American Society of Civil Engineers


Hazardous Air Pollutants Benefits Assessment: Houston-Galveston Case Study


by J. H. Wilson, Jr., (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way, Springfield, VA 22151 E-mail: jim.wilson@pechan.com), M. A. Mullen, (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way, Springfield, VA 22151), D. McKenzie, (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way, Springfield, VA 22151), K. Thesing, (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way, Springfield, VA 22151), A. Bollman, (E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., 5528-B Hempstead Way, Springfield, VA 22151), H. A. Roman, (Industrial Economics, Inc., Cambridge, MA), and J. A. Craig, (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC)
Section: Mobile Source Air Toxics, pp. 285-295, (doi:  http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/40960(320)27)

     Access full text
     Purchase Subscription
     Permissions for Reuse  

Document type: Conference Proceeding Paper
Part of: Transportation Land Use, Planning, and Air Quality
Abstract: Section 812 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to perform periodic, comprehensive analyses of the total costs and total benefits of programs implemented pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA). The first analysis required was a retrospective analysis, addressing the original CAA and covering the period 1970 to 1990. The retrospective was completed in 1997. Section 812 also requires performance of prospective cost-benefit analyses, the first of which was completed in 1999. The prospective analyses address the incremental costs and benefits of the CAAA. The first prospective covered implementation of the CAAA over the period 1990 to 2010. EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is now working on a second prospective study, looking at the period from 1990 to 2020. The analytical plan was reviewed by a statutorily-mandated outside peer review group, the EPA Science Advisory Board Advisory Council for Clean Air Compliance Analysis (SAB Council), and the SAB Council provided comments, which have been incorporated into the technical analysis planning. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of a benzene emissions inventory in the Houston, Texas, area as part of a case study for the second prospective study. After the first prospective 812 study, the SAB Council encouraged EPA to include a hazardous air pollutant (HAP) benefits case study in future efforts to help address limitations in our ability to estimate benefits associated with HAP controls under the CAA.


ASCE Subject Headings:
Air pollution
Case studies
Emissions
Highways and roads
Public health