ClearingHouse for Inventories and Emission Factors
m
N* E* W* S* L E* T* T* E* R
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Air Quality
Planning And Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-454/C-98-001
Volume IX, No. 1
Winter 1998
Table of Contents
(click on title)
A&WMA Call for Papers 2
EFIG's Priorities for the New Year
David Misenheimer, EFIG 3
We Need Your Help! 3
1996 PEI: Baseline of the Future
Greg Stella, EFIG 4
The Future for Emission Factor Quality Ratings
Ron Myers, EFIG 6
Latest Trends Report Release
Sharon Nizich, EFIG 7
Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program
Dennis Beauregard, EFIG 8
Info CHIEFS Most Frequently Asked Questions 9
ป** *** *** *** *** ***
-------
Call for Papers
The Emission Inventory: Living in a Global Environment
The international symposium, "The Emission Inventory: Living in a Global Environment" will be held Decem-
ber 8-10,1998 at Le Meriden Hotel, New Orleans, Louisiana. This is the eighth annual symposium on emis-
sion inventories and is sponsored by the Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA) and the U.S. EPA's
Emission Factor and Inventory Group. Papers presented at the conference may also be submitted to the
A&WMA for publication in the peer reviewed Journal of the Air& Waste Management Association.
The technical program will focus on papers that relate industrial experiences and concerns with inventories of
air pollution emissions and the methods used to estimate emissions. The program will also consist of papers
related to the improvement of the emission inventory process and utilization of emission data in global, na-
tional and regional control strategies. This conference will provide a useful forum for exchange of ideas and
information on the use of emission data between industry, regulatory agencies, environmental professionals
and the public. Topics from emission estimation methods to compliance reporting will also be covered.
Papers will be presented from the following topic areas covering criteria and regional haze pollutants and their
precursors, toxic air pollutants, greenhouse gases and other non-traditional pollutants:
Preparation of industrial emission estimates
Inventories as they relate to policy
development and business decisions
Regional and international emission
programs
Regional Haze
Implementing federal and state
legislation *P
Inventory quality and
uncertainties
Compiling state regulatory
emission inventories, including
periodic inventories
PM factors, emission models
and inventories
Collecting and managing
emission related data
Motor vehicle emission: on road and
off-road
Role of inventories in planning,
industrial permits and trading programs
Biogenic/Agricultural emissions
Spatial and temporal resolution of inventories
Emission projections
Greenhouse gases
Global climate emission issues
Tracking inventories for record keeping and
compliance determinations
Acid rain emission issues
Air toxics emission estimates and
inventories
Integrating and reducing emis-
sion reporting requirements
Air quality modeling inventories
Comparison studies of inventory
and ambient data
Development and Improvement
of emission factors and
inventories
New developments in stationary
source emission estimates
Electronic data processing and
computerized tools
Economic analysis and emission
inventories
Fugitive and Geogenic Emissions
Panel discussions related to the Emission Inventory Improvement Program, international, permit, trading
programs and other inventory related developments are also planned. Continuing education courses and an
exhibit of related products and services will be held in connection with the conference technical program.
Platform and poster presentations are invited. Send (by E-mail, mail, or fax) a 200-400 word abstract by June
5, 1998 to the Technical Program Chair: Sharon Nizich, c/o Sally Dombrowski of the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency, MD-14, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Tel: (919) 541-0875, Fax: (919) 541-0684, e-
mail: dombrowski.sally@epamail.epa.gov. Include a complete mailing address, telephone and fax numbers,
E-mail address, and an indication of whether platform or poster presentation is preferred. Unless otherwise
noted, the first author listed will be assumed to be the primary author and will be the main contact for confer-
ence correspondence.
-------
EFIG's Priorities for the New Year
David Misenheimer, Acting Group Leader, EFIG
A new year is upon us and as usual, things continue to change. Perhaps it would be boring to do the same
things two years in a row, but one of these years I would like to try. While ozone has been the priority for the
Emission Factor and Inventory Group the past several years, priorities for 1998 are: 1) PM Fine, 2) toxics, and
3) ozone.
With the new ambient air quality standards, we have the challenge of developing a full set of PM Fine emission
estimation tools (emission factors, emission models, inventories, etc.) in a relatively short amount of time.
