### 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, 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: 1406601EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 QUESTI ONNAIRE 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 Tr acking

................................ ................................ ............... 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 PARTICIPANTSEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

iii APPENDIX C: QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCES

APPENDIX D: CONCEPTUAL WRAP AND SELECTED EDMS COMPARISON

APPENDIX E: NEI DATA SUBMIS SION FORMAT APPENDIX F: NEI QA/QC PROCESS

APPENDIX G: WRAP EDMS FLOW CHART

APPENDIX H: CAC BONDARIESEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 park s 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 r oads 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 provid es 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 area s 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 (SO 2 ) stationary sources, fire sources, mobile sources, and windblown dust sources among other requirements.

1.2 Consolidated Emiss ion 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 inventor y 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 (PM 2.5 ), regional haze, and statewide reporting of area

and mobile source emissions. In fact, new inventories will add PM 2.5 and ammonia (NH 3 ). 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 sm aller point sources once every three years or one

- third of the sources every year.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 (O 3 ), 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 issu es 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 (RP O) 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 technica l 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 REPO RT

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 statu tory 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

late r 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 framewo rk 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 state s. 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 re presentation 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, ma ny 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 an d 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 tri bal 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 re porting, management, and tracking system to support state and tribal regionalEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 info rmation 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 followin g 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 add ressing 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 t he 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 recommend ations.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 20 th , 2003. It was intended fo r 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 comp arative 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. Appen dices 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 7 th , 2003 and was planned in order to provide an oppor tunity 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 Emissi on 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 un derscored 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 intentEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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

emi ssions 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 int ernet and will contain online training manuals.

The WRAP EDMS will track all the visibility

- impairing pollutants: volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , elemental carbon (EC), organic carbon (OC), carbon monoxide (CO), and NH 3 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 o ther 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. Th e 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 t hrough 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 submit ted 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 b e 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 em issions 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 SO 2 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

so urce 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 ho urly, daily, seasonal, and annual emissions data as necessary. The system would include others pollutants (e.g. methane (CH 4 ), mercury (Hg), etc) and their emissions data. It may be used to track other RHR requirementsEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

7 (e.g. annual emission goals) and ot her 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 popula ted 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 inv entory 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

 E arly 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 30 9

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, an d 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, mobi le, 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 theEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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, in

house developed systems, and other systems (i.e. AMS Tempo) that ne ed 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, an d data version management among

others.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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, NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , EC, OC, CO, and NH 3 . The WRAP EDMS should also track all necessary activity data

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

relate d 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. T he 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 stan dard 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 t o 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 SO 2 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 toEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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

under stood. 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 li ne, 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 stati stical 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 ev aluated 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 incompl ete. 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 websiteEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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, NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , CO, and NH 3 . The pollutants

are tracked for four so urce 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

sub mitting 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 standar d 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 na tional 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

c ountry 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 u tilized in the WRAP EDMS. First, the NEI requires a s tandard 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 captu res the required emissions and activity data for all pollutants except OC and EC, which can be calculated by the WRAP system, based on the PM 2.5 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 proces s 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 aEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

12 modified version of this QA/QC Process to ensure that all data submitted to the WRA P 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 approva l 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 report s 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

EDM S 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 in ventory 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 TEIS S tracks seven pollutants: VOC, NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , CO, and NH 3 . 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

l ocation, 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 G IS 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 sour ces 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 REPO RT

13 3.3.2.2 Key System Elements

The TEISS has two key elements that should be uti lized 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 inclu des 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 c ould 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 specif ic needs.

3.3.3.1 System Details

The CARBEI tracks five pollutants: NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , 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 in dividually 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 th at 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 w ith 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 stan dard 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 th e 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 REPO RT

14 3.3.3.2 Key System Elements

The CARBEI has one key element that should be utilized in the WRAP EDMS. T h e 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 Dep artment 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://ema ps.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 bec ause of its internet capabilities.

