Total Projected Emissions from New Fireplaces, 2016 

Prepared for: 

John Crouch 

Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association 

901 North Moore Street, Suite 600 

Arlington, VA 22209 

Prepared by: 

James E. Houck and Jeremy R. Clark 

OMNI Environmental Services, Inc. 

13327 NE Airport Way 

Portland, OR 97230 

February 3, 2010 
Table of Contents 

Section .............................................................................................................................. Page 

List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... ii 

List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... iii 

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................1 

Methodology .........................................................................................................................1 

Results ...................................................................................................................................3 

Summary Figures .................................................................................................................23 

References ............................................................................................................................33

i 
List of Tables

Table ................................................................................................................................. Page 

Table 1. AHS National Data 1997-2007 ..............................................................................4 

Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 .......................................................................6 

Table 3. Proportion of Wood and Gas Fireplaces ...............................................................21 

Table 4. Multiple Ownership Factor ...................................................................................21 

Table 5. References for “Never Used” Wood-Burning Fireplace 

without Insert Use Category ..........................................................................................21 

Table 6. Total Particulate Emissions for New Construction Houses 

with Wood-Burning Fireplaces without Inserts Emitted in 2016 ..................................22 

Table 7. Total Particulate Emissions for New Construction Houses 

with Wood-Burning Fireplaces without Inserts Emitted in 2016, 

Sensitivity Analysis, Gas-Fired Fireplace Proportion of New 

Fireplaces Increased from 65.43% to 75% ....................................................................22 

ii 
iii 

List of Figures 

Figure ............................................................................................................................... Page 

Figure 1. Usable Fireplaces in Occupied Homes, 1997-2007 ............................................23 

Figure 2. Usable Fireplaces, National and Metropolitan ....................................................24 

Figure 3. U.S. Fireplaces without Inserts Used for Heating, 1997-2007 ............................25 

Figure 4. Fireplaces without Inserts Used for Heating, National and Metropolitan ...........26 

Figure 5. Percent of Completed New Single-Family Houses with Fireplaces ...................27 

Figure 6. Number of Fireplaces in Completed New Single-Family Houses ......................28 

Figure 7. Proportion of Total Fireplaces without Inserts That Are Wood-Fueled ..............29 

Figure 8. Proportion of Total Fireplaces without Inserts That Are Gas-Fueled .................30 

Figure 9. Projected Annual Single-Family Housing Starts .................................................31 

Figure 10. Fireplace Ownership in New Construction .......................................................32 

Figure 11. Wood-Burning Fireplace Usage in New Construction ......................................32 
Introduction 

OMNI Environmental Services (OMNI) was contracted by the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue 

Association (HPBA) to project annual particulate emissions in 2016 from new solid fuel-burning 

fireplaces five years after a new NSPS was in place. For the purposes of this calculation it was 

assumed that the new NSPS would be completed during 2011 and the five-year sum of total new 

solid fuel-burning fireplace construction in the years 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were 

taken into consideration. The use of both cordwood and manufactured wax-fiber firelogs was 

taken into account. Projected values were calculated using the emission factors of 5.1 g/Kg 

(Phase 2, fireplace voluntary program) and 11.3 g/Kg (baseline) for cordwood and a literature 

value of 21.2 g/Kg for firelogs. Key data were obtained from American Housing Surveys, U.S. 

Department of Energy Surveys, HPBA consumer use surveys, HPBA manufacturer shipment 

records, various state, local and regional residential wood combustion surveys, and fireplace 

related reports and publications that are in the public domain. An outline of the calculations and 

assumptions, a list of references, intermediary data, and final results are provided here. 

Methodology 

• The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Housing Survey data for 2007 were used to determine 

the percent of usable fireplaces in new construction homes (i.e. homes built within the past 

four years). 

• The average proportion of gas fireplaces in the United States was determined99-103. 

• It was assumed that the overwhelming majority of fireplace inserts are installed in older 

homes. 

• The average proportion of gas fireplaces was subtracted from the usable fireplaces in new 

construction homes to yield the percent of usable wood fireplaces without inserts in new 

construction homes. 

• The U.S. Census Bureau’s American Housing Survey data for 2007 were used to determine 

the percent of fireplaces without inserts used for heating in new construction homes. 

• The gas fireplace use preference factor (that is, a factor considering the higher use rate of 

gas fireplaces than wood-burning fireplaces) was determined110. 

• The average proportion of gas fireplaces was multiplied by the gas fireplace use preference 

factor to determine the fraction of fireplaces in use that were gas. This value was then 

subtracted from the percent of all fireplaces without inserts used for heating in new 

construction homes to determine the percent of wood-burning fireplaces without inserts 

used for heating in new construction homes. 

• The percent of wood-burning fireplaces without inserts used for heating in new construction 

homes was subtracted from the percent of usable wood fireplaces without inserts in new 

construction homes to determine the percent of wood fireplaces without inserts either used 

for aesthetics or not used in new construction homes. 

1 
• The average fraction of wood fireplaces without inserts that are never used was 

determined104-108,111-114. 

• The average fraction of wood fireplaces without inserts that are never used was multiplied 

by the percent of usable wood fireplaces without inserts in new construction homes to 

determine the percent of wood fireplaces without inserts that are never used in new 

construction homes. 

• The percent of wood fireplaces without inserts that are never used in new construction 

homes was subtracted from the percent of wood fireplaces without inserts either used for 

aesthetics or not used in new construction homes to determine the percent of wood 

fireplaces without inserts that are used for aesthetics in new construction homes. 

• The U.S. Census Bureau Construction Reports115 were used to determine the 1996-2005 predownturn ten-year average annual number of new single-family housing starts, the 2000-

2009 ten-year average annual number of new single family housing starts, and a projected 

2011-2016 average annual number of new single-family housing starts based on the slope 

of the curve from 1995-2005 and the number of new starts in 2009 (see Figure 1). 

• Each of the three housing start projections was multiplied by the percent of wood fireplaces 

without inserts used for heating, aesthetics, and not used, respectively, in new construction 

households to determine the annual number of new construction households with wood 

fireplaces without inserts used for heating, used for aesthetics, and not used. 

• Each of the above was multiplied by five years to yield the number of households with 

wood fireplaces without inserts used for heating constructed from 2011-2016, the number 

of households with wood fireplaces without inserts used for aesthetics constructed from 

2011-2016, and the number of households with wood fireplaces without inserts that will be 

unused constructed from 2011-2016. 

• Each of the above was multiplied by a multiple ownership factor of 1.17 (references 108-

110) to yield the projected total number (including multiple ownership) of new 

construction wood fireplaces without inserts used for heating, used for aesthetics, and not 

used from 2011-2016. 

• The total projected number of new construction wood fireplaces without inserts used for 

heating was multiplied by the average annual cordwood use in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts used for heating117, by the average dry mass of cordwood118, and by the 

relevant unit conversion factors to determine the projected annual mass of cordwood 

burned for heating in wood-burning fireplaces without inserts in 2016. 

• The total projected number of new construction wood fireplaces without inserts used for 

aesthetics was multiplied by the fraction of homes that normally use their fireplaces 

without inserts for aesthetics and normally burn cordwood110, by the average annual 

cordwood use in wood-burning fireplaces without inserts used for aesthetics117, by the 

average dry mass of cordwood118, and by the relevant unit conversion factors to determine 

the projected annual mass of cordwood burned for aesthetics in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016. 

2 
3 

• The total projected number of new construction wood fireplaces without inserts used for 

aesthetics was multiplied by the fraction of homes that normally use their fireplaces 

without inserts for aesthetics and normally burn firelogs110, by the average annual number 

of firelogs burned in each wood-burning fireplace without an insert used for aesthetics116, 

by the average dry weight of a firelog116, and by the relevant unit conversion factors to 

determine the projected annual mass of firelogs burned for aesthetics in wood-burning 

fireplaces without inserts in 2016. 

• The projected annual mass of cordwood burned for heating in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016 was multiplied by the Phase II emission factor of 5.1 g/Kg and by 

the relevant unit conversion factors to determine the Phase II projected tons of particles 

emitted by wood-burning fireplaces without inserts used for heating in 2016. 

• The projected annual mass of cordwood burned for heating in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016 was multiplied by the Baseline emission factor132 of 11.3 g/Kg and 

by the relevant unit conversion factors to determine the Baseline projected tons of particles 

emitted by wood-burning fireplaces without inserts used for heating in 2016. 

• The projected annual mass of cordwood burned for aesthetics in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016 was multiplied by the Phase II emission factor of 5.1 g/Kg and by 

the relevant unit conversion factors to determine the Phase II projected tons of particles 

emitted by wood-burning fireplaces without inserts burning cordwood for aesthetics in 

2016. 

• The projected annual mass of cordwood burned for aesthetics in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016 was multiplied by the Baseline emission factor132 of 11.3 g/Kg and 

by the relevant unit conversion factors to determine the Baseline projected tons of particles 

emitted by wood-burning fireplaces without inserts burning cordwood for aesthetics in 

2016. 

• It was assumed that the overwhelming majority of firelog use is aesthetic. 

• The projected annual mass of firelogs burned for aesthetics in wood-burning fireplaces 

without inserts in 2016 was multiplied by a wax-fiber firelog emission factor119 of 21.2 

g/Kg and by the relevant unit conversion factors to determine the projected tons of particles 

emitted by wood-burning fireplaces without inserts burning firelogs for aesthetics in 2016. 

• All of the above calculations were repeated using 75% rather than 65.43% for the gas-fired 

fireplace proportion of new fireplaces. 

Results 

Detailed results of OMNI’s analysis are presented in Tables 1 through 7. 
Table 1. AHS National Data 1997-2007 

Year Characteristic Total 

Fireplace with Insert Fireplace without Insert Usable 

Fireplace 

% Fireplace with Insert 

Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Ma

1997 

TOHU 99,487 143 3,946 372 2,863 82 3,749 418 3,317 31,825 0.14% 3.97% 0.37% 2.88% 0.08

NC 5,848 2 427 18 325 - 379 22 358 2,921 0.03% 7.30% 0.31% 5.56% 0.00

Urban 71,317 32 2,019 171 1,410 42 2,544 274 2,256 22,127 0.04% 2.83% 0.24% 1.98% 0.06

Rural 28,170 111 1,928 202 1,453 40 1,205 144 1,061 9,698 0.39% 6.84% 0.72% 5.16% 0.14

NE 19,484 11 409 38 318 2 330 41 286 5,015 0.06% 2.10% 0.20% 1.63% 0.0

MW 23,951 19 736 71 555 5 570 35 535 6,604 0.08% 3.07% 0.30% 2.32% 0.02

S 34,808 58 1,561 120 1,157 32 1,520 179 1,336 10,983 0.17% 4.48% 0.34% 3.32% 0.09

W 21,245 54 1,240 142 834 43 1,328 163 1,160 9,223 0.25% 5.84% 0.67% 3.93% 0.20

1999 

TOHU 102,803 138 4,321 564 2,928 73 3,753 490 3,228 33,269 0.13% 4.20% 0.55% 2.85% 0.07

NC 5,881 16 415 23 331 5 402 28 371 2,812 0.27% 7.06% 0.39% 5.63% 0.09

Urban 73,259 37 2,225 295 1,414 31 2,535 299 2,216 22,863 0.05% 3.04% 0.40% 1.93% 0.04

Rural 29,544 101 2,096 270 1,514 42 1,218 192 1,012 10,406 0.34% 7.09% 0.91% 5.12% 0.14

NE 19,958 10 418 57 292 - 322 35 287 5,036 0.05% 2.09% 0.29% 1.46% 0.00

MW 24,360 19 844 85 633 3 522 63 455 6,909 0.08% 3.46% 0.35% 2.60% 0.0

S 36,389 53 1,621 211 1,156 37 1,599 181 1,396 11,652 0.15% 4.45% 0.58% 3.18% 0.10

W 22,096 57 1,437 211 848 32 1,311 212 1,089 9,672 0.26% 6.50% 0.95% 3.84% 0.14

2001 

TOHU 106,261 145 4,937 726 4,193 64 4,055 444 3,590 35,097 0.14% 4.65% 0.68% 3.95% 0.06

NC 5,853 11 457 25 432 2 339 7 332 2,830 0.19% 7.81% 0.43% 7.38% 0.03

Urban 79,146 61 2,840 395 2,430 33 2,985 285 2,690 25,818 0.08% 3.59% 0.50% 3.07% 0.04

Rural 27,115 84 2,097 332 1,763 31 1,071 159 900 9,278 0.31% 7.73% 1.22% 6.50% 0.1

NE 20,321 12 517 72 440 2 367 46 321 5,349 0.06% 2.54% 0.35% 2.17% 0.0

MW 24,758 15 868 112 755 3 622 47 573 7,266 0.06% 3.51% 0.45% 3.05% 0.0

S 38,068 41 1,987 246 1,734 30 1,629 163 1,463 12,238 0.11% 5.22% 0.65% 4.56% 0.08

W 23,115 77 1,565 295 1,264 30 1,437 188 1,233 10,244 0.33% 6.77% 1.28% 5.47% 0.13

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total occupied housing units. NC = New construction (≤4 yrs). NE = Northeast, MW = Mi

census regions. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected. 
Table 1. AHS National Data 1997-2007 (cont.) 

