Scan this mobile 

code to learn more 

about the EPA OIG.

z

EPA Regions Have Considered

Environmental Justice 

When Targeting Facilities for 

Air Toxics Inspections

Report No. 15-P-0101 February 26, 2015

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Air Quality
Report Contributors: Rick Beusse

Erica Hauck

Richard Jones

Julie Narimatsu

Tempestt Woodard

Abbreviations

CAA Clean Air Act 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EJ Environmental justice

FY Fiscal year

HRF High-Risk Facilities

NATA National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment

OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

OIG Office of Inspector General

PM Particulate Matter

Cover photo: A neighborhood in close proximity to an operating power plant. (EPA photo)

Are you aware of fraud, waste or abuse in an

EPA program? 

EPA Inspector General Hotline 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2431T)

Washington, DC 20460

(888) 546-8740

(202) 566-2599 (fax)

OIG_Hotline@epa.gov

More information at www.epa.gov/oig/hotline.html.

EPA Office of Inspector General

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW (2410T)

Washington, DC 20460

(202) 566-2391

www.epa.gov/oig

Subscribe to our Email Updates

Follow us on Twitter @EPAoig

Send us your Project Suggestions
 

 15-P-0101

February 26, 2015

Why We Did This Review

The U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Office of Inspector 

General (OIG), conducted this review 

to determine whether the EPA’s Office 

of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA) and EPA regions 

have targeted facilities in overburdened 

communities, or communities with 

disproportionate impacts, for air toxics 

inspections. Air toxics compliance 

evaluations (commonly referred to as 

inspections) are onsite visits and offsite 

record reviews to determine whether a 

facility is in compliance with laws and 

regulations that limit emissions.

Air toxics are pollutants known or 

suspected to cause cancer or other 

serious health effects. Communities

that experience elevated or 

disproportionate impacts from air toxics 

may be areas of environmental justice 

(EJ) concern. EPA regions are

supposed to consider potential EJ 

concerns and impacts to communities 

when targeting sources for air toxics 

inspections.

This report addresses the 

following EPA goals or 

cross-agency strategies:

 Addressing climate change and 

improving air quality.

 Protecting human health and the 

environment by enforcing laws and 

assuring compliance.

 Working to make a visible 

difference in communities.

Send all inquiries to our 

public affairs office at (202) 566-2391

or visit www.epa.gov/oig.

The full report is at:

www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2015/ 

20150226-15-P-0101.pdf

 

EPA Regions Have Considered

Environmental Justice When Targeting 

Facilities for Air Toxics Inspections

 What We Found

All 10 EPA regions have considered EJ when

targeting facilities for air toxics inspections.

EJ is one of many different factors that 

regions used when deciding where to conduct 

air toxics inspections. Other common factors

that EPA regions used to target air toxics 

inspections included: 

 Cancer risk in the area surrounding a facility.

 Overall emissions from a facility.

 A facility’s compliance history. 

Regions have had limited resources to do air toxics inspections, and these 

factors helped regions prioritize their inspections.

OECA has developed several tools to help regions select air toxics facilities 

for inspection. One tool, the High-Risk Facilities (HRF) list, identifies large 

facilities in areas with elevated cancer risks associated with air toxics. The 

list includes an “EJ Score” for each facility to help regions prioritize which 

facilities to inspect. The most recent HRF list, provided to the regions in 

November 2014, uses EJ information from a relatively new EPA tool, called 

EJSCREEN, to develop the “EJ Score.” EJSCREEN is an online mapping 

and analysis tool developed and issued internally by the EPA to help 

program offices and regions integrate EJ into multiple facets of the 

agency’s work. While regional staff identified several aspects of 

EJSCREEN that limit its usefulness for the targeting of air toxics 

inspections, recent and planned updates to EJSCREEN include 

enhancements that address most of these limitations. 

