NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EVALUATION AND

DESIGN OF AN EMISSIONS DATA REPORTING,

MANAGEMENT, AND TRACKING SYSTEM

Western Governor’s Association

Western Regional Air 

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology

FINAL

NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EVALUATION AND

DESIGN OF AN EMISSIONS DATA REPORTING,

MANAGEMENT, AND TRACKING SYSTEM

Prepared for

Western Governor’s Association

Western Regional Air Partnership

1515 Cleveland Place

Suite 200

Denver, Colorado 80202

Prepared by

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology

15 Loveton Circle

Sparks, MD 21152

July 25, 2003

NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EVALUATION AND

DESIGN OF AN EMISSIONS DATA REPORTING,
NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR EVALUATION AND

DESIGN OF AN EMISSIONS DATA REPORTING,

MANAGEMENT, AND TRACKING SYSTEM

Prepared for

Western Governor’s Association

Western Regional Air Partnership

1515 Cleveland Place

Suite 200

Denver, Colorado 80202

Prepared by

EA Engineering, Science, and Technology

15 Loveton Circle

Sparks, MD 21152

July 25, 2003

EA Project No: 1406601
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

ii

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Regional Haze......................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule (CERR).................................................... 1

1.3 RPO Data Exchange Protocol................................................................................. 2

1.4 Western Air Partnership (WRAP) .......................................................................... 2

1.5 Regulatory Framework for Tribal Visibility Implementation Plans....................... 2

1.6 Objectives ............................................................................................................... 3

2.0 WORKSHOPS AND QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS ................................................... 5

2.1 Description of Workshops...................................................................................... 5

2.2 Description of Questionnaire .................................................................................. 5

2.3 Findings................................................................................................................... 5

3.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS........................................................................................... 9

3.1 Conceptual WRAP EDMS...................................................................................... 9

3.2 Comparison........................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Existing EDMS ..................................................................................................... 10

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................. 16

4.1 Flow Chart of the WRAP EDMS.......................................................................... 16

4.2 Point Source Module............................................................................................. 16

4.3 Area Source Module ............................................................................................. 17

4.4 Mobile source Module .......................................................................................... 18

4.5 Biogenic source Module ....................................................................................... 20

4.6 Windblown Dust Source Module.......................................................................... 20

4.7 Fire Source Module............................................................................................... 21

4.8 Standard Reports and Queries............................................................................... 22

4.9 Special Section 309 Tracking ............................................................................... 23

4.10 GIS Module........................................................................................................... 27

4.11 DBA Module......................................................................................................... 28

4.12 QA/QC Module..................................................................................................... 29

5.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 31

6.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 32

APPENDIX A1: FIRST WORKSHOP PRESENTATION

APPENDIX A2: FIRST WORKSHOP DISCUSSION SUMMARY

APPENDIX A3: FIRST WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS

APPENDIX B1: SECOND WORKSHOP PRESENTATION

APPENDIX B2: SECOND WORKSHOP DISCUSSION SUMMARY

APPENDIX B3: SECOND WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

iii

APPENDIX C: QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCES

APPENDIX D: CONCEPTUAL WRAP AND SELECTED EDMS COMPARISON

APPENDIX E: NEI DATA SUBMISSION FORMAT

APPENDIX F: NEI QA/QC PROCESS

APPENDIX G: WRAP EDMS FLOW CHART

APPENDIX H: CAC BONDARIES
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Regional Haze

Regional haze is defined as air pollution that is transported long distances and reduces visibility

in national parks and wilderness areas. The pollutants that create this haze are sulfates, nitrates, 

organic carbon, elemental carbon, and soil dust. Human-caused haze sources include industry, 

motor vehicles, agricultural and forestry burning, and windblown dust from roads and farming 

practices.

In 1999, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued regulations that address 

regional haze in one hundred fifty six (156) national parks and wilderness areas across the 

country. The goal of the Regional Haze Rule (RHR) is to eliminate human-caused visibility

impairment in national parks and wilderness areas across the country. It contains strategies to 

improve visibility over the next sixty (60) years, and requires states to adopt implementation 

plans.

The RHR provides two paths to address regional haze. One is 40 CFR 51.308 (Section 308), and 

requires most states to develop long-term strategies out to the year 2064. These strategies must 

be shown to make “reasonable progress” in improving visibility in Class I areas inside the state 

and in neighboring jurisdictions. The other is 40 CFR 51.309 (Section 309), and is an option for 

nine states - Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and 

Wyoming - and the two hundred eleven (211) Tribes located within those States to adopt 

regional haze strategies for the period from 2003 to 2018. These strategies are based on 

recommendations from the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC), for 

protecting the sixteen (16) Class I areas in the Colorado Plateau area (GCTVC, 1996). Adopting 

these strategies constitutes reasonable progress until 2018. These same strategies can also be 

used by the nine western states and tribes to protect the other Class I areas within their own 

jurisdiction.

The RHR specifically requires comprehensive emissions tracking and reporting for clean air 

corridors (CAC), sulfur dioxide (SO2) stationary sources, fire sources, mobile sources, and 

windblown dust sources among other requirements.

1.2 Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule

One of the recent EPA’s rules that will affect the data submission requirements of the RHR is the 

Consolidated Emission Reporting Rule (CERR) (67 FR 39602-39616) issued in 2002. The 

CERR will simplify and consolidate emissions inventory reporting requirements to a single 

location within the CFR and establish new reporting requirements related to particulate matter 

with aerodynamic size less than 2.5 μm (PM2.5), regional haze, and statewide reporting of area 

and mobile source emissions. In fact, new inventories will add PM2.5 and ammonia (NH3). 

Currently area and mobile sources are reported by nonattainment area, and under the CERR, 

inventories will include all sources statewide by county. Moreover, there will be an option to 

report smaller point sources once every three years or one-third of the sources every year.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

2

1.3 RPO Data Exchange Protocol

The RPO data exchange protocol will also affect the data submission and reporting requirements. 

The goal of the RPO data exchange protocol is to facilitate the sharing of databases for emissions 

modeling in a regionally consistent and model-independent nature. Therefore, it seeks to 

develop data exchange formats and naming conventions so that emissions modelers from the five 

RPOs and states and tribes have common datasets from which to pursue regulatory modeling of 

ozone (O3), regional haze, and PM. It includes nine different protocols:

 Industrial point source protocol

 Area source protocol

 Temporal allocation and profile assignment protocol

 On-road mobile sources protocol

 Off-road mobile sources protocol

 Continuous emissions monitoring and day-specific protocol

 Spatial surrogate protocol

 Speciation profile protocol

 Growth and control factors protocol

The data sources, data formats, and issues associated with each of these protocols are further 

detailed in the Midwest RPO’s Draft RPO Data Exchange Protocol (Pechan, 2003).

1.4 Western Regional Air Partnership

The Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) is a regional planning organization (RPO) that 

was established in 1997 as the successor organization of the GCVTC. The WRAP is a 

collaborative effort of tribal governments, state governments, and various federal agencies to 

implement the recommendations of the GCVTC and to develop the technical and policy tools 

needed by western states and tribes to comply with the RHR. The WRAP Emissions Forum (EF) 

oversees the development of a comprehensive emissions tracking and forecasting system which 

can be utilized by the WRAP or its member entities to monitor the trends in actual emissions, 

and forecast the anticipated emissions which will result from current regulatory requirements and 

alternative control strategies. In addition, this forum is responsible for the oversight of the 

assembly and quality assurance of the emissions inventories and forecasts to be utilized by the 

WRAP forums.

1.5. Regulatory Framework for Tribal Visibility Implementation Plans

The RHR explicitly recognizes the authority of tribes to implement the provisions of the rule, in 

accordance with principles of federal Indian law, and as provided by the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

Section 301(d) and the tribal authority rule (TAR) (40 CFR 49.1–11). Those provisions create 

the following framework:

 Absent special circumstances, reservation lands are not subject to state jurisdiction.

 Federally recognized tribes may apply for and receive delegation of federal authority to 

implement CAA programs, including visibility regulation, or "reasonably severable" 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

3

elements of such programs (40 CFR 49.3, 49.7). The mechanism for this delegation is a 

tribal implementation plan (TIP). A reasonably severable element is one that is not 

integrally related to program elements that are not included in the plan submittal, and is 

consistent with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.

