown New York City CO problem should be cleaned up in
1977; but the areawide oxidant problem, involving portions of New
York, New Jersey and Connecticut, will require reductions in
emissions areawide which are beyond present expectations for 1977.


24

The low level of transit ridership in the United States is
frequently attributed to America's "love affair'' with the automobile,
but there are more tangible reasons as well. For example, nearly
50 percent of urban area residences are located three or more blocks
from the nearest transit stop, and 30 percent are six or more blocks
from the nearest stop. Transit routes are strongly downtown oriented,
but only about 10 percent of trips go downtown. Transit trips take nearly
twice zs long as auto trips. And, auto parking costs tend to be heavily
subsidized, averaging only $0.75 per day in downtown areas although
commercial rates can exceed $3.00 per day. Clearly, present transit
service in the United States does not offer a very attractive alternative
to the automobile.

There are many ways of increasing the attractiveness of
transit relative to the automobile, Bus travel times can be reduced by
giving buses priority treatment on streets and freeways. The distances
between residences and bus stops can be reduced. Schedule frequencies
can be increased. Suburban and crosstown service can be expanded.
Fares can be reduced, and auto parking or road use charges increased,

There is a growing body of evidence indicating that high

quality transit can attract high levels of ridership, particularly when


EPA-400/9-74-001

THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS

AN EPA WHITE PAPER

by

John Holmes
Joel Horowitz

Robert Reid
Paul Stolpman

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF AIR AND WATER PROGRAMS
WASHINGTON, D.C.

August 1973

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.8. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 90 cents


APPENDIX B

ANNUALIZED INVESTMENT COST OF CONTROL TECHNIQUES
PER CAR PER YEAR

DATE OF PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

1975 1977 1980

VSAD + Lean Idle

-State financed* $ .85 $ .35 $ .09

-Owner financed** 9.20 9.20 9.20
Air Bleed

-State financed 2.25 1.06 -28

-Owner financed 27.57 27.57 27.57
Catalyst (1968-1971)

-State financed 4,27 3.18 1.33

-Owner financed 60.49 60.49 60.49
Catalyst (1972-1974)

-State financed 7.29 6.61 4.65

-Owner financed 52.52 52.52 52,52
I/M Loaded Mode

-State financed 4.50 4.50 4,50
Gasoline Marketing

-Industry financed 3.19 3.19 3.19
State's annual fee to all cars* $21, 80-$22.65 $18. 54-$18. 89 $13. 95-$14, 04

*Assumes investments are financed by the State at 8% and paid off in
5 equal annual payments,
**Assumes consumer financing at 18% paid off in 3 equal annual payments.


32

several small traffic free zones by corridors to which access is not
restricted, or licensing vehicular access to selected areas. The
potential benefits and problems of the various approaches appear to
be similar; increasing the size of the restricted areas and the strin-
gency of ‘estrictions tends to increase the potential air quality improve-
ments but also tends to increase problems of access, circulation, and
peripheral congestion and pollution. There has been no experience
with partial traffic bans in relatively large areas. Many of their
potential problems may be solvable. Thus, programs of experimenta-
tinn with the various types of restrictions could be of considerable
value.

The use of parking restrictions to reduce auto use and
emissions has attracted much recent interest. The only known data
on the effect of parking restrictions on air pollution are from an
experiment in Marseilles, France, where a comprehensive parking
ban in the central city was found to reduce local CO concentrations by
40 percent.

In downtown areas, the total supply of parking spaces
tends to exceed parking demand by about 30 percent. On-street parking

accounts for only about 13 percent of the downtown parking space.


4)
standards for automobiles, trucks, and buses; and Federal new source
performance standards for certain categories of stationary sources.
They also reflect substantial reductions in ‘Gmiasions from new and
existing stationary sources due to present and planned State and local
regulations.