In addition, OECA has developed new mapping tools that combine data 

from EJSCREEN with data layers from the EPA’s GeoPlatform. These 

tools produce maps that include useful information about the location of 

facilities and also note areas of potential EJ concerns in nearby 

communities. OECA demonstrated these tools to EPA regions and has 

worked with two regions to develop individualized mapping tools based on 

specific regional needs. We believe that these new mapping tools will help 

regions target potentially overburdened communities for air toxics 

inspections. 

We make no recommendations.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Inspector General

At a Glance

The EPA has considered 

EJ in its air toxics facility 

targeting activities, and 

the implementation of 

new tools should 

enhance agency efforts. 
February 26, 2015

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: EPA Regions Have Considered Environmental Justice 

When Targeting Facilities for Air Toxics Inspections

Report No. 15-P-0101

FROM: Arthur A. Elkins Jr. 

TO: Cynthia Giles, Assistant Administrator

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This report represents the opinion of the OIG and does 

not necessarily represent the final EPA position. 

Because this report contains no recommendations, you are not required to respond to this report. 

However, if you submit a response, it will be posted on the OIG’s public website, along with our 

memorandum commenting on your response. Your response should be provided as an Adobe PDF file 

that complies with the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as 

amended. The final response should not contain data that you do not want to be released to the public; 

if your response contains such data, you should identify the data for redaction or removal along with 

corresponding justification. 

We will post this report to our website at http://www.epa.gov/oig. 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
EPA Regions Have Considered Environmental Justice 15-P-0101

When Targeting Facilities for Air Toxics Inspections

Table of Contents

Purpose...................................................................................................................... 1

Background ............................................................................................................... 1

Responsible Offices.................................................................................................. 3

Scope and Methodology........................................................................................... 3

OECA Has Developed Guidance and Tools to Assist 

EPA Regional Air Toxics Targeting Efforts ....................................................... 4

All EPA Regions Have Considered EJ in Their Air Toxics Targeting Efforts........ 5

EJSCREEN v2.0 Should Enhance Targeting for Air Toxics Inspections............... 6

Using EJSCREEN Data in Combination With the GeoPlatform Tool

Is a Promising Practice ....................................................................................... 9

Conclusions............................................................................................................... 11

Appendix

A Distribution ....................................................................................................... 12
15-P-0101 1

Purpose

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Inspector General 

(OIG), conducted this review to determine whether the EPA’s Office of 

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) and EPA regions have targeted

facilities in overburdened communities, or communities with disproportionate 

impacts, for Clean Air Act inspections for air toxics.

Background

Air toxics are pollutants known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious 

health effects, such as reproductive effects, birth defects, or adverse 

environmental effects. The EPA estimates that 13.8 million Americans live in 

communities where the estimated individual risk of getting cancer due to a 

lifetime exposure to outdoor air toxics exceeds 1 in 10,000. This rate is double the 

average national cancer risk from air toxics in the United States.

1

Air toxics emitted from sources in a community may remain close to that 

community, rather than dispersing over a larger area. This may result in elevated 

concentrations of air toxics in the community’s air. In communities with multiple 

sources of air toxics emissions, or where sources do not comply with air toxics 

regulations, residents may face increased or disproportionate risks, raising 

concerns about environmental justice (EJ). 

Environmental Justice at EPA

Issued in 1994, Executive Order 12898 directs federal agencies to include EJ as 

part of their mission. Agencies should identify and address disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 

policies and activities on minority and low-income populations. The EPA and 

other federal agencies are required to develop an agencywide EJ strategy.

The EPA’s Plan EJ 2014 is meant to mark the 20th anniversary of the signing of 

Executive Order 12898 and is the agency’s overarching strategy for advancing EJ. 

Issued in 2011, Plan EJ 2014 is the EPA’s comprehensive and cross-cutting 

strategy for incorporating EJ principles into the agency’s programs, policies and 

activities. Plan EJ 2014 includes the following definitions:

 EJ is the “fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people 

regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the 

development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.”