Year Characteristic Total 

Fireplace with Insert Fireplace without Insert Usable 

Fireplace 

% Fireplace with Insert 

Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Ma

2003 

TOHU 105,842 139 4,646 679 3,943 52 3,850 510 3,320 35,458 0.13% 4.39% 0.64% 3.73% 0.05

NC 5,691 - 408 21 388 2 358 16 340 2,773 0.00% 7.17% 0.37% 6.82% 0.04

Urban 78,369 49 2,550 390 2,144 26 2,658 329 2,311 25,787 0.06% 3.25% 0.50% 2.74% 0.03

Rural 27,474 89 2,096 289 1,799 26 1,192 181 1,009 9,672 0.32% 7.63% 1.05% 6.55% 0.09

NE 20,133 9 485 82 398 1 364 40 321 5,147 0.04% 2.41% 0.41% 1.98% 0.00

MW 24,488 25 842 110 727 5 597 65 528 7,413 0.10% 3.44% 0.45% 2.97% 0.02

S 38,145 43 1,923 235 1,681 24 1,597 168 1,421 12,642 0.11% 5.04% 0.62% 4.41% 0.06

W 23,077 62 1,396 252 1,137 22 1,292 236 1,050 10,256 0.27% 6.05% 1.09% 4.93% 0.10

2005 

TOHU 108,871 131 5,006 655 4,323 59 4,495 391 4,080 37,804 0.12% 4.60% 0.60% 3.97% 0.05

NC 5,944 3 521 38 480 3 462 18 439 3,013 0.05% 8.77% 0.64% 8.08% 0.05

Urban 81,258 37 2,875 399 2,450 23 3,259 251 2,996 27,813 0.05% 3.54% 0.49% 3.02% 0.03

Rural 27,613 93 2,131 256 1,873 36 1,236 140 1,085 9,991 0.34% 7.72% 0.93% 6.78% 0.13

NE 20,337 14 564 74 486 10 403 30 371 5,472 0.07% 2.77% 0.36% 2.39% 0.05

MW 24,955 22 933 99 829 - 718 70 643 7,925 0.09% 3.74% 0.40% 3.32% 0.00

S 39,722 47 1,901 220 1,673 22 1,834 133 1,686 13,705 0.12% 4.79% 0.55% 4.21% 0.06

W 23,858 47 1,607 263 1,334 27 1,541 157 1,381 10,702 0.20% 6.74% 1.10% 5.59% 0.11

2007 

TOHU 110,692 165 4,755 51 5,308 38,189 0.15% 4.30% 0.05

NC 5,747 8 510 - 443 2,920 0.14% 8.87% 0.00

Urban 82,736 58 2,660 13 3,744 27,988 0.07% 3.22% 0.02

Rural 27,956 107 2,095 38 1,564 10,200 0.38% 7.49% 0.14

NE 20,392 16 606 10 569 5,543 0.08% 2.97% 0.05

MW 25,292 26 939 3 763 7,918 0.10% 3.71% 0.01

S 40,609 52 1,756 21 2,147 13,888 0.13% 4.32% 0.05

W 24,400 71 1,454 18 1,829 10,840 0.29% 5.96% 0.07

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total occupied housing units. NC = New construction (≤4 yrs). NE = Northeast, MW = Mi

census regions. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected. 
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 

City Year Characteristic Total 

Fireplace with Insert Fireplace without Insert Usable 

Fireplace 

% Fireplace with Insert 

Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main Other Parallel Supplem. Main 

Anaheim-Santa Anna, CA 1994 

TOHU 851.5 0.5 19.9 2.0 197.4 488.5 0.06% 2.34% 0.23% 

NC 44.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 19.8 31.4 0.00% 1.14% 0.00% 

SA1 85.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 9.9 38.9 0.00% 3.06% 0.00% SA2 69.6 0.0 5.6 0.0 7.6 26.1 0.00% 8.05% 0.00% SA3 53.7 0.0 0.9 0.0 7.2 29.5 0.00% 1.68% 0.00% 

2002 

TOHU 937.5 0.0 32.1 13.1 19.1 0.8 54.1 8.5 45.4 531.6 0.00% 3.42% 1.40% 2.04% 0.09% 

NC 38.1 0.0 3.2 1.5 1.7 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.9 29.5 0.00% 8.40% 3.94% 4.46% 0.00% 

SA1 86.6 0.0 1.2 0.3 0.9 0.0 5.0 0.8 4.2 37.4 0.00% 1.39% 0.35% 1.04% 0.00% SA2 76.9 0.0 1.5 0.3 1.1 0.0 1.5 0.3 1.2 21.6 0.00% 1.95% 0.39% 1.43% 0.00% SA3 57.1 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 3.0 0.6 2.4 28.7 0.00% 2.10% 0.00% 2.10% 0.00% 

Atlanta, GA 

1996 

TOHU 1306.3 2.9 53.4 2.3 280.0 686.7 0.22% 4.09% 0.18% 

NC 135.6 0.0 7.3 0.0 59.4 112.7 0.00% 5.38% 0.00% 

SA1 157.4 0.0 0.4 0.4 5.7 46.5 0.00% 0.25% 0.25% SA2 219.4 0.3 5.4 0.3 10.4 95.1 0.14% 2.46% 0.14% SA3 205.2 0.0 7.8 0.0 71.3 123.7 0.00% 3.80% 0.00% 

2004 

TOHU 1595.8 1.2 82.7 13.3 65.3 0.9 118.4 10.2 108.2 924.2 0.08% 5.18% 0.83% 4.09% 0.06% 

NC 186.2 0.0 11.5 1.7 9.8 0.0 21.1 1.1 20.0 142.0 0.00% 6.18% 0.91% 5.26% 0.00% 

SA1 163.5 0.0 5.1 2.1 3.0 0.0 4.2 1.2 3.0 43.6 0.00% 3.12% 1.28% 1.83% 0.00% SA2 253.9 0.4 8.9 2.2 6.7 0.0 15.0 3.0 12.0 111.8 0.16% 3.51% 0.87% 2.64% 0.00% SA3 231.9 0.0 8.8 1.2 7.6 0.0 13.8 1.6 12.2 157.4 0.00% 3.79% 0.52% 3.28% 0.00% 

Baltimore, MD 

1998 

TOHU 920.1 0.0 39.9 4.7 29.1 0.0 24.5 3.3 21.2 291.3 0.00% 4.34% 0.51% 3.16% 0.00% 

NC 45.6 0.0 5.3 0.3 3.8 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.1 25.9 0.00% 11.62% 0.66% 8.33% 0.00% 

SA1 229.5 0.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 21.9 0.00% 0.31% 0.31% 0.00% 0.00% SA2 284.6 0.0 10.8 1.5 7.3 0.0 5.5 1.0 4.5 84.4 0.00% 3.79% 0.53% 2.57% 0.00% SA3 172.2 0.0 11.1 0.5 8.2 0.0 7.8 0.7 7.1 75.3 0.00% 6.45% 0.29% 4.76% 0.00% 

2007 

TOHU 1012.3 0.0 64.5 0.0 47.9 368.0 0.00% 6.37% 0.00% 

NC 26.7 0.0 4.1 0.0 3.5 17.4 0.00% 15.36% 0.00% 

SA1 241.4 0.0 3.5 0.0 4.1 31.1 0.00% 1.45% 0.00% SA2 310.0 0.0 14.7 0.0 15.0 108.1 0.00% 4.74% 0.00% SA3 190.8 0.0 13.0 0.0 15.5 89.9 0.00% 6.81% 0.00% 

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected. 
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Birmingham, AL 1998 

TOHU 358.8 0.2 19.5 1.3 14.8 0.3 21.6 3.6 18.0 149.4 0.06% 5.43% 0.36% 4.12% 0.08

NC 25.8 0.2 3.1 0.2 2.6 0.0 2.2 0.2 2.0 18.6 0.78% 12.02% 0.78% 10.08% 0.00

SA1 100.9 0.0 2.9 0.2 2.3 0.0 5.9 2.3 3.6 24.6 0.00% 2.87% 0.20% 2.28% 0.00SA2 165.8 0.2 8.9 0.7 6.5 0.2 11.6 0.9 10.7 75.0 0.12% 5.37% 0.42% 3.92% 0.12SA3 52.0 0.0 4.7 0.2 3.8 0.1 2.4 0.1 2.4 34.5 0.00% 9.04% 0.38% 7.31% 0.19

Boston, MA 

1998 

TOHU 1264.2 0.7 19.8 1.8 13.7 0.0 24.2 2.5 21.4 440.1 0.06% 1.57% 0.14% 1.08% 0.00

NC 30.3 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.7 20.0 0.00% 4.62% 0.00% 4.62% 0.00

SA1 228.3 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 27.2 0.00% 0.31% 0.00% 0.31% 0.00SA2 37.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA3 32.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.00% 1.23% 0.00% 1.23% 0.00

2007 

TOHU 1057.1 0.6 23.1 0.0 30.1 394.8 0.06% 2.19% 0.00

NC 14.1 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.00% 15.60% 0.00

SA1 227.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 5.2 31.1 0.00% 0.57% 0.00SA2 35.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 5.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA3 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

Buffalo, NY 

1994 

TOHU 458.8 0.6 17.8 0.3 32.3 105.9 0.13% 3.88% 0.07

NC 14.1 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.6 8.3 0.00% 12.77% 0.00

SA1 130.2 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.6 9.4 0.00% 0.84% 0.00SA2 243.3 0.3 12.7 0.3 22.5 75.0 0.12% 5.22% 0.12SA3 26.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.0 4.2 0.00% 1.92% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 461.3 0.0 17.3 2.4 14.9 0.0 9.2 0.8 8.0 124.3 0.00% 3.75% 0.52% 3.23% 0.00

NC 10.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 5.4 0.00% 19.00% 0.00% 19.00% 0.00

SA1 119.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.8 9.9 0.00% 0.50% 0.00% 0.50% 0.00SA2 256.6 0.0 13.2 1.5 11.7 0.0 6.3 0.4 5.8 90.0 0.00% 5.14% 0.58% 4.56% 0.00SA3 24.4 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.3 3.5 0.00% 2.87% 2.05% 0.82% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected. 
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Charlotte, NC-SC 

1995 

TOHU 503.1 2.5 42.0 0.6 102.8 235.3 0.50% 8.35% 0.12

NC 45.3 0.2 5.7 0.0 15.0 28.4 0.44% 12.58% 0.00

SA1 228.8 0.5 19.5 0.3 63.1 122.0 0.22% 8.52% 0.13SA2 67.1 0.4 4.2 0.0 11.6 23.6 0.60% 6.26% 0.00SA3 53.3 0.1 3.6 0.0 3.4 22.7 0.19% 6.75% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 539.7 1.1 43.9 6.4 37.4 0.0 33.1 1.8 31.2 302.8 0.20% 8.13% 1.19% 6.93% 0.00

NC 70.9 0.0 8.9 0.7 8.0 0.0 5.7 0.0 5.7 46.3 0.00% 12.55% 0.99% 11.28% 0.00

SA1 280.0 0.0 13.8 2.6 11.1 0.0 18.9 0.9 18.1 160.6 0.00% 4.93% 0.93% 3.96% 0.00SA2 71.7 0.1 4.1 1.3 2.8 0.0 3.4 0.3 3.0 24.9 0.14% 5.72% 1.81% 3.91% 0.00SA3 64.9 0.2 7.4 0.6 6.8 0.0 3.2 0.0 3.2 30.7 0.31% 11.40% 0.92% 10.48% 0.00

Chicago, IL 

1995 

TOHU 2789.3 0.0 62.9 6.4 192.3 717.7 0.00% 2.26% 0.23

NC 122.9 0.0 5.2 2.3 22.9 75.6 0.00% 4.23% 1.87

SA1 1013.6 0.0 5.9 0.0 11.1 72.7 0.00% 0.58% 0.00SA2 898.7 0.0 17.6 0.0 65.4 262.8 0.00% 1.96% 0.00SA3 302.6 0.0 12.5 4.4 42.4 149.4 0.00% 4.13% 1.45

1999 

TOHU 2847.9 0.0 33.2 4.2 22.5 1.2 61.2 2.1 56.7 757.8 0.00% 1.17% 0.15% 0.79% 0.04

NC 112.7 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 6.3 0.0 6.3 63.2 0.00% 0.98% 0.00% 0.98% 0.00

