* _ \
KWJ
*1 PRO1^
READ ME file for the 1999 NEI for HAPs
(Stationary Sources)

-------

-------
EPA-454/B-20-003
July 2003
READ ME file for the 1999 NEI for HAPs (Stationary Sources)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Air Quality Assessment Division
Research Triangle Park, NC

-------
READ ME file for the 1999 NEI for HAPs (Stationary Sources)
CONTENTS
Section	Page
OVERVIEW 	 ii
ACRONYMS	iii
INTRODUCTION	1
WHAT 1999 NEI FINAL VERSION 3 FILES ARE POSTED FOR HAPS?	2
WHAT INVENTORY DOCUMENTATION FILES ARE PROVIDED? 	2
WHAT INVENTORY DATA FILES ARE PROVIDED? 	2
WHAT SUMMARY FILES ARE PROVIDED? 	3
HOW ARE THE DATA FILES ORGANIZED?	5
WHAT SOFTWARE DO I NEED TO USE THE DATA FILES?	5
HOW CAN I REVIEW OR USE THE FILES?	5
WHO ARE THE CONTACTS FOR STATE, LOCAL, AND MACT DATA? 	17
HOW DOES THE NEI SATISFY THE INFORMATION QUALITY GUIDELINES?	25
Tables	Page
la	Summary of Point Source NEI Records	6
lb	Summary of Point Source NEI Records (Continued) 	7
2	Summary of Area (Nonpoint) Source NEI Records	8
3	Latitude/Longitude Data Standard	14
4	Geocoder Default Flags and Default Values for Latitude/Longitude Standard	15
5	Point Source State and Local Agency Contacts	18
6	Nonpoint Source State and Local Agency Contacts 	21
7	MACT Source Category Contacts for the 1999 NEI	22
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
1

-------
OVERVIEW
WHAT IS PROVIDED HERE?
Point and nonpoint source data files and documentation for the final 1999 NEI Version 3 for
HAPs are provided for download by state, local, and tribal agencies, EPA, and industry. This
READ ME file provides important information integral to your use of the files.
WHY ARE THESE FILES BEING POSTED?
Version 2 of the 1999 NEI for HAPs was posted in October, 2001, for state/local/tribal and
industry review. Review was also solicited from within EPA. The revisions and additions
provided in February, 2002, and June, 2002, for Version 2 of the NEI were incorporated to the
extent possible to develop draft Version 3. Draft Version 3 of the 1999 NEI for HAPs was
posted in December, 2002, for state/local/tribal, EPA, and industry review. The revisions
provided by March 2003 have been incorporated to the extent possible to develop final
Version 3.
Our goal is to have the final 1999 NEI Version 3 contain emission estimates that represent a
consensus among the state/local/tribal agencies involved, EPA, and industry. We expect that this
will continue to require dialog and information exchange.
WHAT IF I HAVE QUESTIONS?
Industry persons who have questions about emission estimates provided by state or local agencies
can use Tables 5 and 6 at the end of this document to identify whom they can work with to
resolve their questions.
To discuss emission estimates based on EPA MACT data, state, local, or industry staff should
contact the MACT specialist listed in Table 7.
Please relay your general point source questions by e-mail to Ms. Anne Pope at the following
address:
pope, anneaepa. 20V
Please relay your questions and comments about residential wood combustion (fireplaces and
stoves), open burning, and wildland fires by e-mail to Mr. Roy Huntley at the following address:
huntlev. rov(a>,epa. gov
Please relay your other nonpoint questions by email to Ms. Laurel Driver at the following
address:
driver. laurel(a),epa. gov
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
11