Similar to ozone, emission estimates are necessary for PM Fine to support baseline assessments, control
strategy development, and air quality modeling. Also similar to ozone, PM Fine air quality modeling must
include precursor pollutants (ammonia, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) in addition to direct emission of
particulates. We will be focusing this year on initiating the development of emission factors/models and on
beginning to firm up national emission estimates for PM Fine and precursors. This effort will include partner-
ships with other federal agencies as well as state and local agencies.
Second on our list of priorities is air toxics. Several activities are planned to improve our support for air toxic
assessment projects within EPA and state agencies. Foremost is preparation of a 1996 emissions database
for 188 hazardous air pollutants (HAPS). This will be the newest version of our National Toxics Inventory (NTI)
and will represent a significant improvement over the current 1993 database. Some of the key activities for this
year will be the addition of facility specific data and significant improvements/updates to the area and mobile
source data. We will also be preparing improved documentation of the NTI methodologies and merging the
data with our national criteria pollutant emissions database.
Third is ozone. Not that ozone has gone away, but relatively speaking, we are in good shape with our ozone
related emission factors, estimates, and tools. One of the main activities for ozone is incorporation of the
states' 1996 periodic emission inventory data into the National Emission Trends (NET) inventory. This will be
a significant update to the NET, especially for point sources. We are also working on some improvements to
consumer solvent emission factors and updates to a few AP-42 sections.
We expect this to be a very busy year with many challenges and with a high level of attention from users of
emission estimation data and tools both within EPA and in other agencies. If you would like to hear more about
our planned activities or would like to participate in efforts to improve data and/or tools for criteria and toxic
emission estimates, you can contact me at misenheimer.david@epamail.epa.gov.
CD
1
ct>
I
8=
x
We Need Your Help!
The Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) is in the initial stages of developing a mul-
timedia Computer Based Training (CBT) course for emission inventory preparation to be
distributed on CD-ROM. The CBT is expected to be an introductory level course for state
and local agency staff members who are new to the inventory preparation process. The
focus will be on inventories of a local or regional nature, which are typically prepared for the
purposes of developing State Implementation Plans (SIP).
EFIG is looking for state and local agency participants to assist and provide peer review
during the development of the CBT. Also, EFIG would like to hear from those agencies that
have similar introductory level training courses available in-house, and can provide examples
of what is already working well. If you are interested in helping us by reviewing course
material or providing additional information, please contact Info CHIEF at (919) 541-5285 or
E-mail info.chief@epamail.epa.gov.
CD
CD
00
-------
A Refresher Course for the 1996 Periodic Emission
Inventory: Baseline of the Future
by Greg Stella, EFIG
As proclaimed in the title of this year's Emission Inventory Conference, we indeed are "Planning for the Fu-
ture." State Periodic Emission Inventories (PEIs) for 1996 are required to be submitted to EPA by July 15,
1998 and soon will be considered the baseline of the future. Until now, emission projections have been
developed from emissions collected during the 1990 estimation effort. This submission and collection pro-
gram will soon become very important as the impact of past inventory projections and policy decisions will be
seen almost immediately.
Background on the Periodic Emission Inventory
Several regulatory provisions are contained in the Clean
Air Act (CAA) that direct the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA) to collect and maintain emis-
sions inventory data. The CAA requires that state and
local agencies develop periodic emission inventories
for ozone nonattainment areas classified as marginal
and above. These inventories must also be devel-
oped for carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas
classified as moderate or serious. Periodic emission
inventories (PEIs) are required to be submitted to the
EPA every three years as directed by the CAA Amend-
ments of 1990 (CAAA). As outlined in the PEI guid-
ance documentation, these inventories are due to EPA
by July 15,1998. EPA will review all data and provide
comments back to the states by October 15, 1998.
All 1996 base year inventory information should be finalized by the states by January 15, 1999.
Because these inventories are used for several purposes, EPA is asking that emission inventories be submit-
ted for areas other than those designated as nonattainment. These inventories will be used for policy deci-
sions that affect entire states and state/local air pollution control agencies as well as the public. Local and
national emission trends are tracked with these inventories and as transport becomes more and more of an
issue, regional models use these inventories as input for air quality estimates in areas affected by emission
transport.
Other Uses
EPA considers the 1996 PEI to be very important. Until now, data collected during 1990 has been projected to
1996 for state's emission estimates. Inventory data are collected from the states for a number of different
purposes. Most are related to some aspect of a state's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for achieving and
maintaining compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Others include monitoring the
15 percent rate-of-progress plans, determining whether emission caps are being maintained for attainment
areas with maintenance plans that call for PEIs, and to track emissions relative to future reasonable further
progress requirements. This 1996 PEI will offer all government agencies the opportunity to reestablish a more
defensive emissions baseline. As new strategies are considered as a result of proposed standards for par-
ticulate matter (PM) and ozone, having solid emission estimates becomes extremely important.
