My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. SR 08-08-2011
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2011 - 2020
>
2011
>
08-08-2011
>
5.2. SR 08-08-2011
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/5/2011 9:51:07 AM
Creation date
8/5/2011 9:47:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
8/8/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
i~ <br />i~ <br /> <br />i~ <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />22. Vehicle-related Air Emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic <br />generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect <br />of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. <br />Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW <br />Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. <br />In addition to controlling air pollutants for which there are National Ambient Air <br />Quality Standards, EPA also regulates air toxics. Most air toxics originate from <br />human-made sources, including on-road mobile sources, non-road mobile sources <br />(e.g., airplanes), area sources (e.g., dry cleaners) and stationary sources (e.g., <br />factories). <br />Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the <br />1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S. <br />Environmental Protection Agency regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous <br />air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list in their latest rule on the <br />Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (February 26, 2007) and <br />identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in <br />their Integrated Risk Information System. In addition, EPA identified seven <br />compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the <br />national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers. These are acrolein, benzene,l,3- <br />butadiene, diesel particulate matter, plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM), <br />formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While FHWA considers <br />these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and maybe <br />adjusted in consideration of future EPA rules. <br />The 2007 EPA rule mentioned above requires controls that will dramatically <br />decrease MSAT emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to <br />an FHWA analysis using EPA's MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity increases <br />by 145 percent as assumed, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual <br />emission rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050. <br />Air toxics analysis is a continuing area of research. While much work has been done <br />to assess the overall health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In <br />particular, the tools and techniques for assessing project-specific health outcomes <br />as a result of lifetime MSAT exposure remain limited. These limitations impede the <br />ability to evaluate how the potential health risks posed by MSAT exposure should be <br />factored into project-level decision-making within the context of the National <br />Environmental Policy Act. The FHWA will continue to monitor the developing <br />research in this emerging field. <br />Because of the uncertainties outlined above, a quantitative assessment of the effects <br />of air toxic emissions impacts on human health cannot be made at the project level. <br />While available tools do allow us to reasonably predict relative emissions changes <br />between alternatives for larger projects, the amount of MSAT emissions from each <br />of the study scenarios and MSAT concentrations or exposures created by each of the <br />' City of Elk River <br />Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review <br />July 2011 <br />Page 71 of 84 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.