-------
ACRONYMS
ASCII
American Standard Code for Information Interchange
CAS
Chemical Abstract Service
EFIG
Emission Factor and Inventory Group
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
ESD
Emission Standards Division
FIPS
Federal Information Processing Standards
FRS
Federal Registry System
FTP
File transfer protocol
GIS
Geographic Information System
HAP
Hazardous air pollutant
ID
Identification
I/O
Input/Output
IQG
Information Quality Guidelines
MACT
Maximum Achievable Control Technology
NA
Not applicable
NAICS
North American Industry Classification System
NEI
National Emissions Inventory
NIF
NEI Input Format
NTI
National Toxics Inventory
OEI
Office of Environmental Information
ORIS
Office of Regulatory Information Systems
PCT
Percent
SIC
Standard Industrial Classification
see
Source Classification Code
TRI
Toxics Release Inventory
VOC
Volatile organic compound
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
111

-------
INTRODUCTION
The National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is a comprehensive inventory covering criteria
pollutants and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The NEI was created by the EPA's Emission
Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Previously,
EFIG developed and maintained two separate inventories for HAPs and criteria pollutants. The
two emission inventories were called the National Toxics Inventory (NTI) and the National
Emission Trends (NET) inventory. The NTI was for HAPs and the NET was for criteria
pollutants, and they sometimes used different procedures for determining emissions from the
same sources. For 1999, the EFIG decided to combine the inventories into a single
comprehensive inventory covering both criteria pollutants and HAPs. The new name is the
National Emissions Inventory, or NEI. For this year, like last year, because of slightly different
data structure, the EFIG prepared the state files separately. This README document is for the
HAP files only.
The scope of the NEI effort for HAPs was to compile 1999 base year emissions data for as many
point, nonpoint, and mobile sources in the United States as possible. Details on development of
the 1999 NEI can be found at http:www.epa. 2Qv/ttn/chief/net/nei plan.pdf. Details on the file
data structure for the NEI can be found at http:www. epa. 2Qv/ttn/chief/nif/index.html#ver3.
Because the NEI now houses both criteria pollutants and HAPs, EFIG made the decision that
emissions data for lead, which is both a criteria pollutant and a HAP, will be included in the NEI
for HAPs.
The 1999 NEI for HAPs contains emission estimates for major sources, area sources, mobile
sources, and other sources which do not readily fall into these categories. This README
pertains only to stationary sources; information on mobile sources can be found elsewhere.
Point sources in the NEI are sources for which the specific location is known; they may be either
major or area sources. Major sources are defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA) as stationary
sources that:
Have the potential to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of one HAP; or
Have the potential to emit 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAPs.
As best as possible, point sources in the NEI have been identified as either major or area, but this
identification may not correspond to the official regulatory classification of some sources.
Nonpoint sources in the NEI include area sources that are not identified as point sources because
their specific locations are not known. Nonpoint sources also include other sources such as
wildfires and prescribed burning whose emissions are estimated at the county level.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
1

-------
WHAT 1999 NEI FINAL VERSION 3 FILES ARE POSTED FOR HAPs?
This file transfer protocol (ftp) site has separate point and nonpoint source files for each state,
including Washington, DC, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, containing the 1999 NEI HAP
files for that state. The files posted here by the EFIG include inventory documentation files
describing how the NEI was developed, and inventory data files that contain the actual inventory
data for each state. This READ ME file describes the different files posted on this site and how
to use them.
WHAT INVENTORY DOCUMENTATION FILES ARE PROVIDED?
The documentation that describes how the NEI was developed appears in the following Adobe®
files:
Point99.pdf for the point source inventory; and
Nonpt99.pdf for the nonpoint source inventory.
The documentation files provided in ".pdf format require the Adobe® Acrobat® Reader Version
2.1 or higher to open and view. To download to a free copy of this software, go to
http://www. adobe, com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep. html.
WHAT INVENTORY DATA FILES ARE PROVIDED?
Two inventory data files are provided for each state: point and nonpoint. The naming convention
for these files is "XX99PTFINAL.zip" where XX is the two-character U.S. postal code (state
abbreviation) for each state for point sources and "XX99NPFINAL.zip" for nonpoint sources
(where XX is again the two-character U.S. postal code).
These files are currently posted only in Access®. If you need the files in an ascii fixed column or
delimited version, please contact the EPA person listed in the Overview section for the source
type in question.
The point source zipped file for each state contains an Access® database with eight record types,
or tables, containing facility and emissions data. Included is a record-count table, a linking
query, and an emissions sum query.
The nonpoint source zipped file for each state contains an Access® database with five record
types.
In addition to the data files, an NEI lookup database has been posted. This file contains all of the
codes and flags used in the data files. Please note that the pollutant HAP dictionary complies
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Office of Environmental Information
(OEI) Data Standards and contains several important fields which map the NEI pollutant codes to
the Chemical Identification Data Standard. (For more information on the Data Standards, see
http://oaspub. epa. 20 v edr epas/dS. startup.)
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
2