 The RHR expressly provides that tribal visibility programs are “not dependent on the 

strategies selected by the state or states in which the tribe is located” (64 FR 35756), and 

that the authority to implement Section 309 TIPs extends to all tribes within the GCVTC 

region (40 CFR 51.309(d)(12)).

 The EPA has indicated that under the TAR, tribes are not required to submit Section 309 

TIPs by the end of 2003. Rather, they may choose to opt-in to Section 309 programs at a 

later date (67 FR 30439).

 Where a tribe does not seek delegation through a TIP, EPA, as necessary and appropriate, 

will promulgate a federal implementation plan (FIP) within reasonable timeframes to 

protect air quality in Indian country (40 CFR 49.11). EPA is committed to consulting 

with tribes on a government-to-government basis in developing tribe-specific or generally 

applicable TIPs where necessary (63 FR 7263-64).

The amount of modification, if any, needed for this report to fulfill tribal needs may vary

considerably from tribe to tribe. The authors have striven to ensure that all references to tribes in 

the document are consistent with principles of tribal sovereignty and autonomy as reflected in the 

above framework. Any inconsistency with this framework is strictly inadvertent and not an 

attempt to impose requirements on tribes, which are not present under existing law.

Tribes, along with states and federal agencies, are full partners in the WRAP, having equal 

representation on the WRAP Board as states. Whether Board members or not, it must be 

remembered that all tribes are governments, as distinguished from the “stakeholders” (private 

interest) which participate on Forums and Committees but are not eligible for the Board. Despite 

this equality of representation on the Board, tribes are very differently situated than states. There 

are over four hundred (400) federally recognized tribes in the WRAP region, including Alaska. 

The sheer number of tribes makes full participation impossible. Moreover, many tribes are faced 

with pressing environmental, economic, and social issues, and do not have the resources to 

participate in an effort such as the WRAP, however important its goals may be. These factors 

necessarily limit the level of tribal input into and endorsement of WRAP products.

The tribal participants in the WRAP, including Board members, Forum and Committee 

members, and co-chairs, make their best effort to ensure that WRAP products are in the best 

interest of the tribes, the environment, and the public. One interest is to ensure that WRAP 

policies, as implemented by states and tribes, will not constrain the future options of tribes who 

are not involved in the WRAP. With these considerations and limitations in mind, it is 

anticipated that the tribal participants will join the state, federal, and private stakeholder interests 

in approving this report as a consensus document.

1.6 Objectives

The EF is currently seeking to implement a comprehensive internet web-based air pollution 

emissions data reporting, management, and tracking system to support state and tribal regional 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

4

haze implementation plan (SIP/TIP) development. The system is to be capable of receiving and 

storing emissions data in EPA-compliant emissions reporting formats commonly used by various 

agencies and sources with little or no additional effort, producing user-specified reports, 

performing user-selected quality control and assurance tests, allowing data queries and graphic 

display, and presenting this information in geographic information system (GIS) format.

The EF contracted with EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc (EA) to assess the needs 

of the WRAP emissions database management system (WRAP EDMS). The overall approach of 

this needs assessment consists of the following tasks.

 Task 1: Determine the emissions data to be reported, managed and tracked.

 Task 2: Conduct a comparative analysis of existing emissions data management systems 

approved and in use by EPA and state air quality agencies.

 Task 3: Prepare a report addressing issues associated with developing a new system, 

long-term system maintenance and operation of the recommended data management 

system, by integrating information gathered in Tasks 1 and 2.

This report presents the results of Task 3 and represents the final technical report of the project. 

It provides the documentation from the two workshops and questionnaires, the findings based on 

the input received from the two workshops and questionnaires, an evaluation of existing EDMS, 

and the system recommendations.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

5

2.0 WORKSHOP AND QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS

2.1 Description of the Workshops

The WRAP EDMS needs assessment survey consisted of two interview workshops. The first 

workshop took place in Santa Fe, New Mexico, on March 20th, 2003. It was intended for 

members of the WRAP Forums. Thirty-five (35) people attended the meeting. The workshop 

lasted approximately three hours, and included a presentation by the EA team covering the 

project overview and timeline, the goals and roles of the WRAP EDMS, a comparative summary

of existing systems, a straw man presentation of the conceptual WRAP EDMS, and the 

conceptual timeline of the development and population of the WRAP EDMS. The presentation 

was followed by specific discussions on the WRAP EDMS needs. Appendices A1, A2, and A3 

present the EA presentation, a summary of the discussion points, and the list of the workshop 

participants respectively.

The second workshop took place in Denver, Colorado, on May 7th, 2003 and was planned in 

order to provide an opportunity for state, tribe, and local (STL) air pollution control agencies 

staff and other stakeholders to participate in the project. Prospective attendees were notified by 

email several weeks prior to the meeting, and via an online questionnaire. Thirteen (13) people 

attended this day long workshop. The session included a presentation by the EA team that 

covered the project overview and timeline, the goals and roles of the WRAP EDMS, a summary

of the RHR and CERR, a comparative summary of existing systems, a straw man presentation of 

the conceptual WRAP EDMS, the conceptual timeline of the development and population of the 

WRAP EDMS, and the summary of the Santa Fe workshop. This was followed by an oral 

presentation of the special needs of the Fire Emission Joint Forum (FEJF) and specific 

discussions on the WRAP EDMS needs were brought up during and after the presentations. 

Appendices B1, B2, and B3 present the EA presentation, a summary of the discussion points, 

and the list of the workshop participants respectively.

2.2 Description of Questionnaire

As mentioned above, in addition to the interview workshop, a web-based questionnaire was 

posted on http://wrap.eaest.com for a period of three months. All potential users of the WRAP

EDMS, stakeholders, and interested parties were invited to fill it out. The questionnaire 

comprised thirty-four (34) questions designed to collect ideas on all the possible needs of the 

WRAP EDMS. Overall, twenty (20) peoples responded to the web-based questionnaire. 

Appendix C shows the results of this questionnaire. Furthermore, one person responded to this 

questionnaire via email before it was posted on the internet. Appendix C also shows these 

responses.

2.3 Findings

The workshop interviews and questionnaire results underscored the emerging project consensus 

that the WRAP EDMS needs to be different from any of the other existing systems (including the 

national emissions inventory (NEI)) because of its architecture, technical capabilities, and 

contents. The system needs to be developed with all possible users in mind, and with the intent 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

6

to accommodate several distinct user groups. The WRAP EDMS will not only be a repository of 

the WRAP regional emissions inventories but will also be able to be used to implement the 

emissions tracking and reporting requirements of the RHR. The WRAP EDMS would be located 

either at the WRAP regional modeling center (RMC) or at a university center as is the 

monitoring database. Moreover, it will be made publicly accessible through the internet and will 

contain online training manuals.

The WRAP EDMS will track all the visibility-impairing pollutants: volatile organic compounds 

(VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), SO2, PM10, PM2.5, elemental carbon (EC), organic carbon (OC), 

carbon monoxide (CO), and NH3 and all the necessary activity data for all the sources and 

emission factors needed to calculate their emissions.

A metadata describing and characterizing all of the emissions data will be developed. 

Furthermore, The WRAP EDMS will be linked to other related external databases. These 

databases will contain related surrogate and activity data used to estimate some of the emissions 

such as mobile, biogenic, and windblown dust sources emissions as well as speciation profiles 

for VOC and PM data. The WRAP EDMS will also adopt the RPO data exchange protocol in 

order to capture all the necessary external data.

The emissions data will primarily be submitted by STL agencies. Emissions from mobile, 

biogenic, and windblown dust sources may be estimated through modeling using activity data 

submitted by STL agencies and other surrogate data. The estimated emissions will be sent to 

STL agencies for review and approval before inclusion in the final database. Fire source 

emissions data that are not generated by STL agencies will be estimated by the WRAP EDMS 

based on fire activity data submitted by STL agencies, federal agencies, private entities, or 

generated by WRAP. Some STL agencies may estimate fire emissions themselves. These 

emissions would be submitted by the STL agencies along with all the activity and surrogate data 

used for the estimation. WRAP will obtain and process the international (Canada and Mexico) 

data.