SA1 969.0 0.0 3.3 1.2 2.1 1.2 14.7 1.1 13.6 73.0 0.00% 0.34% 0.12% 0.22% 0.12SA2 936.5 0.0 11.0 0.0 8.9 0.0 17.3 0.0 17.3 258.8 0.00% 1.17% 0.00% 0.95% 0.00SA3 321.3 0.0 5.3 1.0 1.1 0.0 10.3 0.0 8.9 159.0 0.00% 1.65% 0.31% 0.34% 0.00

2003 

TOHU 2933.3 0.0 25.6 4.1 21.5 0.0 53.5 5.6 47.9 825.0 0.00% 0.87% 0.14% 0.73% 0.00

NC 129.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 5.3 66.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 937.8 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.1 0.0 9.0 2.3 6.6 66.5 0.00% 0.12% 0.00% 0.12% 0.00SA2 978.7 0.0 7.3 2.0 5.3 0.0 17.7 2.2 15.5 299.4 0.00% 0.75% 0.20% 0.54% 0.00SA3 322.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 14.4 0.0 14.4 162.4 0.00% 1.06% 0.00% 1.06% 0.00

Cincinnati, OH 1998 

TOHU 592.4 0.1 20.1 3.0 14.1 0.0 15.3 1.4 13.6 223.2 0.02% 3.39% 0.51% 2.38% 0.00

NC 28.1 0.0 1.7 0.3 1.5 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.2 17.7 0.00% 6.05% 1.07% 5.34% 0.00

SA1 142.4 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 29.9 0.00% 0.77% 0.07% 0.42% 0.00SA2 198.1 0.0 6.2 1.2 4.4 0.0 6.1 0.6 5.5 87.5 0.00% 3.13% 0.61% 2.22% 0.00SA3 56.0 0.0 1.0 0.1 0.6 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.4 20.3 0.00% 1.79% 0.18% 1.07% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Cleveland, OH 

1996 

TOHU 772.3 0.2 20.0 0.0 44.2 221.3 0.03% 2.59% 0.00

NC 21.9 0.0 2.3 0.0 4.1 15.5 0.00% 10.50% 0.00

SA1 191.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.5 15.5 0.00% 0.10% 0.00SA2 373.5 0.2 9.3 0.0 25.0 134.1 0.05% 2.49% 0.00SA3 82.2 0.0 4.7 0.0 6.8 26.0 0.00% 5.72% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 769.3 0.2 29.2 4.0 25.3 0.6 24.4 2.2 22.2 261.2 0.03% 3.80% 0.52% 3.29% 0.08

NC 19.7 0.0 1.6 0.2 1.4 0.2 1.0 0.2 0.8 11.4 0.00% 8.12% 1.02% 7.11% 1.02

SA1 173.7 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 2.1 0.7 1.4 17.2 0.00% 1.09% 0.00% 1.09% 0.00SA2 373.8 0.2 13.3 2.5 10.8 0.6 12.4 1.1 11.3 155.0 0.05% 3.56% 0.67% 2.89% 0.16SA3 82.1 0.0 4.1 0.4 3.7 0.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 28.0 0.00% 4.99% 0.49% 4.51% 0.00

Columbus, OH 

1995 

TOHU 556.2 0.5 19.3 1.1 71.3 199.2 0.09% 3.47% 0.20

NC 43.6 0.0 1.7 0.2 7.7 24.2 0.00% 3.90% 0.46

SA1 267.8 0.2 6.3 0.5 31.4 75.8 0.07% 2.35% 0.19SA2 134.9 0.2 5.9 0.0 27.5 69.9 0.15% 4.37% 0.00SA3 51.0 0.1 1.8 0.3 2.3 14.3 0.20% 3.53% 0.59

2002 

TOHU 613.2 0.0 20.3 1.8 18.3 0.0 23.4 1.5 21.9 231.5 0.00% 3.31% 0.29% 2.98% 0.00

NC 49.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.3 0.0 4.6 0.2 4.4 27.9 0.00% 4.68% 0.00% 4.68% 0.00

SA1 295.1 0.0 5.8 0.3 5.3 0.0 8.9 0.3 8.6 83.4 0.00% 1.97% 0.10% 1.80% 0.00SA2 145.8 0.0 3.8 0.0 3.8 0.0 6.7 0.5 6.2 76.9 0.00% 2.61% 0.00% 2.61% 0.00SA3 55.5 0.0 2.4 0.3 2.1 0.0 1.7 0.0 1.7 16.1 0.00% 4.32% 0.54% 3.78% 0.00

Dallas, TX 

1994 

TOHU 1041.1 0.6 22.7 4.3 235.6 559.9 0.06% 2.18% 0.41

NC 86.2 0.0 3.2 0.3 26.5 65.8 0.00% 3.71% 0.35

SA1 395.5 0.0 4.7 1.0 63.7 166.6 0.00% 1.19% 0.25SA2 351.6 0.0 6.4 1.8 80.7 199.1 0.00% 1.82% 0.51SA3 113.7 0.3 3.4 0.0 30.7 83.2 0.26% 2.99% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 1235.3 0.0 52.0 6.1 45.9 0.0 108.5 5.5 102.1 724.6 0.00% 4.21% 0.49% 3.72% 0.00

NC 118.9 0.0 6.2 0.9 5.3 0.0 12.2 0.3 11.6 91.1 0.00% 5.21% 0.76% 4.46% 0.00

SA1 453.2 0.0 15.4 2.7 12.6 0.0 31.0 3.0 27.7 192.0 0.00% 3.40% 0.60% 2.78% 0.00SA2 337.9 0.0 16.4 1.2 15.2 0.0 42.4 1.4 40.4 208.4 0.00% 4.85% 0.36% 4.50% 0.00SA3 200.6 0.0 5.4 0.6 4.8 0.0 19.3 0.8 18.5 162.9 0.00% 2.69% 0.30% 2.39% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Denver, CO 

1995 

TOHU 725.7 1.0 57.2 4.9 179.2 374.8 0.14% 7.88% 0.68

NC 42.1 0.2 10.5 1.0 16.5 34.6 0.48% 24.94% 2.38

SA1 227.7 0.0 6.6 0.2 40.9 82.3 0.00% 2.90% 0.09SA2 184.1 0.2 18.9 0.2 60.4 107.5 0.11% 10.27% 0.11SA3 169.0 0.4 12.8 3.3 45.6 113.2 0.24% 7.57% 1.95

2004 

TOHU 855.7 0.0 71.7 6.2 65.0 0.2 56.1 3.4 52.5 472.2 0.00% 8.38% 0.72% 7.60% 0.02

NC 74.4 0.0 11.3 0.9 10.4 0.0 7.7 0.2 7.5 52.7 0.00% 15.19% 1.21% 13.98% 0.00

SA1 229.8 0.0 7.5 1.7 5.5 0.0 7.7 0.5 7.2 83.3 0.00% 3.26% 0.74% 2.39% 0.00SA2 204.6 0.0 22.3 1.6 20.6 0.0 15.7 0.7 15.1 127.7 0.00% 10.90% 0.78% 10.07% 0.00SA3 199.8 0.0 15.7 2.2 13.5 0.0 12.0 0.4 11.6 128.6 0.00% 7.86% 1.10% 6.76% 0.00

Detroit, MI 

1995 

TOHU 1681.1 2.0 60.8 3.1 149.8 554.5 0.12% 3.62% 0.18

NC 73.7 0.0 7.8 0.0 8.2 40.7 0.00% 10.58% 0.00

SA1 339.0 0.0 1.9 1.0 6.1 75.4 0.00% 0.56% 0.29SA2 416.6 0.0 9.0 0.0 29.1 112.5 0.00% 2.16% 0.00SA3 458.5 1.0 28.5 1.0 55.9 199.1 0.22% 6.22% 0.22

1999 

TOHU 1741.5 0.0 53.2 3.1 43.6 0.0 46.2 4.2 41.1 610.1 0.00% 3.05% 0.18% 2.50% 0.00

NC 70.6 0.0 6.3 0.0 5.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.3 52.9 0.00% 8.92% 0.00% 7.08% 0.00

SA1 331.7 0.0 4.2 1.1 3.1 0.0 5.5 0.0 5.5 79.1 0.00% 1.27% 0.33% 0.93% 0.00SA2 438.5 0.0 7.5 1.1 4.4 0.0 4.1 0.0 4.1 129.3 0.00% 1.71% 0.25% 1.00% 0.00SA3 464.3 0.0 18.2 1.0 13.8 0.0 24.8 3.1 20.7 208.9 0.00% 3.92% 0.22% 2.97% 0.00

2003 

TOHU 1731.5 0.6 46.0 4.3 41.7 0.0 46.8 8.7 38.1 608.2 0.03% 2.66% 0.25% 2.41% 0.00

NC 61.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 5.4 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.3 40.1 0.00% 8.85% 0.00% 8.85% 0.00

SA1 304.9 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 0.0 3.2 61.2 0.00% 1.02% 0.00% 1.02% 0.00SA2 431.2 0.0 11.6 2.3 9.3 0.0 11.5 2.1 9.4 138.2 0.00% 2.69% 0.53% 2.16% 0.00SA3 477.8 0.0 10.3 1.0 9.3 0.0 14.5 2.0 12.4 206.6 0.00% 2.16% 0.21% 1.95% 0.00

Ft. Worth-Arlington, TX 1994 

TOHU 501.4 0.5 16.1 1.9 67.1 272.7 0.10% 3.21% 0.38

NC 34.7 0.2 1.4 0.2 8.1 28.7 0.58% 4.03% 0.58

SA1 174.4 0.1 3.1 0.2 15.0 74.1 0.06% 1.78% 0.11SA2 50.5 0.2 0.2 0.0 3.6 24.9 0.40% 0.40% 0.00SA3 237.5 0.1 9.3 1.7 45.9 155.8 0.04% 3.92% 0.72

2002 

TOHU 585.9 0.0 20.7 1.2 19.3 0.7 36.2 2.4 33.6 319.5 0.00% 3.53% 0.20% 3.29% 0.12

NC 49.5 0.0 2.9 0.2 2.7 0.0 4.7 0.2 4.3 36.9 0.00% 5.86% 0.40% 5.45% 0.00

SA1 190.4 0.0 4.1 0.3 3.7 0.2 10.1 1.2 8.9 78.1 0.00% 2.15% 0.16% 1.94% 0.11SA2 70.3 0.0 3.3 0.0 3.1 0.0 4.2 0.3 3.8 39.6 0.00% 4.69% 0.00% 4.41% 0.00SA3 281.5 0.0 11.0 0.7 10.3 0.0 19.2 0.9 18.3 184.2 0.00% 3.91% 0.25% 3.66% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Hartford, CT 

1996 

TOHU 440.0 0.5 7.9 0.1 47.6 192.7 0.11% 1.80% 0.02

NC 14.5 0.0 0.6 0.0 2.9 8.4 0.00% 4.14% 0.00

SA1 44.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 28.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 5.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA3 23.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 1.4 7.3 0.00% 2.53% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 463.0 0.1 13.3 0.9 12.1 0.0 13.4 1.1 12.3 209.7 0.02% 2.87% 0.19% 2.61% 0.00

NC 13.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.3 0.3 1.1 9.9 0.00% 5.11% 0.00% 5.11% 0.00

SA1 43.9 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 4.5 0.00% 0.68% 0.00% 0.23% 0.00SA2 24.6 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 4.8 0.00% 1.22% 0.00% 1.22% 0.00SA3 22.7 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 8.4 0.00% 2.20% 0.00% 2.20% 0.00

Houston, TX 

1998 

TOHU 1386.4 0.0 38.4 2.6 18.0 0.6 86.7 4.6 81.8 611.8 0.00% 2.77% 0.19% 1.30% 0.04

NC 88.0 0.0 4.4 0.4 2.9 0.0 6.8 0.0 6.8 60.0 0.00% 5.00% 0.45% 3.30% 0.00

SA1 642.8 0.0 8.4 1.2 3.2 0.0 25.7 2.5 22.9 173.7 0.00% 1.31% 0.19% 0.50% 0.00SA2 514.5 0.0 16.7 1.4 8.1 0.0 43.1 1.7 41.3 306.0 0.00% 3.25% 0.27% 1.57% 0.00SA3 105.8 0.0 7.0 0.0 2.5 0.6 8.1 0.0 8.1 79.5 0.00% 6.62% 0.00% 2.36% 0.57

2007 

TOHU 1872.0 0.9 32.1 0.0 116.9 812.9 0.05% 1.71% 0.00

NC 153.7 0.0 3.7 0.0 13.0 73.2 0.00% 2.41% 0.00

SA1 707.4 0.9 10.7 0.0 27.6 193.4 0.13% 1.51% 0.00SA2 643.6 0.0 9.3 0.0 52.1 367.2 0.00% 1.44% 0.00SA3 120.6 0.0 1.2 0.0 6.9 85.1 0.00% 1.00% 0.00