-------
WHAT SUMMARY FILES ARE PROVIDED?
In addition to the NEI documentation and data files posted here, additional files are provided to
facilitate your evaluation of the NEI, and to help you put the emission estimates presented here
into perspective by state, county, source category, and facility. The summary files and
documentation reports posted here also allow you to clearly identify the source of emissions data
selected for each point source facility and each nonpoint source category.
In each summary file, emissions are presented for each 188 HAP category, as the sum of the 188
HAPs, and as the sum of the 33 urban HAPs used by EPA in many air toxics programs. Each 33
urban HAP is flagged as such. Emissions are also presented for each individual HAP species in
all files except for the county emission summary, the source category summary and the point
source facility summary files. Each county is flagged with the urban/rural designation developed
under EPA/s Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy. A county is considered "urban" if either:
1)	it includes a metropolitan statistical area with a population greater than 250,000; or
2)	the U.S. Census Bureau designates more than fifty percent of the population as
"urban."
The Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy is an important part of EPA's national air toxics
program. Please note that the definition of "urban" does not necessarily apply for regulatory or
implementation purposes (www, epa. isov lln atw urban urban pa.html).
County Emission Summary
The county emission summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by state, and county for major,
area, onroad, and nonroad sources. Major and area sources are also summarized as Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) vs. non-MACT source categories.
Source Category Summary
The source category summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by state, and county for major,
area, onroad, and nonroad sources. The area sources are delineated as point or nonpoint. Each
stationary source category is presented by MACT code, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
code, or just source category name if there is no applicable MACT or SIC code.
Point Source Facility Summary
The point source facility summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by NTI unique facility (often
consisting of multiple sites) and individual site for major and area point sources. Included with
each facility record is the address, site latitude/longitude, emission type (actual, allowable,
potential, etc.), MACT and/or SIC code. The source of the emission estimate, whether original
data or recently revised, is also noted as state/local/tribal, MACT, Toxics Release Inventory
(TRI), industry, or 1996 NTI.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
3

-------
Point Source Stack Summary
The point source stack summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by NTI Unique Facility (often
consisting of multiple sites) and individual site for major and area point sources. Included with
each record is the emission type (actual, allowable, potential, etc.), emission unit ID, process ID,
emission release point ID, source classification code (SCC), MACT and/or SIC code, emission
release point type (stack/vent or fugitive), and latitude/longitude of the emission release point.
The source of the emission estimate, whether original data or recently revised, is also noted as
state/local/tribal, MACT, TRI, industry, or 1996 NTI.
Preparation of the Point Source Summary Files
Prior to the creation of the summary files, the point source files undergo a "standardization"
process to eliminate possible double counting and annualize all estimates.
Where there were multiple estimates for a HAP at a given emission release point (i.e., defined by
state and county FIPs, site ID, unit ID, process ID, and emission release point ID), one record is
chosen according to the following logic:
Data for the most recent year gets preference over older data (e.g., 1999 data are
preferred over 1996 data);
When information is provided for two different periods for the same emission
release point, the more complete period gets preference over incomplete periods
(365 days over 79);
An emission type hierarchy is established, and higher types get preference over
lower ones (entire period > average > potential > maximum annual > maximum >
maximum allowable > average daily > actual hourly > maximum hourly >
unknown);
Where there are multiple metallic HAPs associated with the same emission
release point and one of the compounds is a specific compound and the other is
not, the specific HAP is retained over the non-specific HAP grouping (e.g.,
"Chromium (VI)" is retained over "Chromium and Compounds"); and
Finally, all emissions are converted to tons/year. This entails reviewing the period
start and end dates, emission type, and unit numerator. If the emission type is
daily (29), the emissions are multiplied by the number of days in the period. If the
emission type is hourly (14), the emissions are multiplied by the number of days
in the period and number of hours in the day (24).
The standardized emissions are used to determine if the facility is major or area based on the
CAA definition of major vs area source. The facility category field in the sites table is updated
using this assignment.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
4