The large majority of participants in both workshops felt that the WRAP EDMS should be 

developed and populated in two phases. In Phase I, the system will include the core database 

architecture, including all of the functioning modules and all of the reporting and queries 

capabilities (see Section 4). It will be used primarily to store emissions data that will be used to 

implement the tracking and reporting requirements of both Sections 308 and 309. The focus will 

be on the implementation of the emissions tracking and reporting requirements of the CAC, fire 

sources, stationary SO2 sources, and mobile sources. The minimum spatial resolutions of the 

emissions data will be the county and reservation levels. The submittal temporal resolution of 

the activity data would be variable (i.e. hourly, daily, seasonal, and annual) depending on the 

source category. However, the emissions will be reported and tracked on an annual resolution 

basis.

In Phase II, the system could be expanded to incorporate new and updated technical functionality

that would allow for storage, tracking, and reporting of hourly, daily, seasonal, and annual 

emissions data as necessary. The system would include others pollutants (e.g. methane (CH4), 

mercury (Hg), etc) and their emissions data. It may be used to track other RHR requirements 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

7

(e.g. annual emission goals) and other regulations (e.g. Clear Skies, Greenhouse Gas, etc) 

requirements.

There was general agreement that the WRAP EDMS will be built and tested by the end of 2003 

and will be live on the web in early 2004. This first version of the WRAP EDMS will be 

populated with the 2002 comprehensive emissions data. The collection, processing, and quality 

assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of these data from the STL agencies will start in early 2004 

and will continue throughout 2004. At the same time, the 2002 base and 2018 projection years’ 

emissions files that will be used by RMC will be produced. The system will also produce the 

emission reports as needed for both Sections 308 and 309. From 2005 to 2007, annual emissions 

will be generated from the 2002 comprehensive emissions data in order to satisfy the tracking 

and reporting requirements of the RHR. At the same time, refined emissions inventories 

representing the effect of control strategies in 2018 will be developed, and the 2005 

comprehensive emissions data will be collected from STL agencies, processed, and QA/QC’d. It 

should be noted that the emissions data submitted by tribal agencies may be from any given 

inventory year. Moreover, wherever tribal emissions data are available, the state should adjust 

its inventory taking into account these tribal data. The conceptual development timeline of the 

WRAP EDMS is as follow.

 Mid 2003: finish needs assessment project

 Late 2003:

1. WRAP contractor builds and alpha tests Phase I of WRAP EDMS

2. Beta test of the WRAP EDMS

 Early 2004:

1. Initiate live Phase I of the WRAP EDMS on the web

2. Provide training and user support

 Throughout 2004: begin collection, processing, and QA/QC of 2002 emissions from STL

agencies

 Late 2004:

1. Implement Phase II of the WRAP EDMS

2. Provide training and user support

3. Produce emissions reports as needed for Section 308 and 309 requirements

4. Prepare 2002 base and 2018 projection years' emissions files for use by RMC

 2005-2007: ongoing operation of the WRAP EDMS

1. Track emissions as needed for Section 308 and 309

2. Develop refined emissions inventories representing the effect of control strategies in 

2018

3. Provide training and user support

4. Populate the WRAP EDMS with annual emissions data to meet Section 308 and 309 

regulatory requirements

5. Collection, processing, and QA/QC of 2005 emissions from STL agencies

There was also consensus that the WRAP EDMS should be built in a modular fashion, to allow 

for easy expansion and improvement. It will include six major modules representing the sources 

(point, area, fire, mobile, windblown dust, and biogenic) in addition to the GIS, QA/QC, and 

database administrator (DBA) modules. The submission formats will be similar to that of the 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

8

NEI format (NIF) and the minimum submission cycle would coincide with the submission cycle 

of the NEI (annual and triennial cycles). However, the WRAP EDMS will have an open 

submittal process, where STL agencies’ emissions data will be submitted at different times. 

Currently, state submit the NIF in several file formats including ASCII Text (Text), Microsoft 

Access database (MS Access), and eXtended Markup Language (XML). The results of the 

questionnaire indicated that, across the WRAP region, states are using Text, MS Access, inhouse developed systems, and other systems (i.e. AMS Tempo) that need to be converted to the 

NIF. Therefore, the WRAP EDMS will accept all the file formats already accepted by NEI.

The WRAP EDMS will be managed by a DBA whose functions could include QA/QC, some 

emission calculations, data gap filling, data archiving, and data version management among 

others.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

9

3.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

3.1 Conceptual WRAP EDMS

The conceptual WRAP EDMS was developed based on the findings of the interview workshops 

and the web-based questionnaire.

3.1.1 Data Tracking

The WRAP EDMS should contain all visibility-impairing pollutants: VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, 

PM2.5, EC, OC, CO, and NH3. The WRAP EDMS should also track all necessary activity data 

for all the sources and emission factors needed to calculate emissions. These pollutants and 

related activity data should be tracked for the following sources: point, area, mobile, biogenic, 

windblown dust, and fire sources. The data will be tracked at the county and reservation level 

for all sources and also individually for point and fire sources. The emissions data will be 

submitted to the WRAP EDMS by STL agencies, except for biogenic, mobile, windblown dust, 

and certain fire sources emissions data that will be calculated by WRAP using emissions 

estimation models. The submissions will be in a standard format similar to the NIF and done at 

the NEI minimum cycle but STL agencies may submit emissions data frequently.

3.1.2 Data QA/QC

The WRAP EDMS should include a QA/QC module to perform two levels of QA/QC. The first 

level of QA/QC should include a validation of the format of the submitted data files. This will 

ensure that the submitting entity supply all data to WRAP in the expected format and also 

identify any errors. The submittal check will be at the point of entry to the WRAP EDMS in 

order to minimize the DBA work and encourage STL agencies to submit clean data. The second 

level of QA/QC should consist of checks of the data that is submitted to WRAP, and include 

checking reference values and acceptable data ranges for specific data points. The data should 

also be checked for completeness, ensuring that all data exists for all sources and geographic 

areas.

3.1.3 Data Reporting

The WRAP EDMS should include a series of standard summary reports broken down by source 

type, geographic location, and pollutant. It should also include a series of reports designed 

specifically to meet the RHR emissions tracking and reporting requirements. The RHR reports 

will include special reports for CAC, pre-trigger SO2 stationary sources, mobile sources, fire 

sources, and windblown dust sources. The WRAP EDMS should also include a series of data 

export formats for inclusion in external systems including emissions modeling programs such as 

SMOKE (MCNC, 1999).

3.1.4 GIS Components

The WRAP EDMS should include a fully functioning GIS module that provides multiple tools to 

display data over the internet. The inclusion of a GIS module will provide a means for users to 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

10

select data that is of importance to them and display the data in a fashion that is easily

understood. The WRAP EDMS should include the following GIS functionality: pan, zoom, 

query layer information, ability to add/remove multiple layers of data, point and click, measure 

distances, buffer, print multiple sizes of maps, and select map features by line, rectangle, or 

polygon.

The WRAP EDMS GIS module should include the following layers of data: county, state and 

country polygons, tribal reservation polygons, roadways and railroad line features, CAC 

polygons, international polygons, metropolitan statistical areas polygons, nonattainment area 

polygons, class I areas polygons, bodies of water polygons, census data polygons, other federal 

land polygons (i.e. national parks, monuments, forest, and refuges), and WRAP modeling 

domain grid system. It should have the ability to select and display emissions sources and 

associated emissions data by geographical area.

3.1.5 User Access and Preferences

All reporting features of the WRAP EDMS should be available to the public via the internet. 

STL agencies will have a separate, non-public interface for submitting their data to a central 

submission area. The user interface for the WRAP EDMS should be easy and intuitive to use 

while providing all necessary functionality.

3.2 Comparison

Five existing EDMS were evaluated and compared each to the conceptual WRAP EDMS. Each 

system was evaluated in terms of meeting the design and functionality requirements of the 

conceptual WRAP EDMS. As expected, none of the individual systems included all of the 

required elements for the conceptual WRAP EDMS. This was due in part to the fact that none of 

the systems tracked all of the required pollutants or included emissions data from all of the 

required, individual sources. In some instances, individual systems included most or all of the 

required functionality, such as a GIS module or the ability to export data, but did not track 

emissions data for all of the required pollutants or sources. Without all of the required data 

available, the output of these systems will be incomplete. Appendix D illustrates the overall 

comparison between the conceptual WRAP EDMS and the selected existing systems and Section 

3.3 below describes these systems further.