 

1 The average national cancer risk from air toxics in the United States is 50 in 1 million, or 1 in 20,000, according to 

the EPA’s most recent National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment.
15-P-0101 2

 Fair treatment means that “no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, including those 

resulting from the negative environmental consequences of industrial, 

governmental, and commercial operations or programs and policies.”

The EPA developed the term “overburdened community” to better capture the 

concept of EJ within communities. According to Plan EJ 2014, an overburdened 

community is a minority, low-income, tribal or indigenous population that could 

experience “disproportionate environmental harms and risks as a result of greater 

vulnerability to environmental hazards.” This vulnerability may be due to 

negative (or the lack of positive) environmental, health, economic or social 

conditions.

Advancing EJ Through Compliance and Enforcement

One of the five cross-agency focus areas in Plan EJ 2014 is “Advancing EJ 

through Compliance and Enforcement.” The goal of this focus area is to “fully 

integrate consideration of environmental justice concerns into the planning and 

implementation of OECA’s program strategies, case targeting strategies, and 

development of remedies in enforcement actions to benefit [overburdened] 

communities.” 

OECA facilitates the process of advancing EJ through compliance and 

enforcement within the EPA. Every 3 years, OECA selects a limited number of 

high-priority national environmental and compliance problems to address through 

concentrated, nationwide enforcement efforts. In selecting these areas of focus, 

OECA looks for important environmental and public health problems that are 

caused, at least in part, by widespread failure of regulated sectors to comply with 

federal environmental laws. These are areas where OECA believes a concentrated 

federal enforcement effort can make a difference in correcting violations and 

reducing pollution. The selected areas of focus are called “National Enforcement 

Initiatives.” 

One of OECA’s National Enforcement Initiatives for fiscal years (FYs) 

2011–2013, and continuing for FYs 2014–2016, is the National Air Toxics 

Compliance and Enforcement Initiative. The National Air Toxics Compliance and 

Enforcement Initiative’s goal is to reduce illegal emissions of toxic air pollutants 

from leaks, flares and excess emissions at facilities that have a significant impact 

on air quality and health in communities. The initiative notes that many of these 

types of emissions are often underestimated by facilities and regulators. Also, 

many of these facilities may be located in areas that experience disproportionate 

and adverse impacts. The initiative directs the EPA to incorporate EJ into all 

activities as described, including the targeting of facilities. Accordingly, the 

National Air Toxics Compliance and Enforcement Initiative called for each region 
15-P-0101 3

to develop a plan for FYs 2011–2013 that considered EJ in targeting stationary 

sources2for air toxics inspections. 

Responsible Offices

The EPA offices with primary responsibility for the issues discussed in this report are 

EPA regions and two OECA offices: the Office of Compliance and the Office of 

Environmental Justice. EPA regions are responsible for targeting and inspecting air 

toxics facilities in areas of potential EJ concern within their states and territories. The 

Office of Compliance is responsible for developing guidance and tools to assist EPA 

regional air toxics targeting efforts. The Office of Environmental Justice works to 

protect communities overburdened by air toxics pollution by integrating EJ into EPA 

programs, policies and activities. 

Scope and Methodology

We conducted our review from March through December 2014. We conducted 

this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. Those standards require that we obtain sufficient, appropriate 

evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on 

our objective. We believe the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our objective.

To answer our objective, we reviewed relevant laws, regulations and executive 

orders, including:

 The 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended. 

 The National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.

 Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice 

in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations.

 A 2011 White House Memorandum of Understanding on Executive 

Order 12898.

We also reviewed the following EPA guidance documents pertaining to air toxics 

inspections and EJ:

 Performance Based Strategy for the Air Toxics National Compliance and 

Enforcement Priority, FYs 2008–2010.

 Area Source Rule Implementation Guidance, June 2010.

 CAA Stationary Source Compliance Monitoring Strategy, 

September 2010.