-------
Note: Records eliminated from the standardized file are retained in the inventory and can still be
found in the state output files.
Nonpoint Stationary Source Summary
The nonpoint stationary source summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by state, county, and
area source category. Included with each record is the emission type (actual, allowable, potential,
etc.), SCC, MACT, and/or SIC code.
HOW ARE THE DATA FILES ORGANIZED?
EFIG decided that the structure of the NEI database would be the best format to use in compiling
the NEI for HAPs. The NEI currently houses EPA's criteria pollutant emissions inventory, and
adding the air toxics inventory will serve multiple end uses.
The specific data structure used for the 1999 NEI for HAPs is based on NEI Input Format (NIF)
Version 3.0. Further information about the NIF can be found at
http://www. epa. zov/ttn/chief/nif/index. html.
The NIF code tables can also be found there. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the structure of the point
and nonpoint area source files provided.
WHAT SOFTWARE DO I NEED TO USE THE DATA FILES?
The NEI files are provided in Microsoft® Access 97. MS-Access provides a reliable, commonly
used platform which can be used to view and link the files.
If you need these files in a different format, such as ascii fixed column or comma delimited,
please contact the EPA person listed above in the Overview section for the source type in
question. We are more than happy to provide a format you can use.
HOW CAN I REVIEW OR USE THE FILES?
State and local agencies, tribal representatives, and industry representatives are more familiar
with the emission sources in a given county or state than EFIG. The following discussion will
help you understand the source of the inventory data.
Point Source Files
Emissions Data Source
The point source inventory is a combination of state, local, and tribal agency data, EPA data for
MACT sources, industry data, and TRI data, supplemented with data pulled from the 1996 NTI.
EFIG relied on input from those most familiar with facilities in a given state or county to help
identify missing, duplicate, or closed facilities within the NEI.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
5

-------
Table la. Summary of Point Source NEI Records
Transmittal
Site
Emission Unit
Emission Release Point
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
Organization Name11
State Facility Identifier
State Facility Identifier
State Facility Identifier
Transaction Type
Facility Registry Identified
Emission Unit ID
Emission Release Point ID
Inventory Year
Facility Category
ORIS Boiler ID
Emission Release Point Type
Inventory Type Code
ORIS Facility Code
SIC Unit Level
Stack Height
Transaction Creation Date
SIC Primary
NAICS Unit Level
Stack Diameter
Incremental Submission Number
NAICS Primary
Design Capacity
Stack Fenceline Distance
Reliability Indicator
Facility Name
Design Capacity Unit Numerator
Exit Gas Temperature
Transaction Comments
Site Description
Design Capacity Unit Denominator
Exit Gas Velocity
Contact Person Nameb
Location Address
Max Nameplate Capacity
Exit Gas Flow Rate
Contact Phone Number"
City
Emission Unit Description
X Coordinate
Telephone Number Type Name
State
Submittal Flag
Y Coordinate
Electronic Address Textd
Zip Code
Tribal Code6
UTM Zone
Electronic Address Type Name
Country
Submittal Date®
XY CoordinateType
Source Type
NTI Site ID
NAICS Flag11
Horizontal Area Fugitive
Affiliation Type
Dun & Bradstreet Number