3.3 Existing EDMS

This section lists each of the selected five existing database management systems, provides a 

brief description and background information for each, and highlights any elements from each 

system that could be utilized by the WRAP EDMS.

3.3.1 National Emissions Inventory – NEI

The EPA’s Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) maintains a national emissions 

inventory containing information on air emissions and their sources for each state in the U.S., the 

U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. The NEI has a public website 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

11

(http://www.epa.gov/air/data/index.html) where users can query the emissions database and 

produce reports based on their specific needs.

3.3.1.1 System Details

The NEI tracks seven pollutants: VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NH3. The pollutants 

are tracked for four source types: point, area, mobile, and biogenic sources. All data is tracked at 

the county level for all sources, and also individually for point sources. The data is submitted on 

an annual and triennial basis to EPA by state and tribal agencies. The data is submitted in the 

EPA’s standard submission format, the NIF.

The NEI includes a QA/QC process that performs multiple levels of QA/QC checks. The first 

level consists of a validation of the format of the submitted data files, which ensures that the 

submitting entity supplied all data to NEI, in the expected format, and also identifies any errors 

with the submitted format. The second level of QA/QC checks includes checks of the data that is 

submitted to NEI. Reference values are checked against standard lists and data points are 

checked against acceptable data ranges. The data is also checked for completeness, ensuring that 

all data exists for all sources and geographic areas. If data points are missing, the NEI will 

replace the missing values with national averages or previous year data for the particular data 

point.

The NEI includes a series of standard summary reports broken down by source category, 

geographic location, and pollutant. The NEI also includes a data export feature to allow data to 

be extracted from the NEI database for inclusion in external systems.

The NEI includes a basic mapping capability to display emissions data over the internet. The 

NEI mapping functionality includes the ability to pan, zoom, and displays county, state and 

country boundaries.

All reporting features of the NEI are available to the public via the internet. The NEI user 

interface is easy to use and navigate to reach the desired data.

3.3.1.2 Key System Elements

The NEI has three key elements that should be utilized in the WRAP EDMS. First, the NEI 

requires a standard submission format (NIF) for all data submitted to the system. The WRAP 

EDMS could utilize this same submission format for all data sources, except for fire sources. 

The submission format captures the required emissions and activity data for all pollutants except 

OC and EC, which can be calculated by the WRAP system, based on the PM2.5 data. Also, since 

STL agencies are already required to submit their data in the NIF format, no additional work will 

be necessary on their part to create submissions for the WRAP EDMS. See Appendix E for the 

recent version of the NIF submission formats.

Second, the NEI has a well-established and defined QA/QC process for all submitted emissions 

data. This process does a thorough analysis of the submission format and data content to identify

all possible issues before the data is included in the system. The WRAP EDMS could adopt a 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

12

modified version of this QA/QC Process to ensure that all data submitted to the WRAP EDMS is 

accurate. However, instead of automatically replacing missing or erroneous data with a default 

set of data, WRAP could make recommendations for replacing missing data or supplementing 

existing data to STL agencies while leaving the final approval for all data included in the WRAP 

EDMS with them. See Appendix F for a detailed explanation of the NEI QA/QC process.

Finally, the NEI includes an adequate set of standard reports for users to utilize when accessing 

the NEI database. The set of reports is not exhaustive, but does provide an excellent basis for 

data reporting and gathering to serve the public’s data needs. The NEI report interface is also 

very easy to use and intuitive, making the data gathering process easy for the user. The WRAP 

EDMS could adopt this report functionality and design for the general data gathering and 

reporting capabilities of its system.

3.3.2 Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution – TEISS

Northern Arizona University is currently developing an air emissions inventory for all western 

region tribes. The Tribal Emissions Inventory Software Solution (TEISS) will be a desktop 

application where users can query the emissions database and produce reports based on their 

specific needs.

3.3.2.1 System Details

The TEISS tracks seven pollutants: VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, CO, and NH3. The pollutants 

are tracked for three source types: point, area, and mobile sources. All data is tracked at the 

reservation level for all sources, and also individually for point sources. The data is collected 

from the tribes on a continuing basis. The data is submitted in multiple formats and can also be 

hand-entered through data entry screens.

The TEISS includes a series of standard reports broken down by source category, geographic 

location, and pollutant. The TEISS also includes a data export feature to allow data to be 

extracted from the TEISS database for inclusion in external systems, including the NEI and 

modeling programs such as SMOKE.

The TEISS includes a fully functioning GIS module that provides multiple tools to display data 

geographically. The TEISS includes several advanced GIS features including: pan, zoom, query

layer information, ability to add/remove multiple layers of data, measure distances, buffer, print 

multiple sizes of maps, and select map features by line, rectangle, or polygon. The TEISS GIS 

module includes several static layers of data, such as county, state and country, and tribal 

reservation boundaries, and the ability to select and display emissions sources and associated 

emissions levels by geographical area.

The TEISS utilizes an advanced user interface, since it is a desktop application and not 

accessible via the internet.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

13

3.3.2.2 Key System Elements

The TEISS has two key elements that should be utilized in the WRAP EDMS. First, the TEISS 

has a fully functioning GIS module embedded in the system. This allows TEISS users to display

map features in conjunction with relevant emissions and activity data on a real-time basis. The 

TEISS GIS module includes a full set of tools for manipulation of any map created in the system. 

The WRAP EDMS could include a majority of this functionality in its GIS module to provide its 

users a complete internet GIS capability. However, since current web GIS capabilities are 

limited compared to desktop capabilities, the WRAP EDMS will not be able to implement all of 

the features of the TEISS GIS module.

Second, the TEISS has a flexible set of exporting functions to allow for multiple data export 

formats. The WRAP EDMS could include a comparable set of exporting features to 

accommodate the need of multiple formats for the system’s users. 

3.3.3 California Air Resources Board Emissions Inventory – CARBEI

The California Air Resources Board maintains an emissions inventory (CARBEI) containing 

information on air emissions and their sources for the state of California. The CARBEI has a 

public website (http://www.arb.ca.gov/emisinv/eib.htm) where users can query the emissions 

database and produce reports based on their specific needs.

3.3.3.1 System Details

The CARBEI tracks five pollutants: NOx, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and CO. The pollutants are tracked 

for three sources types: point, area, and mobile sources. All data is tracked at the county level 

for all sources, and also individually for point sources. The data is submitted by local agencies 

in the California Air Resources Board’s standard submission format, the California Emission 

Inventory Development and Reporting System (CEIDARS).

The CARBEI includes a QA/QC process that performs multiple levels of QA/QC checks. The 

first level consists of a validation of the format of the submitted data files, which ensures that the 

submitting entity supplied all data to CARBEI, in the expected format, and also identifies any

errors with the submitted format. The second level of QA/QC checks includes checks of the data 

that is submitted to CARBEI. Data points are checked against acceptable data ranges to ensure 

the submitted data are accurate and reasonable.

The CARBEI includes standard summary reports broken down by source category, geographic 

location, and pollutant. The CARBEI also includes a data export feature to allow data to be 

extracted from the CARBEI database for inclusion in external systems.

All reporting features of the CARBEI are available to the public via the internet. The CARBEI 

user interface is easy to use and navigate for the user to reach the desired data.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

14

3.3.3.2 Key System Elements

The CARBEI has one key element that should be utilized in the WRAP EDMS. The CARBEI 

report interface is very easy to use and intuitive, making the data gathering process easy for the 

user. The WRAP EDMS could adopt this report functionality and design for the general data 

gathering capabilities of its system.

3.3.4 Colorado Department of Health Air Pollution Inventory – CAPI 

The Colorado Department of Health maintains an Air Pollution Inventory (CAPI) containing 

information on air emissions and their sources for the state of Colorado. The CAPI has a public 

website (http://emaps.dphe.state.co.us/APInv/viewer.htm) where users can query the emissions 

database and produce reports based on their specific needs. It should be noted that CAPI is not 

the Colorado primary emissions inventory system. It is included in this analysis because of its 

internet capabilities.