Guidance for Inventory Preparation & Submittal
General guidance has been prepared to assist agencies in compiling their 1996 Periodic Emission Invento-
ries. This information resides in two documents, both of which have been previously distributed to states and
regional air offices in hard copy form and are now available on the web at http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/
efig/ei/. The Action Plan provides an overview of the process to be followed by state/local agencies and EPA.
(Continued on page 5)
4
I
I
CD
CD
00
-------
PEI (Continuedfrom page 4)
The Periodic Emission Inventory Guidance Document contains more specific direction for developing and
submitting an agency's inventory data.
The EPA's Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) guidance documents at http://www.epa.gov/
oar/oaqps/eiip/ contain "preferred and alternative" emission estimation methods for many different and spe- g"
cific types of source categories. While many of the more significant source types are addressed by this .
documentation, procedures for some sources have not yet been developed. In general, the preferred meth- ง:
ods in EIIP are the most accurate and precise of the available estimation techniques and are practical enough ->
to be accomplished by typical state/local agencies and individual facilities in terms of resources and staff.
National Emission Trends Files
Some agencies have expressed concern that their 1996 PEI would be difficult to prepare by the July 1998
submission date. Existing emission estimates compiled by EPA are available to be used as reference in
compiling their 1996 PEIs. As of January 28, 1998, new National Emission Trend (NET) emission files were
uploaded to the EPA's Periodic Emission Inventory FTP site. These files have improved emission estimates
for all source categories, except mobile, and have improved stack and citing parameters for many point source
records. NET files contain criteria pollutant emission estimates while the provided National Toxics Inventory
files contain toxic pollutant emission data. Files can be downloaded from the EPA FTP site and access can be
obtained by state and local agencies by calling the Info CHIEF Help Desk at (919) 541-5285, Monday through
Friday, 8:30 am to 5:30 PM, EST
Submission
Two inventory options and three data formats are available to agencies for their PEI data submissions to EPA.
It should be clearly understood and certainly appreciated that EPA views state or local agency-derived data as
preferable and likely to be of higher quality than NET data. Following suit, an agency's locally-derived data o.
supplemented with NET data would then follow as the next acceptable emissions data. As an example, for ^
some states, a reasonable use of NET data in a PEI would be to use some or all of the EPA-generated ~z
estimates for biogenics, on-road mobile and non-road mobile sources, rather than regenerating these esti- P
mates. However, unlimited verbatim use of NET data to fulfill PEI reporting requirements for large point sources "^
and significant area source categories is not acceptable.
Agencies have three format options for submitting their data electronically to EPA. If an agency decides not to
use any of the available choices, they are still required to submit their data in electronic form. If the agency's
data are not in the EPA system, EPA generated data will be used to represent emissions for that area. Avail-
able formats for submitting data are AIRS/AFS, El IP/EDI, and NET database format. Information on these
formats and advice on how to use these for PEI submission can be found at http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/
efig/ei/ or by contacting the Emission Factor and Inventory Group.
It is important to note that once emissions data are submitted electronically to EPA, they will immediately
become available for public use. Agencies are urged to ensure their submissions contain the most accurate
data available.
Summary
Data reporting is an essential part of the inventory process. A consistent reporting style allows for the data to ^
be used effectively by the state in the future, shared with other states, transferred efficiently to the EPA, and ง
makes it easy to compare and add to data that are already a part of EPA's inventories. Experiences over the IL
last several years have shown the importance of quality emission estimates. The environmental protection CD
community understands the importance of emission estimates in formulating good public policy. If the funda- ฐฐ
mental data used to derive control strategies are flawed, the policy resulting from the strategy will also be in
error. These errors can be costly to the public being exposed, the industry subject to control, and the sur-
rounding environment. While a defensible emission inventory will not solve all these problems, it will provide a
solid foundation on which to begin creating public policy that meets all of society's needs.
-------
The Future for Emission Factor Quality Ratings
by Ron Myers ^
CD
Over the last few years, the meaning of the quality ratings associated with emission factors has been dis- ^
cussed both within EFIG and by outside groups. As a result, the emission factor team has begun a study to S
look at the options for revising these quality ratings. This article contains some information that is germane to ^
this study and identifies some options that may be explored in the future. Also this article requests the readers |
to provide some opinions on the proposals and any additional ideas that could be evaluated. ฃ.