Indianapolis, IN 

1996 

TOHU 592.0 0.8 22.0 0.7 52.2 218.2 0.14% 3.72% 0.12

NC 43.5 0.0 3.2 0.4 7.7 27.8 0.00% 7.36% 0.92

SA1 289.6 0.4 5.2 0.3 19.2 87.4 0.14% 1.80% 0.10SA2 56.0 0.0 3.8 0.1 10.5 36.5 0.00% 6.79% 0.18SA3 37.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 5.4 13.0 0.00% 7.57% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 657.6 0.0 22.3 1.5 20.7 0.2 22.7 1.4 20.8 276.0 0.00% 3.39% 0.23% 3.15% 0.03

NC 63.0 0.0 2.4 0.4 2.1 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 36.0 0.00% 3.81% 0.63% 3.33% 0.00

SA1 257.9 0.0 6.3 0.8 5.5 0.0 6.5 0.9 5.5 77.6 0.00% 2.44% 0.31% 2.13% 0.00SA2 83.7 0.0 2.9 0.2 2.7 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.2 56.5 0.00% 3.46% 0.24% 3.23% 0.00SA3 42.2 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.3 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.6 19.0 0.00% 5.45% 0.00% 5.45% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Kansas City, MO 

1995 

TOHU 659.1 1.3 34.7 1.7 90.2 304.9 0.20% 5.26% 0.26

NC 36.7 0.1 4.8 0.4 12.1 30.8 0.27% 13.08% 1.09

SA1 176.7 0.0 4.5 0.2 18.6 67.4 0.00% 2.55% 0.11SA2 59.2 0.2 1.5 0.0 3.4 13.2 0.34% 2.53% 0.00SA3 128.9 0.2 7.0 0.0 12.4 57.0 0.16% 5.43% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 697.4 0.4 32.5 3.1 29.4 0.0 26.7 2.4 24.3 330.9 0.06% 4.66% 0.44% 4.22% 0.00

NC 51.0 0.0 3.9 0.2 3.7 0.0 2.3 0.2 2.1 35.1 0.00% 7.65% 0.39% 7.25% 0.00

SA1 177.1 0.0 8.5 0.4 8.2 0.0 9.0 0.9 8.1 66.6 0.00% 4.80% 0.23% 4.63% 0.00SA2 51.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 10.3 0.00% 1.35% 0.00% 1.35% 0.00SA3 138.0 0.0 7.9 0.7 7.1 0.0 3.7 0.5 3.2 61.9 0.00% 5.72% 0.51% 5.14% 0.00

Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA 

1995 

TOHU 2947.5 12.3 66.5 12.3 201.4 1089.9 0.42% 2.26% 0.42

NC 50.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 3.0 23.9 0.00% 12.60% 0.00

SA1 1145.4 5.1 17.0 7.2 68.6 367.7 0.45% 1.48% 0.63SA2 158.9 0.0 3.2 0.0 7.2 35.1 0.00% 2.01% 0.00SA3 1643.2 7.2 46.3 5.1 125.5 687.1 0.44% 2.82% 0.31

1999 

TOHU 3062.0 4.2 81.5 14.7 33.0 2.2 184.2 30.1 153.0 1121.3 0.14% 2.66% 0.48% 1.08% 0.07

NC 48.7 0.0 3.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.6 26.4 0.00% 7.19% 0.00% 4.52% 0.00

SA1 1099.0 2.1 20.4 2.1 10.8 2.0 55.9 8.7 47.1 339.3 0.19% 1.86% 0.19% 0.98% 0.18SA2 174.2 0.0 6.6 1.1 2.1 0.0 8.2 2.1 6.1 42.5 0.00% 3.79% 0.63% 1.21% 0.00SA3 1788.7 2.2 54.6 11.5 20.0 0.2 120.1 19.3 99.7 739.4 0.12% 3.05% 0.64% 1.12% 0.01

2003 

TOHU 3131.0 6.4 68.5 19.9 47.6 2.3 170.9 30.3 139.6 1121.5 0.20% 2.19% 0.64% 1.52% 0.07

NC 60.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.5 2.7 4.8 41.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 1123.2 4.1 23.9 5.3 17.6 0.0 59.6 11.9 46.8 335.6 0.37% 2.13% 0.47% 1.57% 0.00SA2 166.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.9 0.0 3.0 1.1 2.0 38.7 0.00% 0.54% 0.00% 0.54% 0.00SA3 1840.9 2.2 43.6 14.6 29.1 2.3 108.2 17.4 90.9 747.2 0.12% 2.37% 0.79% 1.58% 0.12

Memphis, TN 

1996 

TOHU 401.5 1.0 21.5 0.2 60.8 160.2 0.25% 5.35% 0.05

NC 30.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 11.4 23.0 0.00% 8.33% 0.00

SA1 221.7 0.3 5.8 0.0 18.7 53.5 0.14% 2.62% 0.00SA2 106.6 0.3 8.7 0.2 29.4 81.3 0.28% 8.16% 0.19SA3 29.6 0.0 4.2 0.0 8.8 14.5 0.00% 14.19% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 430.8 0.0 24.1 4.0 19.8 0.6 40.1 2.2 37.6 194.7 0.00% 5.59% 0.93% 4.60% 0.14

NC 29.6 0.0 2.2 0.4 1.8 0.0 5.1 0.1 5.0 19.8 0.00% 7.43% 1.35% 6.08% 0.00

SA1 200.0 0.0 5.6 1.1 4.4 0.2 10.7 0.4 10.3 49.8 0.00% 2.80% 0.55% 2.20% 0.10SA2 138.4 0.0 10.2 1.6 8.5 0.2 19.0 1.0 17.6 103.0 0.00% 7.37% 1.16% 6.14% 0.14SA3 43.1 0.0 4.9 1.0 3.9 0.0 5.4 0.3 5.0 25.1 0.00% 11.37% 2.32% 9.05% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, FL 

1995 

TOHU 1245.2 0.8 1.9 3.9 7.5 50.8 0.06% 0.15% 0.31

NC 69.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 124.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 3.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 586.8 0.4 1.5 0.8 3.5 23.5 0.07% 0.26% 0.14SA3 62.9 0.4 0.4 1.1 0.4 6.9 0.64% 0.64% 1.75

2002 

TOHU 1434.2 0.8 3.0 1.5 1.5 0.4 7.1 1.9 4.5 51.9 0.06% 0.21% 0.10% 0.10% 0.03

NC 70.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 128.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 6.3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 667.9 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.4 2.7 0.3 2.4 23.0 0.06% 0.10% 0.10% 0.00% 0.06SA3 69.8 0.4 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.0 1.8 1.1 0.7 6.5 0.57% 1.58% 1.15% 0.57% 0.00

2007 

TOHU 1911.6 1.2 1.2 1.0 13.1 82.6 0.06% 0.06% 0.05

NC 77.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 145.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 679.1 1.2 1.2 1.0 3.4 21.8 0.18% 0.18% 0.15SA3 59.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 5.5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

Milwaukee, WI 

1994 

TOHU 559.6 0.7 19.2 0.4 27.5 146.8 0.13% 3.43% 0.07

NC 26.1 0.2 2.8 0.0 2.6 16.5 0.77% 10.73% 0.00

SA1 233.4 0.2 1.7 0.2 3.5 17.3 0.09% 0.73% 0.09SA2 139.2 0.5 3.2 0.2 7.4 37.5 0.36% 2.30% 0.14SA3 120.0 0.0 11.3 0.0 8.6 65.4 0.00% 9.42% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 584.6 0.0 21.6 1.2 20.4 0.0 8.8 0.3 8.2 179.6 0.00% 3.69% 0.21% 3.49% 0.00

NC 22.2 0.0 3.8 0.2 3.6 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.7 16.5 0.00% 17.12% 0.90% 16.22% 0.00

SA1 224.2 0.0 1.2 0.2 1.0 0.0 1.2 0.4 0.8 17.6 0.00% 0.54% 0.09% 0.45% 0.00SA2 144.8 0.0 2.9 0.2 2.7 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.6 43.2 0.00% 2.00% 0.14% 1.86% 0.00SA3 138.1 0.0 10.7 0.4 10.3 0.0 3.6 0.2 3.4 81.3 0.00% 7.75% 0.29% 7.46% 0.00

Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN 1998 

TOHU 1111.9 0.3 71.2 6.4 54.2 0.0 20.4 0.7 19.7 410.9 0.03% 6.40% 0.58% 4.87% 0.00

NC 63.8 0.0 10.9 0.3 9.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.6 36.0 0.00% 17.08% 0.47% 14.11% 0.00

SA1 165.6 0.0 2.5 0.3 1.1 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 35.6 0.00% 1.51% 0.18% 0.66% 0.00SA2 110.6 0.0 2.2 0.3 1.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.8 21.1 0.00% 1.99% 0.27% 1.27% 0.00SA3 287.2 0.0 21.6 2.7 15.6 0.0 5.8 0.0 5.8 143.2 0.00% 7.52% 0.94% 5.43% 0.00

2007 

TOHU 1229.9 0.6 103.1 0.4 44.1 518.5 0.05% 8.38% 0.03

NC 55.1 0.0 9.7 0.4 5.1 37.2 0.00% 17.60% 0.73

SA1 153.3 0.0 4.5 0.0 1.6 36.6 0.00% 2.94% 0.00SA2 112.8 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.6 26.4 0.00% 3.99% 0.00SA3 303.8 0.0 28.4 0.0 11.5 157.4 0.00% 9.35% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

New Orleans, LA 

1995 

TOHU 484.9 0.3 2.1 0.9 16.5 102.7 0.06% 0.43% 0.19

NC 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 7.2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 188.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 1.3 24.4 0.00% 0.11% 0.11SA2 171.8 0.0 0.4 0.3 5.8 35.1 0.00% 0.23% 0.17SA3 60.5 0.3 1.0 0.2 5.1 29.0 0.50% 1.65% 0.33

2004 

TOHU 498.2 0.0 8.0 1.4 6.7 0.2 20.4 1.4 19.0 117.6 0.00% 1.61% 0.28% 1.34% 0.04

NC 14.4 0.0 1.2 0.3 0.9 0.0 1.7 0.1 1.6 8.1 0.00% 8.33% 2.08% 6.25% 0.00

SA1 178.1 0.0 1.7 0.5 1.2 0.2 3.2 0.5 2.7 22.9 0.00% 0.95% 0.28% 0.67% 0.11SA2 172.4 0.0 2.6 0.7 1.8 0.0 5.4 0.4 4.9 38.7 0.00% 1.51% 0.41% 1.04% 0.00SA3 77.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.3 0.0 8.4 0.2 8.2 38.0 0.00% 2.98% 0.00% 2.98% 0.00

New York-Nassau-Suffolk-Orange, NY 

1995 

TOHU 4207.9 0.0 34.0 0.0 147.3 604.5 0.00% 0.81% 0.00

NC 29.5 0.0 2.3 0.0 4.6 11.6 0.00% 7.80% 0.00

SA1 2795.1 0.0 2.5 0.0 31.3 152.2 0.00% 0.09% 0.00SA2 430.8 0.0 2.3 0.0 30.2 125.7 0.00% 0.53% 0.00SA3 438.2 0.0 13.0 0.0 39.2 150.8 0.00% 2.97% 0.00

1999 

TOHU 4331.7 0.0 26.6 12.8 13.9 0.0 50.8 0.0 50.8 611.8 0.00% 0.61% 0.30% 0.32% 0.00

NC 28.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 2862.2 0.0 4.1 2.7 1.4 0.0 10.1 0.0 10.1 113.4 0.00% 0.14% 0.09% 0.05% 0.00SA2 445.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 8.7 133.3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA3 456.6 0.0 17.4 7.6 9.8 0.0 14.8 0.0 14.8 161.2 0.00% 3.81% 1.66% 2.15% 0.00

2003 

TOHU 4409.3 0.0 12.5 7.7 4.9 0.0 37.7 2.6 35.2 545.5 0.00% 0.28% 0.17% 0.11% 0.00

NC 55.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 2929.8 0.0 5.3 5.3 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 5.9 101.2 0.00% 0.18% 0.18% 0.00% 0.00SA2 445.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 8.7 116.2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA3 461.6 0.0 4.7 2.3 2.4 0.0 12.2 2.6 9.7 145.9 0.00% 1.02% 0.50% 0.52% 0.00

Norfolk-Virginia BeachNewport News, VA 1998 TOHU 564.0 0.3 36.5 3.0 28.8 0.0 27.2 2.7 24.4 245.9 0.05% 6.47% 0.53% 5.11% 0.00

NC 28.8 0.0 2.8 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.4 19.0 0.00% 9.72% 0.00% 7.99% 0.00