3.3.4.1 System Details

The CAPI tracks five pollutants: VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, and CO. The pollutants are tracked for 

three source types: point, area, and mobile sources. All data is tracked at the county level for all 

sources, and also individually for point sources. The data is submitted by local agencies on a 

continuing basis.

The CAPI includes standard summary reports broken down by source category, geographic 

location, and pollutant.

The CAPI includes a fully functioning GIS module that provides multiple tools to visually

display data. The CAPI includes several advanced GIS features including: pan, zoom, query

layer information, ability to add/remove multiple layers of data, measure distances, buffer, print, 

and select map features by line, rectangle, or polygon. The CAPI GIS module includes several 

static layers of data, such as county and state boundaries, and various attainment area boundaries.

All reporting features of the CAPI are available to the public via the internet. The CAPI user 

interface is easy to use and navigate for the user to reach the desired data.

3.3.4.2 Key System Elements

The CAPI includes a functioning, internet-based GIS module. The CAPI GIS module includes a 

full set of tools for manipulation of any map created in the system. Although the CAPI does not 

have the capability of mapping data from the emissions database, it does represent a good 

example of internet-based GIS functionality. The WRAP EDMS could include this functionality

in its GIS module to provide its users internet-based GIS capability.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

15

3.3.5 Delaware Environmental Navigator – DEN

The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control maintains a 

database of information for all aspects of environmental monitoring and control. The Delaware 

Environmental Navigator (DEN) has a public website (http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/dnreceis/) 

where users can query the database and produce reports based on their specific needs.

3.3.5.1 System Details

At the air emissions level, the DEN tracks five pollutants: VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, and CO. The 

pollutants are tracked for three source types: point, area, and mobile sources. All data is tracked 

at the county level for all sources, and also individually for point sources. The data is submitted 

by local agencies on a continuing basis.

The DEN includes a limited QA/QC process that performs quality checks of all submitted data.

The DEN includes standard summary reports broken down by source category, geographic 

location, and pollutant.

The DEN includes a fully functioning GIS module that provides multiple tools to display data 

geographically. The DEN includes several advanced GIS features including: pan, zoom, query

layer information, ability to add/remove multiple layers of data, measure distances, print, and 

select map features by line, rectangle or polygon. The DEN GIS module includes several static 

layers of data, such as county, state and country boundaries, interstate and highway line features, 

and the ability to select and display data by geographical area.

All reporting features of the DEN are available to the public via the internet. The DEN user 

interface is easy to use and navigate to reach the desired data.

3.3.5.2 Key System Elements

The DEN has a fully functioning, internet-based GIS module included in the system. This 

allows DEN users to display map features in conjunction with relevant emissions and activity

data on a real-time basis. The DEN GIS module includes a full set of tools for manipulation of

any map created in the system. The DEN was included in this comparison due to its advanced 

internet-based GIS functionality and its ability to map user defined data queried from the DEN 

database on a real time basis. The WRAP EDMS could include this functionality in its GIS 

module to provide its users internet-based GIS capability.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

16

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Flow Chart of the WRAP EDMS

Appendix G presents the flow chart of the WRAP EDMS that shows the information needs, from 

the emissions data submission to the report generations, data queries, graphic display, and GIS 

presentation. The sections below explain the different parts of this flow chart.

4.2 Point Source Module

For point sources, at a minimum, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, stored, 

and tracked for each inventory. The data file should be organized into records for the submitting 

format. In the NIF Version 3, the point source file contains eight records with specific key fields 

represented by these emissions data (see Appendix E).

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) Facility ID code

9) Point ID code

10) Process ID code

11) Stack ID code

12) Site name

13) Physical address

14) SCC code

15) Heat content (fuel) (annual average)

16) Ash content (fuel) (annual average)

17) Sulfur content (fuel) (annual average)

18) Pollutant code

19) Activity/throughput (annual)

20) Activity/throughput (daily)

21) Work weekday emissions

22) Annual emissions

23) Emission factor

24) Winter throughput (%)

25) Spring throughput (%)

26) Summer throughput (%)

27) Fall throughput (%)

28) Hours/day in operation

29) Start time (hour)

30) Day/week in operation

31) Weeks/year in operation
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

17

32) X stack coordinate (latitude)

33) Y stack coordinate (longitude)

34) Stack height

35) Stack diameter

36) Exit gas temperature

37) Exit gas velocity

38) Exit gas flow rate

39) SIC code

40) Design capacity

41) Maximum nameplate capacity

42) Primary control efficiency (%)

43) Secondary control efficiency (%)

44) Control device type

45) Rule effectiveness (%)

Emissions from point sources will be estimated by STL agencies using emission factors 

published in AP-42 (EPA, 1998) or from stack test data and submitted at the individual source 

level on an annual temporal resolution basis. According to the CERR, the minimum point source 

reporting thresholds are 100 tons per year (tpy) for VOC, NOx, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and NH3 and 

1000 tpy for CO. Many states have different reporting thresholds tied to other state 

environmental regulations and would like to be able to retrieve data from the EDMS as they are 

submitted. Therefore, the WRAP EDMS will allow different point source cutoff level 

submissions and will check for these discrepancies in order to avoid double counting emissions.

4.3 Area Source Module

Based on input and discussion, it appears that area sources represent all other stationary sources 

not included in the point source category, excluding fire and windblown dust sources. These 

sources also include open burning activities on residential, commercial, and industrial properties.

For area sources, at a minimum, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, stored, and 

tracked for each inventory. Similar to the point sources, the data file should be organized into 

records. The area source file contains five records in the NIF version 3 (see Appendix E).

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date,

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Emission factor

10) Activity/throughput level (annual)

11) Total capture/control efficiency (%)

12) Rule effectiveness (%)
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

18

13) Rule penetration (%)

14) Pollutant code

15) Summer/winter work weekday emissions

16) Annual emissions

17) Winter throughput (%)

18) Spring throughput (%)

19) Summer throughput (%)

20) Fall throughput (%)

21) Hours/day in operation

22) Days/week in operation

23) Weeks/year in operation

Emissions from area sources will be estimated by STL agencies using mostly emission factors 

published in AP-42 (EPA, 1998) and submitted at the county level on an annual temporal 

resolution basis. The area source definitions are different from STL to STL. For example, some 

STL define gas stations or dry cleaners as point sources while others do as area sources. 

Therefore, the WRAP EDMS will allow different source category submissions and will check for 

these discrepancies in order to avoid double counting emissions.

4.4 Mobile Source Module

Mobile sources are divided into two main categories: onroad and nonroad mobile sources. 

Onroad mobile sources are motor vehicles licensed for use on highways or roadways (i.e. 

automobiles, trucks, etc). Onroad mobile source emissions are the product of emission factors 

obtained through the execution of the latest EPA’s MOBILE model (EPA, 2002) or the 

California EMFAC model (CARB, 2002) and activity levels represented by the vehicle mile 

traveled (VMT). Dust from paved and unpaved roads may be estimated by using either the 

method in AP-42, Section 11 (EPA, 1998) or the EPA’s PART5 model (EPA, 1995).

Nonroad mobile sources are the other mobile sources represented for instance by construction 

equipment, lawn and garden equipment, snowmobiles, boats, trains, and airplanes. Their 

emissions can be estimated using the EPA’s NONROAD model (EPA, 2000) and/or published 

emission factors, especially for boats and trains. Emissions of airplanes and associated ground 

support equipment and auxiliary power units are estimated using the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) Emission and dispersion Modeling System model (FAA, 2002). It is not 

anticipated that the WRAP EDMS will contain these models.

Most mobile emissions will be submitted at the county level on an annual temporal resolution 

basis. However, many mobile source emissions data are seasonal in nature. Therefore, the 

WRAP EDMS may store applicable seasonal mobile emissions data as well. For unsubmitted 

and/or missing mobile source emissions data for a given area, the WRAP EDMS DBA will 

estimate the inventories using available mobile emissions models and area-specific data or 

national average data. These inventories will be submitted to STL agencies for review and 

approval before inclusion in the final database.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

19

For mobile sources, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, stored, and tracked for 

each inventory. Similar to the point sources, the data file should be organized into records. The 

onroad and nonroad mobile source files contain three and five records respectively in the NIF 

version 3 (see Appendix E).