 

2 A stationary source is a place or object from which pollutants are released that do not result from an internal 

combustion engine for transportation purposes, or from a nonroad engine or vehicle. Stationary sources include

power plants, petroleum refineries, chemical plants, food-processing plants, large factories, gas stations, incinerators 

and pipelines.
15-P-0101 4

 Air Toxics Compliance and Enforcement Initiative, FYs 2011–2013.

 Memorandums from the EPA Deputy Administrator concerning 

EJ analysis tools, April and October 2012.

 Plan EJ 2014 and associated documents, including National Environmental 

Justice Advisory Council Comments to Plan EJ 2014 and Plan EJ 2014 

Progress Report.

 Action Development Process: Guidance on Considering Environmental 

Justice During the Development of an Action, January 2014.

 EPA Strategic Plan, FYs 2011–2015.

To determine whether OECA and EPA regions consider EJ concerns in their 

targeting efforts for air toxics inspections, we reviewed the targeting plans each 

region developed under the National Air Toxics Enforcement and Compliance 

Initiative. Our review was limited to up-front targeting activities that regions 

undertook. We did not review records or data from completed facility inspections. 

We interviewed staff and managers from OECA’s Office of Compliance and 

Office of Environmental Justice. We also interviewed enforcement staff and 

managers from each of the 10 EPA regions. 

In addition, we reviewed and assessed tools that EPA headquarters has developed 

and provided to the regions to help them target air toxics inspections in areas of 

EJ concern, including EJSCREEN, EJSCREEN v2.0,

3

and GeoPlatform. We also 

attended webinar demonstrations on GeoPlatform offered by Region 1 and 

OECA’s Office of Compliance. The webinars demonstrated how GeoPlatform 

can be used in conjunction with EJSCREEN to target inspections.

OECA Has Developed Guidance and Tools to Assist EPA Regional 

Air Toxics Targeting Efforts 

OECA assists EPA regional air toxics targeting efforts by developing guidance 

and tools that can be used by regions to make their targeting decisions. As noted 

above, OECA developed the National Air Toxics Compliance and Enforcement 

Initiative to provide guidance on targeting inspections for air toxics for the 

planning cycles FYs 2011–2013 and FYs 2014–2016. The initiative requires 

regions to consider EJ in their targeting efforts. Under this initiative, regions 

commit to conducting a specific number of air toxics inspections each year, but 

there is no requirement to conduct a certain number of inspections in areas of EJ 

concern. The requirement is that regions consider EJ when making decisions 

about where to invest their limited inspection resources.

In addition, OECA’s Office of Compliance developed a tool called the High-Risk 

Facilities (HRF) list to help regions target their air toxics inspections. This list 

 

3

In this report, EJSCREEN refers to the first version of EJSCREEN that was released in 2012. EJSCREEN v2.0 

refers to an updated version that was released for internal EPA use in September 2014. EJSCREEN v2.0 replaces 

EJSCREEN.
15-P-0101 5

identifies over 6,000 major source4facilities located in counties that have census 

tracts with more than a 1-in-1-million cancer risk from air toxics emissions from 

point sources. The Office of Compliance included an “EJ score” for each facility 

on the list, which was generated using an EJ screening tool no longer in use. EJ 

scores range from 1 to 10. Facilities with EJ scores of 1, 2 or 3 indicate areas with 

the greatest potential for EJ concern.5 The Office of Compliance first provided the 

HRF list to the regions in FY 2011, and provided an updated list in FY 2012. In 

November 2014, the Office of Compliance released a new version of the HRF list 

that incorporates EJ-related information from a newer EJ screening tool called 

ESCREEN. This new HRF list is discussed in more detail below.

The Office of Compliance is also working to develop additional mapping tools to 

enhance EPA regional targeting efforts. These tools are also discussed in detail 

below. 