State and local control of stationary source hydrocarbon
emissions can be extremely important. For example, if an air quality
region has a 30 percent stationary source hydrocarbon contribution in
1970, by 1977 a 20 percent reduction in the emissions of these stationary
sources can be as important as a 24 percent reduction in traffic. If the
stationary sources continue to be uncontrolled through 1985, a 20 percent
reduction in their emissions at that time could be equivalent to 100 percent
elimination of the automobile.

One can see from this comparison that stationary source
control is going to be another critical facet of the overall implementation
strategy. The projections of emissions used in the plans assume very
effective stationary source control programs for most of the regions.
The effectiveness of these programs will depend upon the formulation,
promulgation and active enforcement of strong regulations and the
ability of the industry to apply the needed control techniques. Failure
in any of these areas will greatly jeopardize the achievement and
maintenance of the standards. One area of particular concern and

uncertainty is the precise manner in which many of the regulations for


27
a 20 percent reduction in auto use if it were fully implemented in 1976.
In.fact, the system will not be completed until 1983. These produc-
tion and planning problems suggest that although the potential for
reducing auto use through improved transit is large, it may be unreal-
istic to expect reductions greater than 10 to 20 percent by 1977.

The cost of bus transit depends on the detailed character-
istics of the bus system, notably on vehicle occupancies. Transit
buses cost roughly $1.00 per mile to operate compared with $0. 07 per
mile for cars. Hence, a transit system that carries roughly 40 riders
per vehicle round trip will cost about the same as the auto. Higher
occupancy systems might achieve net savings of $100 per rider per
year. However, with low occupancies costs could reach $900 per
commuter per year. There is clearly a potential for achieving sub-
stantial emission reductions at a net cost savings through increased use
of bus transit. However, precise cost estimates will na be possible
until detailed plans for emissions-control oriented transit systems have
been developed.

2, Carpooling

Average automobile occupancy in the United States is about

two persons per car. For work trips auto occupancy is about 1.4 per-

sons per car. Since the average automobile is capable of carrying at


ll
which vehicles should be required to receive maintenance; and a
maintenance phase, in which appropriate corrective maintenance is
performed on the selected vehicles.
1, Light Duty Vehicle I/M

Recent studies have demonstrated that significant reductions
in light duty vehicle emissions can be achieved through enforced I/M pro-
grams. The effectiveness of a program depends primarily upon the
fraction of the vehicle population forced to receive corrective maintenance.
A program of inspecting idle mode emissions is estimated to result in
reductions of 11% for HC and 10% for CO if 50% of the vehicle population
fails the initial inspection and receives corrective maintenance. An
initial failure rate of only 10% provides reductions of 6% for HC and 3%
for CO. A loaded mode inspection should provide a 15% HC and 12% CO
reduction at a 50% initial failure rate and an 8% HC and 4% CO reduction
at a 10% initial failure rate. These reductions are representative of an
annual inspection program. More frequent inspection and maintenance
would be expected to lead to larger average emissions reductions,

Annual emissions inspection in State operated lanes is
estimated to cost less than $2 per vehicle. Maintenance costs observed

in fleet studies of various I/M approaches have been found to lie in the


rend EGHNICAL REPORT DATA

Iastructions on the reverse before completing)

7. REPORT NO,
EPA-400-9-74-001

3, RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION*NO.

4, TITLE AND SUBTITLE

5. REPORT DATE
Aug. 1973 Date of Issue

The Clean Air Act and Transportation Controls:
An EPA White Paper

|6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE

17. AUTHOR(S)

John Holmes, Joel Horowitz, Robert Reid, Paul Stolpn|

]8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.

fan

). PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Policy Analysis, Office of Air and Water

Programs, EPA

Washington, D.C. 20460

70. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

77. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS

13, TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final

14, SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

15, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES:

fic. ABSTRACT

pated from new car emissions standards.
needed additional emissions reductions include m
improvements. By 1977 these measures, taken c

However, the ability of such automobile controls

Implementing the Federal air quality standards in certain cities will
require reductions in automobile emissions greater than those antici-
Methods of achieving the

echanical measures,

such as retrofit, and measures to reduce auto use, such as transit

ollectively, appear

capable of reducing auto emissions by as much as fifty percent.

to achieve satisfactory

air quality in a city is highly dependent on the extent of non-automotive
emissions sources in the city and on initial pollutant concentrations.