5?
First, we recognize that most users want an unambiguous emission factor value that they can use without "^
question to estimate emissions from a single source or group of sources. However, we also recognize that
these individuals do not have an appreciation for the potential for error in the application of this value. When we
receive phone calls or letters advising us that a factor is wrong it is usually because they have a source that
was recently tested that is half (or twice) the factor. They are surprised when they are informed of the range of
values used to arrive at the average. A few people have also asked for quantitative information on various
aspects related to emission factor uncertainty.
Emission factors are typically the arithmetic average of tests of a few non-random but hopefully unbiased
selections from the source category population. Some factors are geometric means or medians of the avail-
able data. Most emission factors in AP-42 are assigned a quality rating from "A" to "E" by the developer.
Although the basis for the rating is subjective, general criteria differentiate the ratings. The criteria include
aspects of the quality of the supporting tests (compliance with reference test methods, precision and accu-
racy, and supporting documentation) and the quantity of supporting tests. An additional rating of "U" is given to
emission factors that have not been evaluated either because no resources are available to evaluate them, we
have little or no supporting data or because they cannot be evaluated. It should be recognized that the present
factor rating is an imprecise measure of resistance of the factor to change with additional data. No informa- <
tion is provided to characterize the precision or accuracy of the emission factor, the variability of the underlying R-
population, or the precision and accuracy of the resulting inventory. X
~z.
A few difficulties are created by the present emission factor rating system. The lack of quantitative information ^
on the uncertainty of emission estimates for the components of an inventory creates difficulty in formulating
strategies for improving the inventory or identifying potential flaws. The lack of information on the confidence
interval of the factor creates difficulties in identifying priorities for improving emission factors or activity data.
Many people make inappropriate conclusions based upon the factor ratings. One such conclusion is that
factors with equivalent ratings have equivalent precision and accuracy. Another equally inappropriate conclu-
sion concerns the precision and accuracy for these ratings. For example, some comments have been made
that "A" rated factors are ฑ10% in accuracy and that "E" rated factors are order of magnitude estimates.
It is our desire to provide an assessment system that is timeless with little subjectiveness. We would like to
keep the information given to the majority of users as simple as possible but still provide an understandable
assessment of quality. However, we would like to give users the information they require to assess the quality
(precision, accuracy, variability, confidence interval etc.) of their emission estimate. Nevertheless, we want to
keep the development of emission factors relatively uncomplicated. The information supplied should allow
valid comparisons of the quality of emission factors between sources within an inventory.
A few options for what could be included in AP-42, the FIRE database and in the AP-42 background reports
have been identified already. A few of the more viable options identified are:
Eliminate all quality ratings. This is the easiest to implement, would reduce part of the
burden of emission factor development, eliminate some controversies, and would not
adversely impact most of the users of emission factors.
(Continued on page 7)
-------
Quality Ratings (Continuedfrom page 6)
Keep the existing system. This would result in no additional burden in developing the
emission factor. However, it would continue the existing situation. To eliminate some
personal judgements, more specific guidance could be developed on criteria to qualify for
the different ratings.
Eliminate the existing system and provide the number of supporting data and the sample
standard deviation of the supporting data in both AP-42 and FIRE. This would result in
some additional burden but provides additional semi-quantitative information for users.
A variation of this option would be to add this information to the existing system. Despite the
additional burden, this would provide semi-quantitative information and a link to past
practices.
Provide all summary statistics available in spreadsheet programs (count, arithmetic
mean, standard deviation, max, min, median, geometric mean) with two of the above
options. The introduction of AP-42 would need revision to explain how this additional infor-
mation should be used.
It has been suggested that an estimate of the population distribution could be provided by determining the first
and third quartile value and when sufficient data is available by determining the first and ninth decile value.
Another suggestion is that a subjective assessment of the quality of the supporting data be provided.
In formulating the options for revisions of the emission factor quality ratings, discussions are being held with
groups from EPA and state/local agencies. We have targeted groups that use emission factors in inventories,
receptor models, risk assessments and operating permits. In addition, we are soliciting comments from other
users of emission factors. To comment or provide support for what information would be most critical send a
letter to the EFIG or E-mail Ron Myers at myers.ron@epamail.epa.gov.