All EPA Regions Have Considered EJ in Their Air Toxics 

Targeting Efforts

All EPA regions have considered EJ in their targeting efforts for air toxics 

inspections of stationary sources, as called for in the EPA’s FY 2011–2013 

National Air Toxics Compliance and Enforcement Initiative.

6 However, the 

methodology and EJ-related information used to target the inspections vary by 

region. Regions reported using EJ scores from the HRF list in their targeting 

efforts, a relatively new EPA tool called EJSCREEN, and/or local knowledge 

about areas of potential EJ concern. While all regions included EJ in their 

targeting efforts, EJ was only one factor among many that regions used to decide 

which facilities to inspect. Other factors considered in the targeting included: 

cancer risk near the facility, the amount of air toxics emitted from the facility, and 

the compliance history of the facility. 

EPA regions conduct a relatively small number of the total air toxics inspections 

conducted in the United States. Most air toxics inspections are conducted by state 

and local air agencies, which are overseen by EPA regions. Currently, there is no 

requirement that states target facilities in areas of EJ concern. EPA regional staff 

told us that states generally have not targeted air toxics sources specifically in 

areas of EJ concern because states are required to inspect all major sources every 

2 years and other large sources (called synthetic minors) every 5 years. Because 

states are supposed to inspect all large facilities on a regular basis, EPA regions 

have not required states to target stationary sources specifically for EJ. 

 

4 A major source has actual or potential emissions that meet or exceed the major source threshold for its location.

The major source threshold for any “air pollutant” is 100 tons/year (the “default value”). Major source thresholds for 

air toxics are 10 tons/year for a single pollutant or 25 tons/year for any combination of pollutants. 

5 EJ scores were based on the highest risk decile census tract within 2/3-of-a-mile radius. An EJ score of 1 means 

the facility is within 2/3 of a mile of a census tract whose EJ score is among the highest 10 percent within its state.

6 OECA has decided to carry over the National Air Toxics Compliance and Enforcement Initiative to 

FYs 2014–2016.
15-P-0101 6

EJSCREEN v2.0 Should Enhance Targeting for Air Toxics Inspections

In 2012, EPA headquarters released EJSCREEN to help EPA program offices and 

regions incorporate EJ into their work. EJSCREEN is an EJ mapping and analysis 

tool available to all EPA employees. The tool was developed in response to the 

EPA’s commitment in Plan EJ 2014 to develop a consistent nationwide screening 

tool for EJ, and has replaced older EJ screening tools. EJSCREEN allows users to 

identify areas of potential EJ concern at the census block group level7using 

demographic information8and 12 environmental indicators. For example, a user 

can enter the address of a facility that emits air toxics, and then obtain 

demographic and environmental data about the census block group where the 

facility is located, as well as information pertaining to surrounding areas. 

The key output of EJSCREEN is called the 

primary EJ Index, which helps the user 

answer the following question:

How much does each location 

contribute to the overall disparity 

we see in environmental scores 

(between demographic groups, 

nationwide)? 

The tool produces a primary EJ Index for 

the census block group of interest for each 

of the 12 environmental indicators. Each 

EJ Index combines one environmental 

indicator with certain demographic 

information to provide a measure of any 

potential disproportionate impacts of that environmental factor. The EPA has 

determined that a block group may be a good candidate for additional EJ review 

when an EJSCREEN analysis for that area shows one or more EJ Indices at or 

above the 80th percentile for the nation. This 80th percentile threshold allows the 

EPA to focus on communities that are of the highest concern. 

The EJSCREEN tool was intended to help the EPA be more effective and 

efficient in understanding where the impacts of existing pollution may be greatest 

and ensure that such areas receive appropriate consideration. Based on feedback 

from regional staff, EJSCREEN is an improvement over previous EJ screening 

tools and is useful for many EJ-related applications. However, the regions 

 

7 A block is the smallest geographic area considered by the U.S. Census Bureau. A block group is a collection of 

blocks. On average, around 40 blocks are aggregated into a block group. Census block groups vary widely in total 

population, geographic area and population density. There are approximately 211,000 block groups in the United 

States. The average population of a block group is about 1,500.