3.3.4.1 System Details

The CAPI tracks five pollutants: VOC, NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , 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 fun ctioning 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 vi a 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 man ipulation 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

i n its GIS module to provide its users internet

- based GIS capability.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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. T he 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 emis sions level, the DEN tracks five pollutants: VOC, NO

x , SO 2 , PM 10 , 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 layer s 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 s elect 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 f

unctioning, 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 func tionality in its GIS module to provide its users internet

- based GIS capability.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 submitt ed, 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 App endix 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) (annua l 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 operationEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

17 32) X stack coordinate (latitude) 33) Y stack coordinate (longitude) 34) Stack height 35) Stack diameter 36) Exit gas temperature 37) Exit gas veloci ty 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 emiss ion 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 VO C, NOx, SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and NH 3 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 stationa ry 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) Inve ntory 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 REPO RT

18 13) Rule penetration (%) 14) Pollutant c ode 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 estim ated 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 statio ns 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

M obile 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 em ission 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 est imated 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 databa se.EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 a nd 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 (V MT 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 F IPS 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) Spr ing throughput (%) 19) Summer throughput (%) 20) Fall throughput (%) 21) Hours/day in operation 22) Days/week in operationEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 ge nerate 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 f inal 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 emi ssions 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 sourc e 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) Annua l 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 sp atial 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 (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ) are

curre ntly 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 aEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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

defini tion 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 emissi ons 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 Trackin g 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 app ropriate 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, s o me 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 subm itted, 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 burnEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

22 10) Duration of burn 11) Burn location latitude 12) Burn location longitude 13) Area of burn 14) Fuel type 15) Pre

- burn fuel loadi ng 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 Querie s

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 ann ual 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 t otal 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 pollu tant.

 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 emi ssions 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 emis sions 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 emissio ns 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 REPO RT

23  A summary report of the annual WRAP emissions from on

- road mobile sour ces 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 WR AP 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 a nnual 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_UN ITS, 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 emis sions 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), stationar y SO 2 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 requirem ents 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 strate gy must include:EA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 impairme nt 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

- i mpaired 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, a nd 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 o f 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 (20 08, 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 significa nt 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 i n 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 mor e 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 revis ion (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) format s 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 a nnual 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 REPO RT

25 4.9.2 Pre

- Trigger SO 2 Annex

The SO 2 Annex program, as proposed by WRAP and adopted by EPA, requires the tracking of

SO 2 emissions from eligible stationary sources within states or tribal reservations participating in Section 309, to determine if the regional SO 2 emissions cap has been exceeded. This is k nown 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 SO 2 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 SO 2 sources which emissions are greater than100 tpy that were not contained in the previous year’s emissions report.

 Explanation for sources shut dow n 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 com pile the annual emissions reports submitted by the states and tribes participating in the program into a regional emission report for SO 2 using the WRAP EDMS. By December 31 of the year following the applicable compliance year, WRAP will prepare a regiona l emission report that will include the following information:

 Summary of regional SO 2 emissions (tpy).

 Identification of any paper emission increases and decreases that have occurred due to changes in emission inventory techniques since the last SIP revi sion 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 c apability 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 SO 2 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 SO 2 that

were not contained i n 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 SO 2 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 REPO RT

26  A summary report of the regional average SO 2 emissions from stationary sources emitting more than 100 tpy of SO 2 for the last three years and comparison to the regional milestone for the compliance period.

 A summary report of the stationary sources emitt ing more than 100 tpy of SO 2 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

SO 2 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

SO 2 that were not included in the base year for each state, tribe and the entire region.

4.9.3 Mobile Emissio ns

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

- road

and non

- road mobile source emissions of VOC, NO X , SO 2 , PM 2.5 , EC, OC, and paved and unpaved road dust for the years 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2018. The inventori es 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 estima ted 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, SO 2 , PM 2.5 , EC, OC, and paved and unpaved road dust) fo r 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 syste m (spatial and temporal) of VOC, NO X , EC, OC, and PM 2.5 emissions from fire. The WRAP inventory will add SO 2 , PM 10 , CO, and NH 3 emissions.

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

track fire activit y 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 r equirements 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 repor ted by states and tribes participating in Section 309, as well as the same type of data provided by other WRAP region state, tribal, andEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

27 local air agencies, and federal/state/private sources using prescribed and/or agricultural burning techniques. The WRA P 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 gra ph 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 inte rnet. 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

Fun ctionality.

 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 follo wing 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 polygonsEA Engineering, Science, and Technology FINAL TECHNICAL REPO RT

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 dri ven 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 g eneral 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 inter face. 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 req uire 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

– abi lity 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 inter national 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 REPO RT

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 f or 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 corr ect, 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 th e 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 enc ountered 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 t hat 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.

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

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

30  Aggregate dust and biogenic source data from the supplied grid and hourly levels to county/reservation and annual levels.

 Modify county dat a 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. Fo r 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 REPO RT

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 compare d 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 th at 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

- compl iant 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 th at 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 ut ilize 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 REPO RT

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), Vol ume 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, S parse 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 Enviro nmental 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 Environmenta l 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 Re gional Air Partnership (WRAP), WRAP Policy Fire Tracking System, 2002.