SA1 82.7 0.1 2.3 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.8 0.4 2.3 17.9 0.12% 2.78% 0.00% 2.54% 0.00SA2 152.3 0.0 13.3 1.6 10.3 0.0 9.0 0.8 8.2 92.6 0.00% 8.73% 1.05% 6.76% 0.00SA3 70.2 0.0 3.9 0.1 3.0 0.0 2.4 0.1 2.2 25.2 0.00% 5.56% 0.14% 4.27% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Northern NJ 

1995 

TOHU 2202.5 0.0 57.4 0.0 92.5 551.1 0.00% 2.61% 0.00

NC 56.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 5.8 31.8 0.00% 4.11% 0.00

SA1 87.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 324.5 0.0 10.4 0.0 14.1 96.8 0.00% 3.20% 0.00SA3 243.5 0.0 5.0 0.0 2.5 52.2 0.00% 2.05% 0.00

1999 

TOHU 2315.8 3.2 43.5 0.0 30.8 0.0 40.3 8.0 32.3 580.8 0.14% 1.88% 0.00% 1.33% 0.00

NC 63.9 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 8.7 38.9 5.01% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 76.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 329.6 0.0 6.7 0.0 2.4 0.0 11.0 0.0 11.0 89.9 0.00% 2.03% 0.00% 0.73% 0.00SA3 265.5 0.0 8.2 0.0 5.4 0.0 2.7 0.0 2.7 52.0 0.00% 3.09% 0.00% 2.03% 0.00

2003 

TOHU 2352.0 0.0 40.6 4.7 35.9 0.0 26.7 8.5 18.2 599.4 0.00% 1.73% 0.20% 1.53% 0.00

NC 72.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.9 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 85.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 334.8 0.0 2.4 0.0 2.4 0.0 7.8 1.0 6.8 100.2 0.00% 0.72% 0.00% 0.72% 0.00SA3 285.5 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.6 0.0 4.7 2.5 2.2 70.8 0.00% 0.91% 0.00% 0.91% 0.00

Oakland, CA 1998 

TOHU 855.7 0.6 46.5 5.0 29.2 0.6 71.8 11.9 58.9 475.3 0.07% 5.43% 0.58% 3.41% 0.07

NC 30.2 0.0 1.3 0.2 1.1 0.0 3.1 0.2 2.9 25.8 0.00% 4.30% 0.66% 3.64% 0.00

SA1 148.7 0.0 6.2 0.9 2.9 0.2 8.4 2.6 5.8 57.3 0.00% 4.17% 0.61% 1.95% 0.13SA2 370.0 0.0 19.1 2.6 12.2 0.0 28.7 4.4 23.6 199.7 0.00% 5.16% 0.70% 3.30% 0.00SA3 337.0 0.6 21.2 1.5 14.2 0.4 34.7 4.9 29.5 218.4 0.18% 6.29% 0.45% 4.21% 0.12

Oklahoma City, OK 

1996 

TOHU 386.2 1.4 16.1 1.7 98.7 161.2 0.36% 4.17% 0.44

NC 15.5 0.0 1.6 0.1 9.7 13.5 0.00% 10.32% 0.65

SA1 181.2 0.4 6.4 0.2 48.7 76.1 0.22% 3.53% 0.11SA2 85.6 0.1 2.4 1.3 21.6 37.1 0.12% 2.80% 1.52SA3 55.8 0.4 3.0 0.0 15.2 26.4 0.72% 5.38% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 430.8 0.0 22.9 2.5 20.1 0.0 23.6 1.6 21.9 194.7 0.00% 5.32% 0.58% 4.67% 0.00

NC 29.4 0.0 3.8 0.3 3.5 0.0 2.2 0.1 2.1 21.1 0.00% 12.93% 1.02% 11.90% 0.00

SA1 170.0 0.0 6.8 0.3 6.3 0.0 8.6 1.0 7.6 70.7 0.00% 4.00% 0.18% 3.71% 0.00SA2 89.5 0.0 4.5 0.7 3.8 0.0 4.6 0.1 4.5 43.4 0.00% 5.03% 0.78% 4.25% 0.00SA3 68.5 0.0 4.6 0.3 4.2 0.0 3.4 0.0 3.3 32.0 0.00% 6.72% 0.44% 6.13% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Philadelphia, PA 

1995 

TOHU 1820.6 2.2 43.2 1.0 113.4 504.7 0.12% 2.37% 0.05

NC 42.2 0.0 2.3 0.0 6.0 27.3 0.00% 5.45% 0.00

SA1 596.6 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 50.4 0.00% 0.52% 0.00SA2 267.9 1.0 4.3 1.0 16.3 106.0 0.37% 1.61% 0.37SA3 204.1 0.0 6.8 0.0 17.2 71.1 0.00% 3.33% 0.00

1999 

TOHU 1874.6 0.0 59.9 6.8 39.7 0.0 27.0 1.3 25.8 535.7 0.00% 3.20% 0.36% 2.12% 0.00

NC 48.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.9 0.00% 13.76% 0.00% 13.76% 0.00

SA1 582.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 2.4 0.0 5.9 1.3 4.7 50.2 0.00% 0.82% 0.00% 0.41% 0.00SA2 281.7 0.0 11.4 1.1 5.8 0.0 4.7 0.0 4.7 111.6 0.00% 4.05% 0.39% 2.06% 0.00SA3 210.8 0.0 5.6 0.0 3.5 0.0 5.6 0.0 5.6 71.8 0.00% 2.66% 0.00% 1.66% 0.00

2003 

TOHU 1905.2 0.0 60.1 10.4 47.1 1.0 30.7 3.5 27.3 576.0 0.00% 3.15% 0.55% 2.47% 0.05

NC 62.2 0.0 4.9 0.0 4.9 0.0 6.1 0.0 6.1 43.0 0.00% 7.88% 0.00% 7.88% 0.00

SA1 589.9 0.0 5.0 3.7 1.2 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 51.7 0.00% 0.85% 0.63% 0.20% 0.00SA2 293.5 0.0 9.4 2.3 7.2 0.0 3.6 0.0 3.6 126.6 0.00% 3.20% 0.78% 2.45% 0.00SA3 197.9 0.0 5.7 0.0 3.1 1.0 4.2 0.0 4.2 69.1 0.00% 2.88% 0.00% 1.57% 0.51

Phoenix, AZ 

1994 

TOHU 896.7 1.1 20.4 1.7 139.3 298.7 0.12% 2.28% 0.19

NC 82.5 0.0 3.3 0.0 19.8 40.3 0.00% 4.00% 0.00

SA1 330.3 0.4 4.8 0.2 44.4 91.1 0.12% 1.45% 0.06SA2 111.3 0.4 4.6 0.0 19.6 41.4 0.36% 4.13% 0.00SA3 455.2 0.4 11.0 1.5 75.3 166.2 0.09% 2.42% 0.33

2002 

TOHU 1165.7 0.0 22.8 2.4 20.1 0.3 31.4 2.3 29.2 350.8 0.00% 1.96% 0.21% 1.72% 0.03

NC 148.9 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.5 0.0 3.2 0.3 2.9 31.2 0.00% 2.35% 0.00% 2.35% 0.00

SA1 342.4 0.0 5.1 0.7 4.4 0.3 6.0 1.4 4.6 83.1 0.00% 1.49% 0.20% 1.29% 0.09SA2 145.7 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.5 48.8 0.00% 1.72% 0.00% 1.72% 0.00SA3 677.6 0.0 15.3 1.7 13.3 0.0 20.9 0.8 20.1 219.0 0.00% 2.26% 0.25% 1.96% 0.00

Pittsburgh, PA 

1995 

TOHU 969.6 0.0 27.1 0.0 84.1 260.1 0.00% 2.79% 0.00

NC 23.7 0.0 1.1 0.0 5.1 15.0 0.00% 4.64% 0.00

SA1 150.6 0.0 1.3 0.0 6.5 15.7 0.00% 0.86% 0.00SA2 395.6 0.0 13.7 0.0 42.2 127.4 0.00% 3.46% 0.00SA3 148.1 0.0 3.2 0.0 17.0 38.9 0.00% 2.16% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 953.8 0.3 36.7 4.4 32.0 0.0 27.3 3.0 23.7 294.9 0.03% 3.85% 0.46% 3.36% 0.00

NC 20.4 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 12.9 0.00% 12.25% 0.00% 12.25% 0.00

SA1 130.2 0.3 1.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.2 0.6 1.7 16.4 0.23% 1.08% 0.00% 1.08% 0.00SA2 394.2 0.0 12.9 1.9 10.8 0.0 13.6 0.5 12.5 140.4 0.00% 3.27% 0.48% 2.74% 0.00SA3 151.2 0.0 9.5 1.4 8.2 0.0 3.9 0.3 3.6 51.5 0.00% 6.28% 0.93% 5.42% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Portland, OR 

1995 

TOHU 655.1 6.3 57.6 1.4 154.4 332.8 0.96% 8.79% 0.21

NC 49.8 0.2 4.7 0.0 13.9 30.5 0.40% 9.44% 0.00

SA1 191.1 0.9 9.0 0.2 37.1 88.2 0.47% 4.71% 0.10SA2 63.1 0.7 7.8 0.4 13.2 32.9 1.11% 12.36% 0.63SA3 138.2 0.4 13.2 0.0 41.8 80.4 0.29% 9.55% 0.00

2002 

TOHU 747.8 2.4 78.1 8.1 69.8 1.1 54.6 3.4 50.8 403.5 0.32% 10.44% 1.08% 9.33% 0.15

NC 55.6 0.0 10.4 0.6 9.8 0.2 7.7 0.5 7.2 36.8 0.00% 18.71% 1.08% 17.63% 0.36

SA1 202.0 0.2 16.0 2.3 13.8 0.4 12.0 0.8 11.3 98.1 0.10% 7.92% 1.14% 6.83% 0.20SA2 68.2 0.0 8.2 1.5 6.7 0.2 6.8 0.2 6.7 37.0 0.00% 12.02% 2.20% 9.82% 0.29SA3 173.8 0.9 19.6 1.3 18.3 0.0 14.6 0.9 13.7 108.0 0.52% 11.28% 0.75% 10.53% 0.00

Providence, RI 1998 

TOHU 379.5 0.0 5.1 0.7 3.3 0.0 6.1 0.4 5.7 109.0 0.00% 1.34% 0.18% 0.87% 0.00

NC 10.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.4 5.2 0.00% 0.98% 0.00% 0.98% 0.00

SA1 58.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5 7.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 35.1 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.7 12.1 0.00% 1.71% 0.28% 0.85% 0.00SA3 27.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.4 10.2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 1994 

TOHU 932.9 3.8 26.4 7.2 185.8 476.5 0.41% 2.83% 0.77

NC 74.5 0.0 4.9 0.5 21.4 62.0 0.00% 6.58% 0.67

SA1 84.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 7.6 37.7 0.00% 0.24% 0.00SA2 354.3 1.3 6.2 2.4 52.5 183.6 0.37% 1.75% 0.68SA3 49.2 0.0 1.6 0.6 9.8 17.3 0.00% 3.25% 1.22

2002 

TOHU 1083.9 1.8 65.3 11.1 54.2 3.7 84.4 10.2 73.6 572.8 0.17% 6.02% 1.02% 5.00% 0.34

NC 78.7 0.0 7.4 0.2 7.2 0.0 5.3 0.3 5.0 64.2 0.00% 9.40% 0.25% 9.15% 0.00

SA1 88.3 0.0 2.5 0.9 1.6 0.1 8.2 1.1 7.1 38.5 0.00% 2.83% 1.02% 1.81% 0.11SA2 448.6 0.2 21.5 1.3 20.2 1.9 37.1 3.5 33.4 243.0 0.04% 4.79% 0.29% 4.50% 0.42SA3 54.2 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.5 0.0 2.5 0.4 2.1 17.4 0.00% 2.77% 0.00% 2.77% 0.00

Rochester, NY 1998 

TOHU 410.0 0.0 13.0 1.3 10.2 0.1 7.0 0.9 6.1 126.7 0.00% 3.17% 0.32% 2.49% 0.02

NC 11.3 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 6.3 0.00% 10.62% 0.00% 10.62% 0.00

SA1 84.9 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.5 9.9 0.00% 0.71% 0.12% 0.35% 0.12SA2 192.8 0.0 7.2 0.7 6.0 0.0 4.4 0.5 3.9 86.5 0.00% 3.73% 0.36% 3.11% 0.00SA3 37.0 0.0 2.0 0.2 1.4 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.2 11.3 0.00% 5.41% 0.54% 3.78% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Sacramento, CA 

1996 

TOHU 557.8 12.0 35.8 7.7 137.2 318.4 2.15% 6.42% 1.38

NC 32.3 0.2 2.5 0.3 12.7 26.5 0.62% 7.74% 0.93

SA1 144.1 1.4 4.0 3.4 35.5 77.2 0.97% 2.78% 2.36SA2 275.3 3.7 19.9 3.7 80.3 174.1 1.34% 7.23% 1.34SA3 83.2 4.6 8.1 0.4 16.9 44.5 5.53% 9.74% 0.48