For on-road mobile sources,

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Emission factor

10) Activity (VMT by roadway class)

11) Pollutant code

12) Summer/winter work weekday emissions

13) Annual emission

14) Refueling emissions classification

For non-road mobile sources,

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Emission factor

10) Activity/throughput level (annual)

11) Total capture/control efficiency (%)

12) Rule effectiveness (%)

13) Rule penetration (%)

14) Pollutant code

15) Summer/winter work weekday emissions

16) Annual emissions

17) Winter throughput (%)

18) Spring throughput (%)

19) Summer throughput (%)

20) Fall throughput (%)

21) Hours/day in operation

22) Days/week in operation
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

20

23) Weeks/year in operation

4.5 Biogenic Source Module

The latest EPA’s Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (BEIS) model (EPA, 1998) will be used 

to generate the region-wide biogenic emissions using activity data submitted by STL agencies 

and other surrogate land use and meteorological data. The emission inventories will then be 

submitted to STL agencies for review and approval before inclusion in the final database. The 

reporting spatial resolution will be the county level and the temporal resolution will be annual for 

the biogenic emissions data in Phase I. In phase II, hourly, daily, or seasonal temporal 

resolutions may be tracked. The biogenic emissions are currently being generated at RMC on a 

36-km grid system for each hour. Therefore, they will need to be converted to a county level and 

aggregate on an annual temporal resolution basis before being sent to STL agencies for review 

and subsequent inclusion in the WRAP EDMS.

For biogenic sources, at a minimum, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, stored, 

and tracked for each inventory. Similar to the point sources, the data file should be organized 

into records. The biogenic source file contains two records in the NIF version 3 (see Appendix 

E).

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Pollutant code

10) Summer/winter work weekday emissions

11) Annual emissions

4.6 Windblown Dust Source Module

Windblown dust emissions will be generated region-wide through modeling. The emission 

inventories will then be submitted to STL agencies for review and approval before inclusion in 

the final database. The spatial resolution will be the county level and the temporal resolution 

will be annual for the windblown dust source data in Phase I. In phase II, hourly, daily, or 

seasonal temporal resolutions may be tracked. The dust emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) are 

currently being estimated using wind data as emissions per grid square. Therefore they will need 

to be converted to a county level before being sent to STL agencies for review and subsequent 

inclusion in the WRAP EDMS.

For windblown dust sources, at a minimum, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, 

stored, and tracked for each inventory. Windblown dust source is not included in the NEI as a 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

21

separate source category. Therefore, the data file needs to be created and the records defined. A 

definition based on the NIF biogenic source file should suffice.

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) Country code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Pollutant code

10) Summer/winter work weekday emissions

11) Annual emissions

12) Natural or anthropogenic classification

4.7 Fire Source Module

There are four types of fire emissions sources - wildfire, prescribed fire, wildland fire use, and 

agricultural burning - that will be included in the fire source module of the WRAP EDMS. It

should be noted that wildfire, prescribed fire, wildland fire use include rangeland. Fire sources 

such as open burning activities on residential, commercial, and industrial properties will be 

included in the area source module. The WRAP Fire Tracking System (FTS) (WRAP, 2001) 

identified seven essential data (9 – 17) that will provide the basis for calculating the emissions 

for fire through the use of an emissions calculation mechanism, such as the WRAP emissions 

inventory system, to integrate the appropriate emissions factors and emission calculation 

techniques. The FTS also identified optional data (18 – 21) that are equally important in 

calculating fire emissions. Note that for fire sources, the WRAP EDMS will calculate the 

emissions. However, some STL agencies may estimate fire emissions themselves. These 

emissions will be submitted by the STL agencies with all the activity and surrogate data used for 

the estimation.

For fire sources, at a minimum, the emissions data listed below should be submitted, stored, 

tracked, and also used to calculate fire emissions when necessary. In the NEI, fire sources are 

contained in the area source category. Therefore, a data file which records are similar to the NIF 

area source file may define the fire source file.

1) Inventory year

2) Inventory start date

3) Inventory end date

4) Inventory type

5) County code

6) State and county FIPS code

7) Tribal code

8) SCC code

9) Date of burn
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

22

10) Duration of burn

11) Burn location latitude

12) Burn location longitude

13) Area of burn

14) Fuel type

15) Pre-burn fuel loading

16) Type of burn

17) Anthropogenic or natural classification

18) Daily tracking components

19) Fuel consumption

20) Non-burning techniques

21) Additional fire tracking information

22) Pollutant code

23) Emission factor

24) Daily emissions

25) Annual emissions

4.8. Standard Reports and Queries

The EDMS should have the capability to produce the following standard reports in tabular and 

simple plots (i.e. bar graph and pie chart) formats and allow queries of the same information 

including presentation in GIS format.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emission inventory, compiled at the county and 

reservation levels and totaled for each state, tribe, and the WRAP region, for all 

pollutants, broken down by point, area, mobile, fire, biogenic, and windblown dust source 

categories, and by summed total emissions for all six source categories.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the stationary point sources in 

each county and reservation and the stationary point sources for each state, tribe and the 

entire region (broken down by plant name), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the stationary point sources in 

each county and reservation and the stationary point sources for each state, tribe and the 

entire region (broken down by SCC code), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the area sources in each county

and reservation and the area sources for each state, tribe and the entire region (broken 

down by SCC code), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the “Top 10” stationary point 

sources in each county and reservation and the “Top 10” stationary point sources for each 

state, tribe and the entire region (broken down by plant name), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the “Top 10” stationary point 

sources in each county and reservation and the “Top 10” stationary point sources for each 

state, tribe and the entire region (broken down by SCC code), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the “Top 10” area sources in 

each county and reservation and the “Top 10” area sources for each state, tribe and the 

entire region (broken down by SCC code), for each pollutant.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

23

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from on-road mobile sources in each 

county and reservation and on-road mobile sources for each state, tribe and the entire 

region (broken down by the sixteen (16) mobile source categories), for each pollutant and 

dust from paved and unpaved road.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from non-road mobile sources in each 

county and reservation and non-road mobile sources for each state, tribe, and the entire 

region (broken down by SCC code), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from fire sources in each county and 

reservation and fire sources for each state, tribe, and the entire region (broken down by

the 3 fire categories (wildfire, prescribed wild land burning, and agricultural burning 

activities), for each pollutant.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from biogenic sources in each county

and reservation and biogenic sources for each state, tribe, and the entire region (broken 

down by emission source name).

 Data reports in the NEI Input Format Version 3.0 (NIF V3.0) for submittal to the EPA 

under the CERR.

 For stationary point sources, data reports for all emission points on site by text 

description name and by Stack ID, for NEI file format stack parameters (STKHGT, 

STKDIAM, STKTEMP, STKFLOW, STKVEL), production rates (BOILCAP, 

CAP_UNITS, THRUPUT, MAXRATE, NETDC), fuel parameters (HEATCON, 

SULFCON, ASHCON), standard industrial classification code (SIC), location (LATC, 

LONG), and emission controls ("pollutant"_CE, "pollutant"_CPRI, "pollutant"_CSEC).

 For stationary point sources, data reports for all emission points on site by text 

description name and by Stack ID, for actual emission rates of each pollutant, on an 

annual (tpy) and on a short term (pounds per hour) basis. This emission data will be 

summed for a cumulative total of emissions from each stationary point source.

 In addition to these standard reports, the EDMS will produce regional emission model 

(SMOKE)-ready emissions input files for the regional visibility modeling efforts.

4.9. Special Section 309 Tracking

Section 309 of the RHR requires that the first SIP be submitted by December 31, 2003 and that 

SIP must be effective until December 2018. Section 309 also specifically requires 

comprehensive emissions tracking and reporting for the clean air corridors (CAC), stationary 

SO2 sources, mobile sources, fire sources, and windblown dust based on annual emissions.

4.9.1 Clean Air Corridors (CAC)

The preamble of the RHR defines a CAC as “a region that generally brings clean air to a receptor 

region”. The preamble also says, “the requirement to track emissions will enable states to 

quickly determine if changes in patterns of emissions will reduce the number of clean air days 

(defined as the average of the 20% clearest days) in any of the 16 Class I areas.” The actual 

requirements state that the Section 309 SIP/TIP must describe and provide for implementation of 

comprehensive emission tracking strategies for CAC to ensure that the visibility does not 

degrade on the least-impaired days at any of the 16 Class I areas. The strategy must include:
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

24

 An identification of CAC.