8 The primary demographic information used is an average of the percent that are low-income and the percent that 

are minority, although other demographic information is also available.

Twelve environmental indicators

in the EPA’s EJSCREEN mapping 

and analysis tool

• Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5 Level in Air.

• Ozone Level in Air.

• Diesel Particulate Matter Level in Air.

• Air Toxics Cancer Risk.

• Air Toxics Neurological Hazard Index.

• Air Toxics Respiratory Hazard Index.

• Traffic Proximity and Volume.

• Lead Paint Indicator (percent pre-1960).

• Risk Management Plan Facility Proximity 

and Count.

• Superfund Site Proximity and Count.

• Treatment Storage Disposal Facility 

Proximity and Count.

• Major Direct Dischargers to Water, 

Proximity and Count.
15-P-0101 7

identified three aspects of EJSCREEN that limit its usefulness as a tool for 

conducting up-front targeting for air toxics inspections:

1) EJSCREEN identifies areas of potential EJ concern, but not air toxics 

facilities within those areas.

2) EJSCREEN can only provide EJ Indices for the area surrounding one 

facility at a time; it cannot provide information for multiple facilities at 

once. The user must run the screen for each facility (address) separately, 

which is not feasible for regions that have hundreds or thousands of air 

toxics facilities. 

3) EJSCREEN produces an EJ Index for only one environmental indicator at 

a time. 

In September 2014, the EPA released an updated version of EJSCREEN, referred 

to as EJSCREEN v2.0, for internal EPA use. When fully implemented,9

EJSCREEN v2.0 will include a number of data updates and tool enhancements.10

Based on discussions with the Office of Environmental Justice and our review of 

a pre-release version of EJSCREEN v2.0, we believe the updated version will 

address two of the above concerns. Specifically, EJSCREEN v2.0 will:

 Have the capability to overlay Envirofacts11 facility locations (including 

known air toxics facility sites from the Toxics Release Inventory data) 

on one screen.

 Provide information for multiple facilities at once. This version will also 

include a batch processing tool that allows users to process thousands of 

locations simultaneously. 

These two new functions will better enable the regions to use the EJSCREEN tool 

to identify potential facilities to inspect based on EJ considerations. Regarding the 

third limitation, EJSCREEN v2.0 will not have any new capability to produce an 

EJ Index that incorporates more than one environmental indicator.

EJSCREEN v2.0 relies heavily on data from the EPA’s National-Scale Air Toxics 

Assessment (NATA) to estimate risks from air toxics in communities. The NATA 

is an assessment tool through which the EPA conducts modeling to estimate 

 

9 Although the EPA has released EJSCREEN v2.0 for internal use, not all planned enhancements are currently 

available. For example, the batch processing functionality that is planned for EJSCREEN v2.0 is not yet operational.

10 The environmental data categories used to create EJ Indices in EJSCREEN v2.0 remain the same. However, the 

EPA has updated the names of the 12 environmental indicators as follows: PM 2.5, Ozone, NATA Diesel PM, 

NATA Cancer Risk, NATA Neuro Hazard Index, NATA Respiratory Hazard Index, Traffic Proximity, Lead Paint 

Indicator, RMP Proximity, NPL Proximity, TSDF Proximity, and Water Discharger Proximity.

11 Envirofacts is a single point of access to select EPA environmental data. The Envirofacts website 

(http://www.epa.gov/enviro/facts/ef_overview.html) provides access to several EPA databases containing

information about environmental activities that may affect air, water and land anywhere in the United States.
15-P-0101 8

health risks, including cancer risks, from air toxics based on emissions data from 

the EPA’s National Emissions Inventory. The EPA collaborates with state, local 

and tribal agencies to obtain information that serves as the basis for the NATA. 