2004 

TOHU 669.4 3.1 60.4 6.1 53.9 1.7 68.1 7.2 60.7 385.9 0.46% 9.02% 0.91% 8.05% 0.25

NC 62.3 0.2 8.2 0.8 7.5 0.0 6.0 0.0 6.0 40.7 0.32% 13.16% 1.28% 12.04% 0.00

SA1 163.1 0.4 10.3 0.7 9.4 0.8 16.4 0.8 15.6 84.5 0.25% 6.32% 0.43% 5.76% 0.49SA2 319.4 0.4 25.2 3.7 21.4 0.4 38.3 3.8 34.6 200.4 0.13% 7.89% 1.16% 6.70% 0.13SA3 119.9 0.6 15.3 1.2 14.1 0.2 7.9 1.6 6.2 71.0 0.50% 12.76% 1.00% 11.76% 0.17

St. Louis, MO 

1996 

TOHU 1005.5 1.3 55.1 1.3 162.0 363.2 0.13% 5.48% 0.13

NC 49.0 0.2 8.8 0.0 14.0 36.0 0.41% 17.96% 0.00

SA1 156.8 0.0 0.7 0.0 8.5 20.2 0.00% 0.45% 0.00SA2 401.0 0.0 11.0 1.0 83.2 183.9 0.00% 2.74% 0.25SA3 105.4 0.2 7.0 0.0 21.4 35.6 0.19% 6.64% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 1029.4 0.5 39.7 3.8 35.8 0.0 36.0 1.3 34.2 417.6 0.05% 3.86% 0.37% 3.48% 0.00

NC 47.6 0.0 5.3 0.0 5.3 0.0 4.5 0.3 4.3 33.1 0.00% 11.13% 0.00% 11.13% 0.00

SA1 143.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.8 16.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 399.0 0.3 12.1 1.1 11.0 0.0 13.3 0.3 13.0 187.3 0.08% 3.03% 0.28% 2.76% 0.00SA3 99.3 0.0 3.6 0.3 3.3 0.0 3.3 0.3 3.0 38.1 0.00% 3.63% 0.30% 3.32% 0.00

Salt Lake City, UT 1998 TOHU 410.6 0.0 34.0 3.1 22.9 0.1 19.9 1.8 18.1 204.1 0.00% 8.28% 0.75% 5.58% 0.02

NC 39.3 0.0 5.4 0.2 4.5 0.0 2.1 0.0 2.1 20.2 0.00% 13.74% 0.51% 11.45% 0.00

SA1 65.5 0.0 2.7 0.2 1.6 0.0 2.2 0.1 2.1 23.3 0.00% 4.12% 0.31% 2.44% 0.00SA2 212.2 0.0 18.5 1.8 11.2 0.0 12.3 1.2 11.2 116.4 0.00% 8.72% 0.85% 5.28% 0.00SA3 68.8 0.0 5.9 0.2 4.7 0.0 3.1 0.2 2.9 35.6 0.00% 8.58% 0.29% 6.83% 0.00

San Antonio, TX 

1995 

TOHU 484.8 0.9 9.7 1.1 69.3 168.5 0.19% 2.00% 0.23

NC 21.9 0.0 1.0 0.0 4.8 12.3 0.00% 4.57% 0.00

SA1 336.3 0.7 3.0 0.8 41.6 98.3 0.21% 0.89% 0.24SA2 87.8 0.0 3.1 0.3 22.1 50.1 0.00% 3.53% 0.34SA3 28.2 0.3 1.8 0.0 2.2 7.9 1.06% 6.38% 0.00

2004 

TOHU 586.9 0.0 15.0 1.9 12.9 0.2 31.8 2.3 29.4 215.0 0.00% 2.56% 0.32% 2.20% 0.03

NC 43.7 0.0 1.4 0.0 1.4 0.0 2.7 0.0 2.7 17.0 0.00% 3.20% 0.00% 3.20% 0.00

SA1 410.9 0.0 6.8 1.4 5.4 0.0 20.8 1.1 19.6 131.2 0.00% 1.65% 0.34% 1.31% 0.00SA2 95.5 0.0 4.3 0.2 4.1 0.2 7.5 0.8 6.7 55.9 0.00% 4.50% 0.21% 4.29% 0.21SA3 37.7 0.0 1.6 0.2 1.5 0.0 0.9 0.0 9.0 12.1 0.00% 4.24% 0.53% 3.98% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

San Diego, CA 

1994 

TOHU 896.8 6.8 19.0 10.7 60.7 421.7 0.76% 2.12% 1.19

NC 41.5 0.5 2.4 0.5 5.6 33.4 1.20% 5.78% 1.20

SA1 408.0 0.6 1.9 3.2 27.1 185.3 0.15% 0.47% 0.78SA2 488.7 6.2 17.1 7.5 33.6 236.5 1.27% 3.50% 1.53SA3 

2002 

TOHU 999.1 2.3 49.1 10.5 38.0 1.6 83.0 12.4 69.8 475.7 0.23% 4.91% 1.05% 3.80% 0.16

NC 49.8 0.0 1.5 0.2 1.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 4.8 39.3 0.00% 3.01% 0.40% 2.61% 0.00

SA1 450.2 0.3 13.7 4.0 9.4 0.0 35.1 5.1 29.5 200.1 0.07% 3.04% 0.89% 2.09% 0.00SA2 549.0 2.1 35.3 6.5 28.6 1.6 47.9 7.3 40.3 275.6 0.38% 6.43% 1.18% 5.21% 0.29SA3 

San Francisco-Oakland, 

CA 1998 

TOHU 663.2 0.5 21.1 3.7 10.8 0.0 52.5 11.9 40.7 319.1 0.08% 3.18% 0.56% 1.63% 0.00

NC 8.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.5 4.9 0.00% 2.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00

SA1 307.3 0.2 3.9 1.4 0.8 0.0 12.6 2.3 10.3 92.8 0.07% 1.27% 0.46% 0.26% 0.00SA2 257.9 0.2 12.2 2.0 6.6 0.0 27.5 7.8 19.6 161.9 0.08% 4.73% 0.78% 2.56% 0.00SA3 98.0 0.2 5.0 0.3 3.3 0.0 12.4 1.7 10.7 64.4 0.20% 5.10% 0.31% 3.37% 0.00

San Jose, CA 1998 

TOHU 565.9 0.4 24.5 1.8 16.8 0.3 33.3 3.6 29.6 326.9 0.07% 4.33% 0.32% 2.97% 0.05

NC 21.8 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.4 0.1 1.2 15.6 0.00% 3.67% 0.00% 3.21% 0.00

SA1 274.6 0.3 11.0 0.7 7.6 0.3 15.7 1.7 14.0 159.6 0.11% 4.01% 0.25% 2.77% 0.11SA2 53.9 0.0 1.3 0.3 0.8 0.0 2.7 0.6 2.0 24.2 0.00% 2.41% 0.56% 1.48% 0.00SA3 237.4 0.1 12.3 0.8 8.3 0.0 14.9 1.3 13.6 143.2 0.04% 5.18% 0.34% 3.50% 0.00

Seattle-Everett, WA 

1996 

TOHU 902.4 10.2 87.9 2.9 230.7 539.0 1.13% 9.74% 0.32

NC 51.7 0.2 4.6 0.0 16.1 36.0 0.39% 8.90% 0.00

SA1 242.4 1.2 7.1 0.4 32.6 112.8 0.50% 2.93% 0.17SA2 421.6 2.7 52.7 1.6 141.8 296.4 0.64% 12.50% 0.38SA3 214.2 5.6 25.4 0.7 54.4 121.1 2.61% 11.86% 0.33

2004 

TOHU 991.9 4.9 129.9 13.0 116.2 2.7 89.3 8.3 80.5 593.1 0.49% 13.10% 1.31% 11.71% 0.27

NC 64.0 0.3 14.1 2.3 11.8 0.0 9.5 0.3 9.2 45.4 0.47% 22.03% 3.59% 18.44% 0.00

SA1 250.6 0.3 17.6 2.5 14.9 0.6 14.1 2.2 11.9 117.0 0.12% 7.02% 1.00% 5.95% 0.24SA2 450.7 0.8 65.2 6.9 58.4 0.7 45.8 4.0 41.7 310.8 0.18% 14.47% 1.53% 12.96% 0.16SA3 258.7 3.5 42.7 3.1 39.1 1.4 26.7 2.0 24.1 151.8 1.35% 16.51% 1.20% 15.11% 0.54

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected.
Table 2. AHS Metropolitan Data 1994-2007 (cont.) 

Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL 1998 

TOHU 935.8 0.3 16.6 1.6 10.4 1.1 29.6 6.6 23.0 184.3 0.03% 1.77% 0.17% 1.11% 0.12

NC 54.4 0.0 1.3 0.3 0.8 0.0 2.5 0.0 2.5 14.7 0.00% 2.39% 0.55% 1.47% 0.00

SA1 114.4 0.0 1.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 2.5 0.8 1.7 18.1 0.00% 1.40% 0.26% 0.26% 0.00SA2 103.7 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.3 0.3 3.3 0.6 2.8 15.7 0.00% 1.06% 0.00% 0.29% 0.29SA3 286.8 0.0 5.3 0.5 3.7 0.2 9.0 1.7 7.4 58.3 0.00% 1.85% 0.17% 1.29% 0.07

2007 

TOHU 1074.9 0.0 8.5 2.0 42.0 193.3 0.00% 0.79% 0.19

NC 62.3 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.1 7.1 0.00% 1.77% 0.00

SA1 123.7 0.0 0.6 0.5 3.8 20.5 0.00% 0.49% 0.40SA2 99.4 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.7 15.7 0.00% 0.00% 0.50SA3 285.8 0.0 1.1 0.5 13.6 55.2 0.00% 0.38% 0.17

Washington, DC 

1998 

TOHU 1672.7 0.0 83.0 4.6 63.1 0.0 65.2 5.8 59.4 749.8 0.00% 4.96% 0.28% 3.77% 0.00

NC 103.1 0.0 13.5 0.4 10.7 0.0 9.1 0.4 8.7 73.9 0.00% 13.09% 0.39% 10.38% 0.00

SA1 226.1 0.0 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.8 5.8 46.6 0.00% 0.35% 0.18% 0.00% 0.00SA2 274.2 0.0 16.7 1.3 12.9 0.0 10.2 0.0 10.2 100.8 0.00% 6.09% 0.47% 4.70% 0.00SA3 340.9 0.0 17.6 0.0 13.1 0.0 11.4 1.2 10.2 209.0 0.00% 5.16% 0.00% 3.84% 0.00

2007 

TOHU 1949.1 0.0 119.8 0.0 128.2 918.3 0.00% 6.15% 0.00

NC 92.7 0.0 8.5 0.0 13.8 67.6 0.00% 9.17% 0.00

SA1 247.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.5 49.8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00SA2 292.6 0.0 27.8 0.0 13.2 110.5 0.00% 9.50% 0.00SA3 371.1 0.0 20.7 0.0 31.2 232.6 0.00% 5.58% 0.00

Note: Numbers in thousands. TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units. NC = New Construction (≤4 yrs). SA1 = Suba= Subarea 3. – indicates zero or rounds to zero. Blank regions indicate no data collected. 
Table 3. Proportion of Wood and Gas Fireplaces 

Source Proportion Wood Fireplaces Proportion Gas Fireplaces 

2008 HPBA Shipment Survey 25.45% 74.55% 

EIA Adjusted 37.63% 56.32% 

Average 31.54% 65.43% 

Note: “EIA Adjusted” is the adjusted EIA value calculated by the following method, 

(2005 ENC) x (Manufacturer Shipments value for 2008) / (Average Manufacturer 

Shipments values for 2000-2005) 

Table 4. Multiple Ownership Factor 

*Assume 2+ fireplaces = 2 fireplaces; to two significant figures the same multiplication factor is 

obtained if it is assumed that 2+ fireplaces = 90% 2 fireplaces and 10% 3 fireplaces. 