 Within areas that are CAC, an identification of patterns of growth or specific sites of 

growth that could cause, or are causing, significant emissions increases that could have, 

or are having, visibility impairment at one or more of the 16 Class I areas.

 In areas outside of CAC, an identification of significant emissions growth that could 

begin, or is beginning, to impair the quality of air in the corridor and thereby lead to 

visibility degradation for the least-impaired days in one or more of the 16 Class I areas.

 If impairment of air quality in CAC is identified, an analysis of the effects of increased 

emissions, including provisions for the identification of the need for additional emission 

reduction measures, and implementation of the additional measures where necessary.

 A determination of whether other clean air corridors exist for any of the 16 Class I areas. 

For any such CAC, an identification of the necessary measures to protect against future 

degradation of air quality in any of the 16 Class I areas.

WRAP identified one CAC as shown in Appendix H. Using the most recent state emission 

inventories available through the WRAP EDMS, WRAP will produce a report for each five-year 

implementation plan revision (2008, 2013, and 2018) on the current and projected emissions in 

the CAC and in areas outside the corridor and compare these emissions to a 1996 baseline 

emissions.

WRAP has examined patterns of growth in the CAC and found that they are not causing 

significant emission increases that could have or are having visibility impacts at one or more of 

the 16 Class I areas. Nor, at this time, are such emission increases expected during the first 

planning period (2003-2018). WRAP also has examined emissions growth in areas outside the 

corridor and found that significant emissions growth is not occurring that could begin or is 

beginning to impair the quality of the air in the corridor and thereby lead to visibility degradation 

for the least impaired days in one or more of the 16 Class I areas.

Since impairment of air quality in clean air corridors has not been identified, WRAP finds no 

requirement under for further visibility impact analysis or additional emission reduction 

measures until at least the next SIP revision (2008). WRAP finds no other clean air corridors 

beyond the corridor identified in Appendix H.

Consequently, the EDMS should have the capability to produce the following special reports in 

tabular and simple plots (i.e. bar graph and pie chart) formats and allow queries of the same 

information including presentation in GIS format, in addition to the standard reports.

 A summary report of the annual summed total emissions for all six source categories and 

all of the pollutants by county/state and tribal lands, as well as for the entire CAC.

 A summary report of the annual summed total emissions for all six source categories and 

all of the pollutants for the same types of political boundaries surrounding the CAC.

 A summary report of the comparison of the annual summed total emissions for all six 

source categories and all of the pollutants for the same types of political boundaries, as 

well as the entire CAC and the corresponding base year total emissions.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

25

4.9.2 Pre-Trigger SO2 Annex

The SO2 Annex program, as proposed by WRAP and adopted by EPA, requires the tracking of 

SO2 emissions from eligible stationary sources within states or tribal reservations participating in 

Section 309, to determine if the regional SO2 emissions cap has been exceeded. This is known 

as “pre-trigger” tracking. Beginning with the 2003 calendar year and continuing through 2018, 

each state and tribe participating in the program will submit an annual SO2 emissions report to 

the WRAP EDMS for the sources covered by the program. These annual reports will contain the 

following information:

 Identification and explanation for new/additional SO2 sources which emissions are 

greater than100 tpy that were not contained in the previous year’s emissions report.

 Explanation for sources shut down or removed from the previous year’s emissions report.

 Explanation for emissions variations at any covered source that exceeds +/- 20% from the 

previous year.

 Identification and explanation of new emissions reporting methods at any source. 

WRAP will compile the annual emissions reports submitted by the states and tribes participating 

in the program into a regional emission report for SO2 using the WRAP EDMS. By December 

31 of the year following the applicable compliance year, WRAP will prepare a regional emission 

report that will include the following information:

 Summary of regional SO2 emissions (tpy).

 Identification of any paper emission increases and decreases that have occurred due to 

changes in emission inventory techniques since the last SIP revision for the regional haze 

SIP. The report will contain a running regional total, as well as supporting 

documentation identifying the specific changes that have occurred at individual sources.

 Average emissions for the last three years (if applicable) for comparison to the regional 

milestone.

 Regional milestone for the compliance period.

 Draft determination that the milestone has either been met, or has been exceeded thereby 

triggering the backstop trading program.

Consequently, The EDMS should have the capability to produce the following special reports in 

tabular and simple plots (i.e. bar graph and pie chart) formats and allow queries of the same 

information including presentation in GIS format, in addition to the standard reports.

 A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from the stationary sources emitting 

more than 100 tpy of SO2 in the base year for each state, tribe and the entire region.

 A summary report of the new stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of SO2 that 

were not contained in the previous year’s inventory for each state, tribe and the entire 

region.

 A summary report of the stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of SO2 that are 

retired compared to the previous year’s inventory for each state, tribe and the entire 

region.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

26

 A summary report of the regional average SO2 emissions from stationary sources 

emitting more than 100 tpy of SO2 for the last three years and comparison to the regional 

milestone for the compliance period.

 A summary report of the stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of SO2 which 

emissions exceed +/- 20% compared to the previous year’s inventory for each state, tribe 

and the entire region.

 A summary report identifying all the stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of 

SO2 that choose to opt in the program for each state, tribe and the entire region.

 A summary report identifying all the stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of 

SO2 that were not included in the base year for each state, tribe and the entire region.

4.9.3 Mobile Emissions

For mobile sources, the SIP/TIP submissions must provide for statewide inventories of on-road 

and non-road mobile source emissions of VOC, NOX, SO2, PM2.5, EC, OC, and paved and 

unpaved road dust for the years 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2018. The inventories must demonstrate 

a continuous decline in total mobile source emissions for the aforementioned pollutants, 

evaluated separately. This means that the statewide mobile source emissions of each pollutant in 

2008, 2013, and 2018 must be less than the estimated emissions of that pollutant for the previous 

period.

Consequently, the EDMS should have the capability to produce the following special report in 

tabular and simple plots (i.e. bar graph and pie chart) formats and allow queries of the same 

information including presentation in GIS format, in addition to the standard reports.

 A summary report of the comparison of annual WRAP total (on-road plus nonroad) 

emissions from the mobile sources (VOC, NOx, SO2, PM2.5, EC, OC, and paved and 

unpaved road dust) for each state, tribe and the entire region and the corresponding 

previous period total emissions, for each pollutant.

4.9.3 Fire Emissions

For fire emissions, Section 309 of the RHR specifically calls for a statewide inventory and 

emissions tracking system (spatial and temporal) of VOC, NOX, EC, OC, and PM2.5 emissions 

from fire. The WRAP inventory will add SO2, PM10, CO, and NH3 emissions.

Under Section 309, states and tribes must identify a method or a timeline to develop a method to 

track fire activity data and calculate the resulting required emissions inventory in their SIP/TIP. 

Tracking of fire activity data and calculation of the resulting emissions through the WRAP 

EDMS will provide information critical to the successful implementation of other requirements 

under Section, including the development, adoption, and implementation of enhanced smoke 

management programs, the establishment of annual emission goals, and future projections of fire 

emissions.

The WRAP EDMS will track activity data as reported by states and tribes participating in 

Section 309, as well as the same type of data provided by other WRAP region state, tribal, and 
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

27

local air agencies, and federal/state/private sources using prescribed and/or agricultural burning 

techniques. The WRAP EDMS will calculate the resulting emissions for fire source types 

including prescribed fire, wildfire, wildland fire use, and agricultural burning.

The EDMS should have the capability to produce a special report in tabular and simple plots (i.e. 

bar graph and pie chart) formats and allow queries of the same information including 

presentation in GIS format in the standard report style presented in Section 3.8 of this report.

4.10 GIS Module

GIS provides users with the ability to display and analyze data that is related to a geographic 

location. GIS provides a means for an organization to display data that is easily read and 

understood. The WRAP EDMS should include a fully functioning GIS module that provides 

multiple tools to display data over the internet. The inclusion of a GIS module will provide a 

means for users to select data that is of importance to them and display the data in a fashion that 

is easily understood.

During Phase I of development, the WRAP EDMS should include the following GIS 

Functionality.