Latest Trends Report Release
The National Air Pollutant Emission Table ES-1- 1995 and 199G National Annual Emission
-r- i ,-, ,.^^ I-I-.A /,n- ,1/1-1 ^-7 n** Estimates for Criteria Air Pollutants
Trends, 1900- 1996, EPA/454/R-97-01 1 , Alison short tons)
December 1997, is now on our website
at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/
emtrnd. This report presents the lat-
est estimates of national emissions for
criteria air pollutants: carbon monox-
ide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), vola-
tile organic compounds, sulfur dioxide
(SO2), particulate matter (PM-10), and
Lead. Data on air toxics, greenhouse
gases, international emissions, and
biogenics are also summarized in this
report. The table below presents the
1995 and 1996 emissions for the pol-
lutants mentioned above. A hard copy
of the report will be available by March
20th. Please call Info CHIEF at (919)
541 -5285 for a copy.
Errisstons
Pdlutsrt
Anthropogenic Emissions
Carton Monoxide
Lead (Jhousand short tons)
Nitrogen Oxides
Participate Matter (PM-10)
Fugitive dust
Mon- fugitive dust
Sulfur Dioxide
Volatile Organic Compounds
Biogenic Emissions
Volatile Organic Compounds
Nitric Oxide
(&nissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants
tons.)
1995
89.72
3.94
23.94
26.89
22.82
4.07
18.55
20.59
32.74
1.59
1996
88.82
3.87
23.39
31.30
27.23
4.07
19.11
19.09
29.25
1.55
in 1990 (Apere4.^D million short
CD
CD
00
-------
AMERICAN
PETROLEUM
INSTITUTE
Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program
by Dennis Beauregard, EFIG
The American Petroleum Institute (API), in collabora-
tion with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
has developed a program to provide a reliable mecha-
nism for establishing evaporative loss rates for stor-
age tank components. Providing a reliable mecha-
nism for establishing tank component evaporative loss
rates is expected to promote the development and
use of improved seals and fittings for fixed and float-
ing roof storage tanks. Improved seals and fittings
will tend to reduce volatile organic compound and haz-
ardous air pollutant emissions from fixed and floating
roof storage tanks and yield air quality improvements.
Over the years, testing of tank components has been
conducted under the auspices of API and the results evaluated by EPA for inclusion in AP-
42 and the TANKS model. The Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program provides a
mechanism for any party to conduct testing with the reasonable expectation that the results will
be accepted by regulatory agency personnel.
Testing will likely be conducted for the following reasons:
Emission estimates are currently generated using equations developed by API that are
in Section 7.1 of AP-42 and the TANKS model. Inputs to the equations for tank seals and
fittings were developed through evaporative loss testing conducted under the auspices of API.
To characterize evaporative loss rates for various types of seals and fittings, equipment repre-
senting the type of design (e.g., mechanical shoe seal) was fabricated. Equipment designs
were generic in nature but inclusive of features common to most vendor-specific designs
believed critical to controlling evaporative losses. Evaporative loss rates developed through
testing the generic component designs have been generally recognized by regulatory agencies
when used to calculate fixed and floating roof storage tank emissions. The alternative of devel-
oping evaporative loss rates for vendor specific component designs has always existed but no
ready means has been available for doing so.
Sources regulated under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Storage
of Organic Liquids, will now have a reasonable mechanism to utilize the "equivalency" provi-
sion of NSPS, allowing use of designs not strictly adhering to the equipment specifications
within Subpart K. In the past, no established methods existed to evaluate the adequacy of new
or different designs in achieving emission levels equivalent to designs that fully comply with
Subpart K equipment specifications. The Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program estab-
lishes the mechanism by which equivalency determinations can be conducted.
The API Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program is composed of the following:
Test Methods: several test methods have been developed to determine evaporative
loss rates for specific categories of tank components (e.g., rim seals).
Loss Factor Development: procedures have been established to ensure consistent
handling of data and development of evaporative loss rates.
(Continued on page 9)
-------
Seals & Fittings (Continuedfrom page 8)
Laboratory Certification: requirements have been established for the design and
operation of test facilities to ensure reliable test results.
Loss factors developed through the program may be submitted to the American Petroleum Institute for issu-
ance of Certification Numbers. API Certification Numbers indicate adherence with all program requirements
and provide assurance that the loss factors are credible.