Table 5. References for “Never Used” Wood-Burning Fireplace without Insert Use 

Category 

Reference Region Year Category Fraction Unused 

104 San Joaquin Valley, CA 2002 Never 0.22 

105 San Joaquin Valley, CA 1999 Never 0.32 

106 Northern California 2002 Used Last Year? No. 0.23 

107 U.S. 2002 Almost Never/Never 0.19 

111 U.S. 1994-1995 Don't Use 0.31 

108 U.S. 2004 Almost Never/Never 0.31 

112 Bay Area, CA 2006-2007 Not Used 0.44 

113 Seattle MSA, WA 2007 Not Used 0.57 

114 Minnesota 2002-2003 Unused 0.27 

Average 0.32 

Data Set Total Wood Gas Insert 

2008 U.S. Census* 1.1 − − −

1973-2008 

U.S. Census Average* 1.1 − − −

2008 HPBA 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 

2006 HPBA 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.4 

2004 HPBA 1.2 1.1 1.1 −

21 
22 

Table 6. Total Particulate Emissions for New Construction Houses with Wood-Burning 

Fireplaces without Inserts Emitted in 2016 

New Single-Family Housing Starts 

Projection Basis 

Emission 

Factor 

Projected Tons of Particles Emitted in 2016 

Heating 

Wood 

Aesthetics 

Total

Wood Firelogs*

’96-’05 Pre-Downturn 

Ten-Year Average 

Phase II 538 265 

164 

968 

Baseline 1,193 588 1,945 

’00-’09 Ten-Year Average 

Phase II 487 240 

148 

875 

Baseline 1,078 531 1,758 

’95-’05 Slope + ’09 Intercept 

Projected Average ’11-’16 

Phase II 274 135 

84 

493 

Baseline 608 300 991 

Average 

Phase II 433 213 

132 

779

Baseline 960 473 1,565

*

The wax-fiber firelog emission factor remains the same in both emission factor scenarios. 

Table 7. Total Particulate Emissions for New Construction Houses with Wood-Burning 

Fireplaces without Inserts Emitted in 2016, Sensitivity Analysis, Gas-Fired Fireplace 

Proportion of New Fireplaces Increased from 65.43% to 75% 

Percentage of New Fireplaces that 

are Gas-Fired 

Emission 

Factor 

Projected Tons of Particles Emitted in 2016 

Heating

Wood 

Aesthetics 

Total†

Wood Firelogs*

65.43% Gas Fireplaces 

Phase II 433 213 

132 

779

Baseline 960 473 1,565

75% Gas Fireplaces 

Phase II 202 163 

101 

466

Baseline 447 361 909

*

The wax-fiber firelog emission factor remains the same in both emission factor scenarios. 

†

Total values based on average of new single-family housing starts projections as shown in 

previous table. 
Summary Figures 

Figure 1. Usable Fireplaces in Occupied Homes, 1997-2007 

Note: TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units, NC = New Construction (within four years). 

NE = Northeast, MW = Midwest, S = South, and W = West census regions 
Figure 2. Usable Fireplaces, National and Metropolitan 

*92 surveys conducted from 1994-2007 in 47 MSAs. See Table 2 for MSA locations. Note: TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units, NC = New Construction (

≤4 years). 
Figure 3. U.S. Fireplaces without Inserts Used for Heating, 1997-2007*

*Sum of “Other Heating” (which includes parallel and supplemental heating) plus “Main Heating” as defined 

portions of bars denote “Main Heating” contribution. Note: TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units, NC = New Construction (

≤4 years) 
Figure 4. Fireplaces without Inserts Used for Heating, National and Metropolitan 

*92 surveys conducted from 1994-2007 in 47 MSAs. See Table 2 for MSA locations. Note: TOHU = Total Occupied Housing Units, NC = New Construction (≤4 years). 
Figure 5. Percent of Completed New Single-Family Houses with Fireplaces
Figure 6. Number of Fireplaces in Completed New Single-Family Houses
Figure 7. Proportion of Total Fireplaces without Inserts That Are Wood-Fueled 

Note: “Manufacturer Shipments” based on the 2008 HPBA Shipment Survey103

“2005 ENC” = 2005 EIA National Data, New Construction (2000-2005) 
Figure 8. Proportion of Total Fireplaces without Inserts That Are Gas-Fueled 

Note: “Manufacturer Shipments” based on the 2008 HPBA Shipment Survey103

“2005 ENC” = 2005 EIA National Data, New Construction (2000-2005) 
Figure 9. Projected Annual Single-Family Housing Starts *Average annual housing starts for the period 2011 to 2016 based on the slope of 1995 to 2005 housing starts an

on 2009 housing starts.
Figure 10. Fireplace Ownership in New Construction 

Note: Numbers are percent of single-family new construction homes. Multiple ownership factor 

of 1.17 not considered on this chart. 

Figure 11. Wood-Burning Fireplace Usage in New Construction 

Note: Numbers are percent of wood-burning fireplaces. 

32 
References 

1 American Housing Survey for the United States: 1997, Current Housing Reports, issued 

November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

2 American Housing Survey for the United States: 1999, Current Housing Reports, issued 

October 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

3 American Housing Survey for the United States: 2001, Current Housing Reports, issued 

October 2002, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

4 American Housing Survey for the United States: 2003, Current Housing Reports, issued 

September 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

5 American Housing Survey for the United States: 2005, Current Housing Reports, issued 

August 2006, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Department 

of Commerce. 

6 American Housing Survey for the United States: 2007, Current Housing Reports, issued 

September 2008, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

7 American Housing Survey for the Anaheim-Santa Ana Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current 

Housing Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

8 American Housing Survey for the Anaheim-Santa Ana Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current 

Housing Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

9 American Housing Survey for the Atlanta Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

10 American Housing Survey for the Atlanta Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

11 American Housing Survey for the Baltimore Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued December 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

33 
12 American Housing Survey for the Baltimore Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current Housing 

Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

13 American Housing Survey for the Birmingham Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

14 American Housing Survey for the Boston Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

15 American Housing Survey for the Boston Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current Housing 

Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

16 American Housing Survey for the Buffalo Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current Housing 

Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

17 American Housing Survey for the Buffalo Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

18 American Housing Survey for the Charlotte Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

19 American Housing Survey for the Charlotte Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

20 American Housing Survey for the Chicago Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

21 American Housing Survey for the Chicago Metropolitan Area: 1999, Current Housing 

Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

22 American Housing Survey for the Chicago Metropolitan Area: 2003, Current Housing 

Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

34 
23 American Housing Survey for the Cincinnati Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

24 American Housing Survey for the Cleveland Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

25 American Housing Survey for the Cleveland Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

26 American Housing Survey for the Columbus Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

27 American Housing Survey for the Columbus Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

28 American Housing Survey for the Dallas Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current Housing 

Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

29 American Housing Survey for the Dallas Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

30 American Housing Survey for the Denver Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

31 American Housing Survey for the Denver Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

32 American Housing Survey for the Detroit Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

33 American Housing Survey for the Detroit Metropolitan Area: 1999, Current Housing 

Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

35 
34 American Housing Survey for the Detroit Metropolitan Area: 2003, Current Housing 

Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

35 American Housing Survey for the Ft. Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current 

Housing Reports, issued April 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

36 American Housing Survey for the Ft. Worth-Arlington Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current 

Housing Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

37 American Housing Survey for the Hartford Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

38 American Housing Survey for the Hartford Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

39 American Housing Survey for the Houston Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

40 American Housing Survey for the Houston Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current Housing 

Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

41 American Housing Survey for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

42 American Housing Survey for the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

43 American Housing Survey for the Kansas City Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

44 American Housing Survey for the Kansas City Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

36 
45 American Housing Survey for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Area: 1995, 

Current Housing Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

46 American Housing Survey for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Area: 1999, 

Current Housing Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

47 American Housing Survey for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Area: 2003, 

Current Housing Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

48 American Housing Survey for the Memphis Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

49 American Housing Survey for the Memphis Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

50 American Housing Survey for the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current 

Housing Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

51 American Housing Survey for the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current 

Housing Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

52 American Housing Survey for the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current 

Housing Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

53 American Housing Survey for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current Housing 

Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

54 American Housing Survey for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

55 American Housing Survey for the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

37 
56 American Housing Survey for the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current 

Housing Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

57 American Housing Survey for the New Orleans Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

58 American Housing Survey for the New Orleans Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

59 American Housing Survey for the New York-Nassau-Suffolk-Orange Metropolitan Area: 

1995, Current Housing Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

60 American Housing Survey for the New York-Nassau-Suffolk-Orange Metropolitan Area: 

1999, Current Housing Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

61 American Housing Survey for the New York-Nassau-Suffolk-Orange Metropolitan Area: 

2003, Current Housing Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

62 American Housing Survey for the Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News Metropolitan 

Area: 1998, Current Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of 

Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

63 American Housing Survey for the Northern New Jersey Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current 

Housing Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

64 American Housing Survey for the Northern New Jersey Metropolitan Area: 1999, Current 

Housing Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

65 American Housing Survey for the Northern New Jersey Metropolitan Area: 2003, Current 

Housing Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

66 American Housing Survey for the Oakland Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

38 
67 American Housing Survey for the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

68 American Housing Survey for the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current 

Housing Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

69 American Housing Survey for the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

70 American Housing Survey for the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area: 1999, Current Housing 

Reports, issued March 2001, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

71 American Housing Survey for the Philadelphia Metropolitan Area: 2003, Current Housing 

Reports, issued December 2004, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

72 American Housing Survey for the Phoenix Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current Housing 

Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

73 American Housing Survey for the Phoenix Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

74 American Housing Survey for the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

75 American Housing Survey for the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

76 American Housing Survey for the Portland Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

77 American Housing Survey for the Portland Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

39 
78 American Housing Survey for the Providence-Pawtucket-Warwick Metropolitan Area: 

1998, Current Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

79 American Housing Survey for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan Area: 

1994, Current Housing Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

80 American Housing Survey for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan Area: 

2002, Current Housing Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

81 American Housing Survey for the Rochester Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

82 American Housing Survey for the Sacramento Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

83 American Housing Survey for the Sacramento Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

84 American Housing Survey for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

85 American Housing Survey for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

86 American Housing Survey for the Salt Lake City Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

87 American Housing Survey for the San Antonio Metropolitan Area: 1995, Current Housing 

Reports, issued September 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

88 American Housing Survey for the San Antonio Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current Housing 

Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

40 
89 American Housing Survey for the San Diego Metropolitan Area: 1994, Current Housing 

Reports, issued May 1996, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

90 American Housing Survey for the San Diego Metropolitan Area: 2002, Current Housing 

Reports, issued July 2003, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

91 American Housing Survey for the San Francisco Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

92 American Housing Survey for the San Jose Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

93 American Housing Survey for the Seattle-Everett Metropolitan Area: 1996, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 1997, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

94 American Housing Survey for the Seattle-Everett Metropolitan Area: 2004, Current 

Housing Reports, issued October 2005, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

95 American Housing Survey for the Tampa-St. Petersburg Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current 

Housing Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

96 American Housing Survey for the Tampa-St. Petersburg Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current 

Housing Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

97 American Housing Survey for the Washington Metropolitan Area: 1998, Current Housing 

Reports, issued November 2000, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 

and U.S. Department of Commerce. 

98 American Housing Survey for the Washington Metropolitan Area: 2007, Current Housing 

Reports, issued February 2009, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

99 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1993 Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2g.html. 

100 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1997 Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs97/recs97.html. 

41 
101 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 2003 Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/detail_tables.html. 

102 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 2005 Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey, 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2005/hc2005_tables/detailed_tables2005.html. 

103 Personal Communication, Don Johnson, Director of Market Research, Hearth, Patio and 

Barbecue Association, Hearth Industry Appliance Shipments 1999-2008, e-mail dated 

January 13, 2010. 

104 McGuire Research Services, Inc., Duraflame San Joaquin Valley District Survey, report to 

Duraflame Inc. Stockton, CA, 2002. 

105 META Information Services, Summary Results, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution 

Control District Baseline Telephone Survey, January 1999, report to San Joaquin Valley 

Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999. 

106 Broderick, D. and Houck, J.E., Results of Wood Burning Survey – Sacramento, San 

Joaquin, and San Francisco Areas, University of California Berkeley/California Air 

Resources Board – GIS Study, report prepared for Hearth, Patio, and Barbecue 

Association, 2003. (Includes Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley and San Francisco areas.) 

107 NFO WorldGroup, HPBA Fireplace and Freestanding Stove Usage and Attitude Study 

2002, report to Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, Arlington, VA, 2003. 

108 DHM Group, 2004 Consumer Attitude and Usage Survey: Hearth Products, report to 

Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, Arlington, VA, 2005. 

109 TNS Global Market Research, 2006 Fireplace/Freestanding Stove Lifestyle Usage and 

Attitude Study, report to Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, Arlington, VA, 2006. 

110 TNS Global Market Research, 2008 Fireplace/Freestanding Stove Lifestyle Usage and 

Attitude Study, report to Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, Arlington, VA, 2008. 

111 U.S. Fireplace Fuel Usage, 1994/95 Fall/Winter Season, Vista Marketing Research report 

to Duraflame Corporation, March 1996, Stockton, CA. 

112 Winter 2006-2007 Spare the Air Tonight Study, report prepared by True North Research, 

Inc. for the BAAQMD, March 2007. 

113 Clark, J. and Houck, J.E., Puget Sound Indoor Wood-Burning Emission Inventory Survey 

Data Review and Evaluation, survey review and analysis by OMNI Environmental 

Services, Inc. for the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association, Arlington, VA, 2009. 