 Pan and zoom

 Query layer information

 Ability to add/remove multiple layers of data

 Point and click

 Measure distances

 Buffer

 Print – multiple sizes of maps

 Select map features by line, rectangle or polygon

Phase II development of the WRAP EDMS could include some of the following additional 

functionality.

 Export selected maps shape files

 Generate polygons/layers from coordinates stored in the WRAP EDMS (e.g. create 

polygons for fire burn areas)

The WRAP EDMS GIS module should include the following layers of data for Phase I 

development.

Static layers

 County, state and country polygons

 Tribal reservation polygons

 Metropolitan statistical areas polygons

 Nonattainment area polygons

 Class I areas polygons
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

28

 Interstate and highway line features

 Other roadways and railroad line features

 Bodies of water polygons

 Census data polygons

 Other federal land polygons (i.e. national parks, monuments, forest, and refuges)

 CAC polygons

 International area polygons

 WRAP modeling domain grid system

Dynamic/Data driven layers

 Select and display emissions sources and associated emissions levels by geographical 

area.

4.11 DBA Module

All major applications and systems include an administrative section or module that allows the 

application administrator(s) to perform general system maintenance as well as application 

specific system maintenance. These maintenance routines consist of tasks that are routinely

performed by the application or system administrator(s) and can easily be automated through a 

graphical user interface. Often times there are tasks that administrators need to perform that 

cannot easily be automated, due to the complexity or changing nature of the task, and would not 

be included in the administrative module of the application.

The WRAP EDMS will require a DBA Module, which will provide the necessary functionality

required to perform several administrative tasks. During Phase I of development, the WRAP 

EDMS should include the following DBA Functionality.

 User account maintenance – maintain the list and permissions for users of the WRAP 

EDMS.

 Lookup table maintenance (unit conversions, threshold values, etc.) – maintain the 

multiple lookup tables and associated data that will be included in the WRAP EDMS.

 Versioning/maintenance of submitted data – ability to version submitted data and 

determine current version of all data. 

 Data gap filling triggered from a QA/QC check, following specific methods that will be 

developed by WRAP.

 International data maintenance – maintain the tables and data for all international data 

necessary for the WRAP EDMS.

 Opt-in options for individual states, tribes, and sources – maintain list of states and tribes 

with associated emissions sources that decide to opt-in for Sections 308 and 309 tracking, 

after 2003.

 Others – other DBA module functionality requirements as determined necessary.

During Phase II development, the WRAP EDMS should include the following DBA 

Functionality.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

29

 Data warehousing/archiving – ability to move historical data out of the production 

database and into a WRAP data warehouse.

 Historical data retrieval – ability to generate reports and data sets from the WRAP data 

warehouse.

4.12 QA/QC Module

The WRAP EDMS will include a QA/QC module to perform two levels of QA/QC. The QA/QC 

protocol will be similar to that of NEI with some modifications (see Appendix F for the NEI 

QA/QC process). The first level of QA/QC should include a validation of the format of the 

submitted data files at the submission point of entry. This would ensure that the submitting 

entity supplied all data to the WRAP EDMS in the expected format and also identify any errors. 

The second level of QA/QC should consist of checks of the data that was submitted to WRAP. 

This should include checking reference values and acceptable data ranges for specific data 

points.

The WRAP EDMS QA/QC module should perform the following types of format checks.

 Does the file conform to the format specification? - The initial checks performed on each 

submitted data set will verify that the file format is correct, and therefore readable for 

further processing (e.g., field widths, begin/end position, data types).

 Are mandatory data elements reported? - The presence or absence of mandatory data 

elements will be confirmed. Some of the mandatory data fields are the primary keys (i.e. 

FIPS codes and SCC Codes) in each record that help relate and maintain the individual 

records together in a file for subsequent processing. 

 Does the data set contain what the STL agency said they are submitting? - The data in the 

file will be compared to the Inventory Submittal Form (ISF) that was provided with the 

file to verify the noted and intended coverage for geographic area, pollutants, source 

categories, and temporal information.

WRAP will keep a log of errors and problems encountered with each of the data submissions, 

and will provide those to the STL agency when communicating with the agency.

The WRAP EDMS QA/QC for data content will consist of two areas of QA/QC. First, the data 

will be checked for completeness, ensuring that all data exists for all sources and geographic 

areas. Second, the data integrity will be checked, ensuring that supplied values are within 

acceptable ranges and all codes are valid. The QA/QC module should perform the following 

types of data content checks for completeness.

 Add records to fill in missing facilities or source categories, or to fill in for missing 

geographic areas (e.g., where data were not reported for entire counties).

 Add, or solve for, data elements missing in existing records.

Additionally, the QA/QC module will perform the following data augmentation processes:

 Calculate EC and OC emissions.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

30

 Aggregate dust and biogenic source data from the supplied grid and hourly levels to 

county/reservation and annual levels.

 Modify county data to exclude sources and emissions from tribal reservations that are 

within the county’s boundaries.

The QA/QC module should perform the following types of data integrity checks.

 Conditional fields - fields required by other fields in the same table. For example, if there 

is a PCT Capture Efficiency in the Control Equipment (CE) table, then there should also 

be a Primary Device Type in the CE Table.

 Acceptable codes - the Pollutant Code (and all acceptable codes) should be consistent. 

 Numeric values in acceptable range - For example, the annual average days per week in 

the Emission Point (EP) table should be less than seven.

 Inter-File Format - fields required by other fields in different tables. If there is an 

Emission Record in the Emission (EM) table, then there should be an associated activity

record in the Activity Code (AC) table. 

 Inter-source relationships

 Inter-pollutant relationships

 Advance point source diagnostic – check of largest sources, out of range stacks, stack 

location.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

31

5.0 CONCLUSIONS

Under contract with the WRAP EF, EA performed an EDMS needs assessment that included two 

interview workshops, a web-based questionnaire, and an evaluation of selected existing systems. 

Five existing database management systems were evaluated and compared to the conceptual 

WRAP EDMS developed from the findings of the workshops and web-based questionnaire.

The workshops and questionnaire results indicated that the WRAP EDMS should be used as the 

repository of WRAP regional emissions data, and as a tool that can help in the implementation of 

the emissions tracking and reporting requirements of the RHR. The WRAP EDMS will be able 

to track all the visibility-impairing pollutants. The emissions data will primarily be submitted by

STL agencies in an EPA-compliant format according to an open submittal process. Furthermore, 

the WRAP EDMS will contain six major sources representing the emissions sources: point, area, 

mobile, fire, biogenic, and windblown dust sources in addition to a QA/QC module, a GIS 

module, and a DBA module. Finally, the WRAP EDMS will produce user-specified standard 

and RHR-special reports and will allow data queries and graphical display, and presentation of 

this information in GIS format.

The results of the comparative analysis showed that the conceptual WRAP EDMS has a unique 

set of requirements that are not fully implemented in any existing EDMS. Therefore, a new 

individual EDMS needs to be developed to meet the requirements for the conceptual WRAP 

EDMS. Also, this new system could utilize some of the features incorporated in several of the 

existing systems to accomplish some of the WRAP EDMS requirements.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPORT

32

6.0 REFERENCES

California Air Resources Board (CARB), EMFAC 2002 Vehicle Emission Model, 2002.

Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Chapter 40, Part 51.

Code of Federal Regulation (CFR), Chapter 40, Part 49.

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Emission and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 

Version 4.1, 2002.

Federal Register (FR), Volume 64, PP 35756.

Federal Register (FR), Volume 67, PP 30439.

Federal Register (FR), Volume 67, PP 7263-64.

Federal Register (FR), Volume 67, PP 39602-16.

Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC), Recommendations for Improving 

Western Vistas, Report to the EPA, June 10, 1996.

MCNC, Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) Modeling System, 1999 

Pechan, Draft RPO Data Exchange Protocol, 2003.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), User’s Guide to Mobile6.1 and Mobile6.2: Mobile 

source Emission Factor Model, 2002.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Draft User’s Guide to PART5: A Program for 

Calculating Particle Emissions from Motor Vehicles, 1995.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Draft NONROAD Model for 2007 HD Highway

Rulemaking, June 2000.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Biogenic Emission Inventory System Version 2.3, 

1998.

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, 

AP-42, Fifth Edition, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, 1998.

Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), WRAP Policy Fire Tracking System, 2002.