17.

KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTORS

}b. DENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS

lc. COSATI Field/Group

‘Air Pollution

Urban Transportation
Automobiles

Smog

Exhaust Emissions

18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
None

19, SECURITY CLASS (This Report}

21. NO. OF PAGES
52

Release Unlimited
None

20, SECURITY CLASS (This page)

22. PRICe

EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)



EPA-450/1-74-007
MONITORING AND AIR QUALITY TRENDS REPORT, 1973
ADDENDUM AND ERRATA
DECEMBER 1974

ADDENDUM

This report is intended to portray recent nationwide air quality
trends and air quality status for the year 1973 for air pollutants
for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) have been
established. The data used in preparation of this report are the
latest available monitoring information reported by the states or
collected by EPA and summarized in the National Air Data Bank (NADB).
It must be pointed out that the majority of these data were collected
in heavily industrialized or populated portions of the country and
as such do not reflect the full impact of major point sources such
as coal-fired utility plants that are located in nonurban areas.

It is estimated that over 97 percent of the monitoring sites were
established to monitor urban pollution levels and only very recent-
ly have the states' monitoring resources and monitoring priorities
been directed to monitoring the effects of large, more isolated
pollutant sources.

There are several additional factors that must be considered
when using this report to interpret the air quality status of any
particular geographical area. First, as explained in the report,
the states' monitoring networks are not yet fully established and,
thus, do not always represent the full geographical coverage required
in assessing air quality. As a consequence, violations of the
air quality standards may be presently undetected in some regions.
For example, on a nationwide basis, the states' implementation plans
propose a,total of 698 continuous sulfur dioxide monitors and 1434
bubblers. As of June 1974, (the cutoff date to prepare summaries
for publication), 350 of the proposed continuous instruments (50
percent) and 1104 of the proposed bubblers (77 percent) were report-
ing at least fragmentary data to the NADB.t There were 59 AQCR's
reporting either no data or insufficient data (less than a valid
quarter for any station) to support even the most tentative appraisal
of the 24-hour standard.

*Moni toring and Air Quality Trends Report, 1973, Table 3-6, p. 65.

tore: stations have been reported to the NADB (422 continuous,
1506 bubblers) but these represent extended networks in certain
AQCR's.


14
program's implementation or in terms of the average annual cost likely
to be incurred by all vehicle owners if the cost of the control program
can be spread to all vehicle owners.

Table 3 sets forth the range of out-of-pocket costs likely to be
incurred by the average vehicle owner in the year of program imple-
mentation. The cost data reflect an assumption that the owners of
vehicles of various ages will be required to pay cash for the installation
of pollution control devices, the inspection and maintenance of the

vehicles and the modification of the service stations servicing all vehicles,

TABLE 3

POSSIBLE CONSUMER COSTS IN YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION

New Cars

Control Devices $160. 00 - $200. 00*
I/M 1,20 - 31, 20**
Gas Station Control 3.20 - 3. 20%#%
TOTAL $164.40 - $234.40
1968 - 1974 Cars
Control Device (Catalyst) $90.00 - $140.00
1/M 1.20- 31.20
Gas Station Control 3.20 - 3.20
TOTAL $94.40 - $174.40
Pre-1968 Cars
Control Device (VSAD or Air Bleed) $30.00 - $59.00
1/M 1,20 - 31.20
Gas Station Control 3.20 - 3.20
TOTAL $34.40 - $93.40

*Incremental cost of control devices over what is presently found on new cars.
**Range of costs reflects the fact that some cars will require maintenance,
others will not.

**kThe average cost per car of controlling gasoline station vapors if the
cost is passed on to the consumer over a 5-year period.