42 
114 Wu, C.Y., Piva, R., Broderick, D.R., Houck, J.E. and Crouch, J. Emissions Inventory 

Oriented Residential Wood Combustion Survey, in Proceedings of 14th International 

Emission Inventory Conferences, “Transforming Emission Inventories – Meeting Future 

Challenges Today,” Las Vegas, NV, April 11-14, 2005. 

115 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Construction Reports, Series C-20, Housing Starts 1991-2009. 

116 Houck, J.E. and Eagle, B.N. Residential Wood Combustion Emission Inventory South 

Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley Portion of Salton Sea Air Basin – 2002 Base Year, 

report to South Coast Air Quality Management District and Hearth, Patio and Barbecue 

Association, October 2006. 

117 Houck, J.E., Mangino, J.E., Brooks, G. and Huntley, R.H. Recommended Procedure for 

Compiling Emission Inventory National, Regional and County Level Activity Data for 

Residential Wood Combustion Source Category, in proceedings of: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Emission Inventory Conference, Denver, CO, 2001. 

118 Broderick, D., Houck, J.E., Crouch, J., Goldman, J. Review of Residential Wood 

Combustion Data for Mid-Atlantic and New England States, in proceedings of: 14th

International Emission Inventory Conference, Transforming Emission Inventories – 

Meeting Future Challenges Today, Las Vegas, NV, April 11-14, 2005. 

119 Houck, J.E. and Crouch, J. Updated Emissions Data for Revision of AP-42 Section 1.9, 

Residential Fireplaces, report prepared for Roy H. Huntley, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, December 18, 2002. 

120 Muhlbaier, J.L. A Characterization of Emissions from Wood-Burning Fireplaces, General 

Motors Research Laboratories report GMR-3730, ENV #111, Warren, MI, 1981. 

121 Muhlbaier, J.L. A Characterization of Emissions from Wood-Burning Fireplaces, in 

Proceedings of 1981 International Conference on Residential Solid Fuels, pp. 164-187, 

Environmental Impact Solutions, Portland, OR, 1981. 

122 Muhlbaier, J.L. Particulate and Gaseous Emissions from Residential Fireplaces, General 

Motors Research Laboratories report GMR-3588, ENV #101, Warren, MI, 1981. 

123 Aiken, M. Canadian Firelog Ltd. Emission Testing, report prepared for Canadian Firelog 

Ltd., Richmond, BC, prepared by B.C. Research, project no. 2-61-666, Vancouver, BC, 

1987. 

124 Shelton, J. Testing of Sawdust-wax Firelogs in an Open Fireplace, report to Conros Corp., 

Duraflame Inc., and Pine Mountain Corp., prepared by Shelton Research, Inc., Santa Fe, 

NM, 1988. 

125 Haden, A.C.S. and Braaten, R.W. Reduction of Fireplace and Woodstove Pollutant 

Emissions through the Use of Manufactured Firelogs, Proceedings 84th Annual Meeting 

43 
and Exhibition of the Air and Waste Management Association, paper 91-129.1, 

Vancouver, BC, 1991. 

126 Bighouse, R.D. and Houck, J.E. Evaluation of Emissions and Energy Efficiencies of 

Residential Wood Combustion Devices using Manufactured Fuels, Oregon Department 

of Energy, Salem, OR, 1993. 

127 Zielinska, B., et al. Northern Front Range Air Quality Study, Final Report to Colorado 

State University, Fort Collins, CO, 1998. 

128 Bartley, B. and Colwell, G. Glenn Colwell Residence Fireplace Source Test Report, Bay 

Area Air Quality Management District, Report No. 99178, San Francisco, CA, 1999. 

129 Houck, J.E. and Scott, A.T. Duraflame Emission Benefits Study, report to Duraflame, Inc., 

prepared by OMNI Environmental Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 1999. 

130 Houck, J.E. and Scott, A.T. Duraflame Emission Benefits Study, Results of Two 

Supplemental Tests, report to Duraflame, Inc., prepared by OMNI Environmental 

Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 1999. 

131 Broderick, D. and Houck, J.E. Environflame Firelog, Emission Test Report prepared for 

Wayerhaeuser Company, prepared by OMNI Consulting Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 

2001. 

132 Broderick, D., Houck, J.E., and Crouch, J. Development of a Fireplace Baseline 

Particulate Emission Factor Database, in proceedings of: 14th International Emission 

Inventory Conference, Transforming Emission Inventories – Meeting Future Challenges 

Today, Las Vegas, NV, April 11-14, 2005. 

133 Snowden, W. D. Source Sampling Residential Fireplaces for Emission Factor 

Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-450/3-76-010, 1975. 

134 PEDCo-Environmental, Inc. Source Testing for Fireplaces, Stoves, and Restaurant Grills 

in Vail, Colorado, report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, contract no. 68-01-

1999, 1977. 

135 DeAngelis, D.G., Ruffin, D.S. and Reznik, R.B. Preliminary Characterization of Emissions 

from Wood-Fired Residential Combustion Equipment, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA-600/7-80-040, 1980. 

136 Kosel, P. Emissions from Residential Fireplaces, State of California Air Resources Board, 

Stationary Source Control Division, Engineering Evaluation Branch Report no. C- 80-

027, 1980. 

137 Shelton, J.W. and Gay, L. Colorado Fireplace Report, Colorado Air Pollution Control 

Division, report prepared by Shelton Research, Inc., Santa Fe, NM, 1987. 

44 
138 Shelton, J. Testing of Sawdust-wax Firelogs in an Open Fireplace, PM10 Standards and 

Nontraditional Particulate Source Controls, Volume II, A & WMA Transactions Series, 

ISSN 1040-8177: no. 22, Pittsburgh, PA, 1988. 

139 Advanced Systems Technology, Inc. Development of AP-42 Emission Factors for 

Residential Fireplaces Apex, North Carolina, EPA contract no. 68D90155, 1990. 

140 Shelton, J., Sorensen, D., Stern, C.H. and Jaasma, D.R. Fireplace Emissions Test Method 

Development, report to Wood heating Alliance and Fireplace Emissions Research 

Coalition, prepared by Shelton Research, Inc., Santa Fe, NM and Virginia Polytechnic 

Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 1990. 

141 Barnett, S.G. In-home Evaluation of Emissions from Masonry Fireplaces and Heaters, 

OMNI Environmental Services, Inc. report to Western States Clay Products Association, 

San Mateo, CA, 1991. 

142 Hayden, A.C.S. and Braaten, R.W. Reduction of Fireplace and Woodstove Pollutant 

Emissions through the Use of Manufactured Firelogs, Proceedings 84th Annual Meeting 

and Exhibition of the Air and Waste Management Association, Vancouver, BC, paper 91-

129.1, 1991. 

143 Jaasma, D.R., Stern, H.S., Champion, M. and Albright, E. Fireplace Emissions Test 

Method Refinement and Verification, report to Wood Heating Alliance, Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg, VA, 1991. 

144 Stern, C.H. and Jaasma, D.R. Study of Emissions from Masonry Fireplaces, report to Brick 

Institute of America, Reston, VA, prepared by Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State 

University, Blacksburg, VA, 1991. 

145 Wood Heating Alliance Fireplace Technical Committee. WHA Fireplace Emissions Test 

Method, internal memorandum, 1991. 

146 E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc. Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 1.9, 

Residential Fireplaces, EPA Contract No. 68-D1-0146, 1993. 

147 OMNI Environmental Services, Inc. Reports on thirty-six fireplace tests submitted to the 

Washington State Department of Ecology pursuant to WAC 51-309-3102 and UBC 

Standard 31-2, 1995-2000. 

148 Schauer, J.J. Source Contributions to Atmospheric Compound Concentrations: Emissions 

Measurements and Model Predictions, Ph.D. Thesis, California Institute of Technology, 

Pasadena California, 1998. 

149 Purvis, C.R. and McCrillis, R.C. Fine Particulate Matter (PM) and Organic Speciation of 

Fireplace Emissions, Environmental Science and Technology, v. 34, n. 9, pp. 1653-1658, 

2000. 

45 
150 Tiegs, P.E. The Effects of Fireplace Design Features on Emissions, report to the Fireplace 

Manufacturer’s Caucus of the Hearth Products Association, prepared by OMNI-Test 

Laboratories, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 2000. 

151 Tiegs, P.E. and Houck, J.E. Evaluation of an Emission Testing Protocol for Wood-Burning 

Fireplaces and Masonry Heaters, draft report to Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution 

Control District, 2000. 

152 Broderick, D. and Houck, J.E. Andiron Super-Grate, Emission Test Report prepared for 

California Hot Wood, prepared by OMNI Consulting Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 

2001. 

153 Broderick, D. and Houck, J.E. Emissions from Duraflame Firelogs, report prepared for 

Duraflame, Inc., prepared by OMNI Consulting Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 2001. 

154 Fine, P.M., Cass, G.R. and Simoneit, B.R. Chemical Characterization of Fine Particle 

Emissions from Fireplace Combustion of Woods Grown in the Northeastern United 

States, Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 35, No. 13, 2001. 

155 Fine, P.M., Cass, G.R. and Simoneit, B.R. Chemical Characterization of Fine Particle 

Emissions from Fireplace Combustion of Woods Grown in the Southern United States, 

Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 36, No. 7, 2002. 

156 Gullett, B.K., Touati, A. and Hays, M.D. PCDD/F, PCB, HxCBz, and PM Emission 

Factors for Fireplace and Woodstove Combustion in the San Francisco Bay Region, 

Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 37, No. 9, 2003. 

157 Gullett, B.K., Touati, A. and Hays, M.D. Corrections to PCDD/F, PCB, HxCBz, and PM 

Emission Factors for Fireplace and Woodstove Combustion in the San Francisco Bay 

Region, Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 38, No. 13, 2004. 

158 Crouch, J. and Houck, J.E. Comment on "PCDD/F, PCB, HxCBz, and PM Emission 

Factors for Fireplace and Woodstove Combustion in the San Francisco Bay Region", 

Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2004. 

159 Fiedler, J.D. Data prepared for the HPBA ASTM fireplace test protocol, by OMNI 

Consulting Services, Inc., Beaverton, OR, 2004. 

160 Myren, B. Data prepared for the HPBA ASTM fireplace test protocol, by Myren 

Consulting, Inc. Colville, WA, 2004. 

161 Simons, C.A., Burnet, P.G. and Merrill, R.G. A System to Obtain Time-Integrated 

Woodstove Emission Samples, Proceedings of the 1986 EPA/APCA Symposium on 

Measurement of Toxic Air Pollutants, EPA Report No. 600/9-86-013, 1986. 

46 
162 Simons, C.A., Christiansen, P.D. and Pritchett, L.C. Woodstove Emission Sampling 

Methods Comparability Analysis and In-Situ Evaluation of New Technology 

woodstoves, final report to U.S. DOE/BPA, contract ED-AC79-85BP18508, 1988. 

163 Freeburn, S.A. and Simons, C.A. An Automated System for Residential Sampling of 

Woodstove Emissions, presented at AWMA International Specialty Conference on 

Combustion and the Environment, Seattle, Washington, 1989. 

164 U.S. EPA. EPA Contract No. 68-D1-0146, Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 

Section 1.9, Residential Fireplaces, prepared by E.H. Pechan & Associates, 1993. 

165 McCrillis, R.C. and Jaasma, D.R. Woodstove Emission Measurement Methods: 

Comparison and Emission Factors Update, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 

Vol. 24: 1-12, 1993. 

166 Washington State Building Code. Standard Test Method for Particulate Emissions from 

Fireplaces, WAC 51-40-31200, Section 31-2, 2004. 

167 Houck, J.E. and Eagle, B.N. Task 6 Technical Memorandum 4 Control Analysis and 

Documentation for Residential Wood Combustion in the MANE-VU Region, final report 

prepared for the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association, Inc., prepared by 

OMNI Environmental Services, Inc., 2006. 

168 May, D.M. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and Production in Kansas, report prepared 

for United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin NC-169, 

1994. 

169 May, D.M., Settle, J. and Benjamin, T. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and 

Production in Indiana, report prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Resource Bulletin NC-188, 1996. 

170 May, D.M., Weatherspoon, A.K. and Hackett, R.L. Residential Fuelwood Consumption 

and Production in Michigan, report prepared for United States Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin NC-148, 1992. 

171 May, D.M. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and Production in Nebraska, report 

prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin 

NC-168, 1994. 

172 May, D.M. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and Production in North Dakota, report 

prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin 

NC-167, 1994. 

173 May, D.M. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and Production in South Dakota, report 

prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin 

NC-171, 1994. 

47 
48 

174 May, D.M. Residential Fuelwood Consumption and Production in Wisconsin, report 

prepared for United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Resource Bulletin 

NC-172, 1994. 

175 Mouelle, J., et al. Residential Fuelwood Assessment, State of Minnesota, 2002-2003 

Heating Season, report prepared for Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 

Division of Forestry, 2003.