To utilize information developed through the Tank Seals and Fittings Certification Program, EPA is evaluating
modifications to the TANKS model which would prompt the user for API Certification Numbers when adding
evaporative loss factors and "flag" new loss factors on emission reports. Compilations of loss factors that
have been issued API Certification Numbers will be available through API and EPA (posting on the CHIEF
website is anticipated).
EPA will periodically review activity under the Tank Seals and Fittings Program to assess the need for adding
new loss factors to AP-42 and the TANKS model. New loss factors having wide application would be logical
candidates for publication in AP-42 and addition to updated versions of the T/WK'S model.
Manufacturers of tank components are expected to be the primary customers for this program. However, it
will be operated on a fee basis and will be open to all parties with a desire to establish evaporative loss factors
for vendor-specific component designs.
Questions regarding this program should be directed to Dennis Beauregard of the Emission Factor and Inven-
tory Group at (919) 541-5512 (E-mail: beauregard.dennis@epamail.epa.gov) or Jason Beckstrom of API at
(202) 682-8147 (E-mail: apitsf@api.org).
Air Quality
Planning &
Standards
CHIEF
1996 El
Air Toxics
TTNWeb
AP-42
Trends
Air&
Radiation
Search OAR
AIRLmks
,3, PDA U'
vf CTitt u
uriMHtml frcwo* AIMQ
ฃ\ Emission Factor
and
Inventory Group
I ABOUT LINKS]
I INFORMATION
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/efig/
9
H
CD
Ct>
Ct>
I
X
~z.
o
CD
CD
00
-------
Info CHIEFs Most Frequently Asked Questions
Call (919) 541-5285 or E-mail info.chief@epamail.epa.gov
if you have questions!
Q: I would like to keep my hard copy of AP-42 up to date, but the last time I called GPO, they did
not have it in stock. How can I get a hard copy of AP-42 Supplement C?
A: Unfortunately, the printing of AP-42 Supplement C was delayed, but it is now available from the Govern-
ment Printing Office (GPO) for $9.00. To order, call GPO at (202) 512-1800 and request Stock Number
055-000-00587-7. Supplement C sections are also available on the CHIEF website (http://www.epa.gov/
ttn/chief/), on Fax CHIEF (call 919-541-5626 or 541-0548 from your fax machine), and on the Air CHIEF
CD-ROM which is available from GPO (Stock No. 055-000-00580-0).
Q: I have recently upgraded from TANKS 3.0 to TANKS 3.1 and I would like to combine the tank
data into TANKS 3.1. Is there a way to do this?
A: Yes. Both versions 3.0 and 3.1 of TANKS allow you to merge data. Since there have been few changes
to TANKS 3.1 from the previous version, it is relatively easy to merge the data from TANKS 3.0 into TANKS
3.1. To do this, simply select "Database Utilities" from the TANKS 3.1 Main Menu. Under "Database
Utilities", choose the "Merge Data" option. This option will bring up a window which prompts you for the two
data directories and the two system directories to be merged. Type in the directories for TANKS 3.1 in the
"Directory 1" option (this should appear as the default) and then type the directories for TANKS 3.0 in the
"Directory 2" option. When you have finished, hit the "CTRL" key and the "END" key on your keyboard to
save and merge the directories.
Q: I just downloaded the TANKS 3.1 software and tried to install it onto my computer. However,
when I try to run the program, I get a screen that says "Exiting TANKS software". Why is this
happening?
A: If you have followed the installation instructions correctly (e.g. exiting Windowsฎ and installing under
DOS), then you may have a virus scanning software running on your system that interferes with the
installation process. We have recently discovered that some virus scanning software programs appar-
ently treat the TANKS installation like a virus program and prevents the TANKS31.EXE file from being
installed. To correct this situation, disable your virus scanning software during the installation process.
[Emission Factor & Inventory Group!
I The CHIEF Newsletter
Volume IX, No. 1
Winter 1998
The CHIEF Newsletter is produced quarterly by the Emission Factor and
Inventory Group; Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division; of EPA's Of-
fice of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Its purpose is to enhance commu-
nication within the emission factor and inventory community by providing
new and useful information and by allowing for the exchange of information
between and among its readers. Comments on the Newsletter and articles for
inclusion in it are welcome and should be directed to Emission Factor and
Inventory Group (MD-14), US EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; tele-
phone (919) 541-5285.
The contents of The CHIEF Newsletter do not necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Agency, neither does the mention of trade names or com-
mercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
------- |