Although not identified by the regions as a limitation, the most recent NATA was 

issued by the EPA in 2011 and is based on air toxics emissions data from 2005. 

Thus, the air toxics risk data in EJSCREEN v2.0 is based on emissions data that is 

almost 10 years old. The EPA is currently updating the NATA with air toxics 

emissions data from 2011 and plans to release the updated NATA to the public in 

early 2015. OECA plans to update EJSCREEN v2.0 after the newer NATA data 

are released.

Figure 1 provides an example of EJSCREEN v2.0’s mapping output. Areas in 

yellow, orange and red represent areas that warrant additional review based on air 

toxics cancer risk data and selected demographic information. The blue dots 

represent the location of air emission facilities12 incorporated into 

EJSCREEN v2.0 from Envirofacts.

Figure 1: Example of EJSCREEN v2.0 output for environmental indicator “NATA Cancer Risk,” 

showing the locations of air emissions facilities from Envirofacts a

Source: EJSCREEN v2.0 analysis conducted by the OIG. 

a Yellow denotes areas in the 80th to 90th percentile; orange the 90th to 95th percentile; and red the 95th to 100th

percentile. The blue dots represent the location of air emissions facilities that are tracked in the EPA’s 

Envirofacts database.

 

12 Note that the air emissions facility data layer available in EJSCREEN v2.0 contains all types of air emissions 

facilities from Envirofacts, and not just air toxics facilities. There is no data layer specifically for air toxics facilities.
15-P-0101 9

The EPA plans to release EJSCREEN v2.0 to the public in December 2014. The 

Office of Environmental Justice and EPA regions have been working with states 

to prepare for EJSCREEN v2.0’s public release, and to explain how the tool 

works and the EPA uses the tool. Once EJSCREEN v2.0 is released publicly, state 

and local agencies will be able to use the tool in a manner similar to the way EPA 

regions use it to consider EJ in their targeting efforts for air toxics inspections.

Using EJSCREEN Data in Combination With the GeoPlatform 

Tool Is a Promising Practice

OECA is beginning to use the agency’s GeoPlatform tool in conjunction with 

EJSCREEN data to produce better air toxics targeting tools for EPA regions. 

The EPA’s GeoPlatform is a Web-based geographic information system tool that 

the agency launched in May 2012. The GeoPlatform allows EPA staff to build 

custom maps by adding any of the thousands of available data layers to 

GeoPlatform base maps. It also allows agency staff to easily share completed 

mapping products with other EPA users. 

Using GeoPlatform allows OECA and EPA regions to develop more detailed 

maps to meet specific regional needs and include information that is not available 

in EJSCREEN, such as a composite view of selected environmental stressors in a 

given area. OECA recently developed two GeoPlatform targeting tools for air 

toxics: 

 Storage Tanks Tool—OECA combined GeoPlatform data layers from the 

EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation’s National Emissions Inventory with 

data from the Office of Air and Radiation’s Risk and Technology Review 

database to identify petroleum storage tank facilities by Standard 

Industrial Classification code. OECA then added EJSCREEN information 

on air toxics cancer risk to show the percentiles for each block group. The 

Storage Tanks Tool is a national map currently available to EPA regions.

 Model-to-Monitor Tool—OECA compared monitoring data from 

thousands of ambient air monitors around the nation to the Office of Air 

and Radiation’s modeling data available for those locations. In many 

cases, the monitored concentrations were significantly higher than the 

modeled risks. OECA created a GeoPlatform map of monitor locations, 

the locations of facilities within 30 kilometers of the monitors, and the 

wind direction on the days when the highest concentrations of air toxics

were measured, to help EPA regions identify where the emissions may 

have originated. OECA also included EJSCREEN percentiles for air toxics 

cancer risk for nearby census block groups. The Model-to-Monitor Tool is 

a national map currently available to EPA regions. 
15-P-0101 10

In addition, in November 2014, OECA released an updated version of the HRF 

list, which includes every known major source of air emissions located in a 

county with a census tract with greater than a 1-in-1-million cancer risk from 

stationary source emissions. The updated list identifies facilities that are located in 

areas with potential EJ concerns. Specifically, the list includes an “EJ Score” for 

each facility that reflects the number of EJ Indices from EJSCREEN for which a 

facility scored at or above the 80th percentile. OECA has added the updated HRF 

list as a data layer to the GeoPlatform.

OECA has begun outreach activities with individual regions to demonstrate the 

GeoPlatform tools and to discuss region-specific mapping needs. For example, 

OECA has partnered with Region 6 to develop a map of high-risk flare facilities,

since flaring is an important issue in that region. Similarly, OECA has partnered 

with Region 1’s enforcement staff and geographic information specialists to 

combine EJSCREEN data with GeoPlatform data layers to include the following 

data in a single online map:

 Census block groups meeting the 80th percentile EJSCREEN threshold for 

any environmental indicator.

 Locations of storage tanks, gas processing plants and compressor stations.

 Cancer and noncancer data from the National-Scale Air Toxics 

Assessment (with special emphasis on benzene and formaldehyde 

emissions).

 The boundaries of ozone nonattainment areas. 

 Wind and stream data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration.

 Population density per square mile.

 Educational institutions.

 Percent of population below the poverty level by tract.

 Percent of population over 64 years by tract.

 Percent of population under 5 years by tract.

 Percent of minority population by tract. 

 Tribal boundaries. 

 Federal Registry Service facility data. 

By combining EJSCREEN data with GeoPlatform data layers, Region 1 has 

produced a regional map view of leaking storage tanks in areas of potential EJ 

concern that would not be available to regions using EJSCREEN (or EJSCREEN 

v2.0) alone. Figure 2 provides an example of the mapping done by Region 1 that 

uses EJSCREEN data in conjunction with GeoPlatform data layers for targeting 

purposes. The purple areas represent census block groups meeting the 80th

percentile EJSCREEN threshold for any of the 12 environmental indicators in 

EJSCREEN. The dots on the map represent individual facilities or storage tanks. 
15-P-0101 11

Figure 2: Example of GeoPlatform data layers used in conjunction with EJSCREEN data

Source: GeoPlatform map generated by Region 1’s CAA Inspection Targeting Group, July 2014. 

a The checked boxes on the left indicate that only three of the data layers used to create this map are selected 

or “turned on.” Blue dots indicate storage tank locations. Red and orange dots indicate Region 1’s targeted air 

toxics facilities based on the region’s GeoPlatform mapping analysis. Region 1 has completed inspections of 

these facilities.

In our view, the development of tools that integrate EJSCREEN data with 

GeoPlatform data layers is a promising practice that will help EPA regions more 

effectively identify areas of potential EJ concern, and help regions consider EJ 

and risks to communities during targeting efforts. OECA demonstrated these new 

tools to EPA regions at a meeting of regional air enforcement managers in 

September 2014.

Conclusions

All 10 EPA regions have considered EJ when targeting facilities for air toxics 

inspections, and EPA continues to update and advance important tools to support 

regional targeting efforts. Through the modifications made to EJSCREEN and the 

new GeoPlatform mapping tools being developed by OECA, the agency is taking 

important and proactive steps to enhance the ability of EPA regions to consider 

areas of EJ concern when targeting air toxics inspections. We make no 

recommendations.
15-P-0101 12

Appendix A

Distribution

Office of the Administrator

Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Agency Follow-Up Official (the CFO)

Agency Follow-Up Coordinator

General Counsel

Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations 

Associate Administrator for Public Affairs

Regional Administrators, Regions 1–10 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Environmental Justice, Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance

Director, Office of Compliance, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Audit Follow-Up Coordinator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance

Audit Follow-Up Coordinators, Regions 1–10