Release Height Fugitive
Format Version
TRI ID

Fugitive Dimensions Unit
Tribal Code6
Submittal Flag

Emission Release PT Description

Tribal Code6

Submittal Flag

Submittal Date8

Horizontal Collection Method Code

NAICS Flag11

Horizontal Accuracy Measure



Horizontal Reference Datum Code



Reference Point Code



Source Map Scale



Coordinate Data Source Code



Tribal Code6



Submittal Dateg



Stack Default Flag1



Location Default Flag)
1 Indicates origin of stack parameters
J Indicates how latitude/longitude was defaulted
k Indicates how MACT code was assigned
1 Origin of total capture control efficiency
m Indicates source of estimates; state, local, tribal agency; ESD, industry, TRI, 1996 NEI
11 US EPA EFIG for this version.
b Ms. Anne Pope
c 919-541-5373
d pope, anne@epa.gov
e Contains relevant tribal ID code; "999" for non-tribal records
f NTI Unique Facility ID, often assigned to multiple Sites
B Date Final version was compiled
h Indicates how NAICs was defaulted

-------
Table lb. Summary of Point Source NEI Records (Continued)
Emission Process
Control Equipment
Emission Period
Emission
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State Facility Identifier
State Facility Identifier
State Facility Identifier
State Facility Identifier
Emission Unit ID
Emission Unit ID
Emission Unit ID
Emission Unit ID
Emission Release Point ID
Process ID
Process ID
Process ID
Process ID
Pollutant Code
Start Date
Pollutant Code
see
Primary PCT Control Efficiency
End Date
Emission Release Point ID
Process MACT Code
PCT Capture Efficiency
Start Time
State Date
Emission Process Description
Total Capture Control Efficiency
End Time
End Date
Winter Throughput PCT
Primary Device Type Code
Actual Throughput
Start Time
Spring Throughput PCT
Secondary Device Type Code
Throughput Unit Numerator
End Time
Summer Throughput PCT
Control System Description
Material
Emission Numeric Value
Fall Throughput PCT
Third Control Device Type Code
Material I/O
Emission Unit Numerator
Annual Average Days Per Week
Fourth Control Device Type Code
Period Days Per Week
Emission Type
Annual Average Weeks Per Year
Submittal Flag
Period Weeks Per Period
EM Reliability Indicator
Annual Average Hours Per Day
Tribal Code6
Period Hours Per Day
Factor Numeric Value
Annual Average Hours Per Year
Total Capture Flag1
Period Hours Per Period
Factor Unit Numerator
Heat Content
Submittal Date8
Submittal Flag
Factor Unit Denominator
Sulfur Content

Tribal Code6
Material
Ash Content

Submittal Date8
Material I/O
Process MACT Compliance Status


Emission Calculation Method Code
Submittal Flag


EF Reliability Indicator
Tribal Code6


Rule Effectiveness
Submittal Date8


Rule Effectiveness Method
MACT Flagk


HAP Emissions Performance Level



Control Status



Emission Data Level



Submittal Flag



Tribal Code6



Submittal Dateg



Data Source™



Data Rating
1 Indicates origin of stack parameters
J Indicates how latitude/longitude was defaulted
k Indicates how MACT code was assigned
1 Origin of total capture control efficiency
m Indicates source of estimates; state, local, tribal agency; ESD, industry, TRI, 1996 NEI
US EPA EFIG for this version.
b Ms. Anne Pope
c 919-541-5373
d pope, anne@epa.gov
e Contains relevant tribal ID code; "999" for non-tribal records
f NTI Unique Facility ID, often assigned to multiple Sites
B Date Final version was compiled
h Indicates how NAICs was defaulted

-------
Table 2. Summary of Area (Nonpoint) and Nonroad Mobile Source NEI Records
Transmittal
Emission Process
Control Equipment
Emission Period
Emission
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
Record Type
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
State and County FIPS
Organization Name3
see
see
Start Date
see
Transaction Type
Process MACT Code
Pollutant Code
End Date
Pollutant Code
Inventory Year
Emission Process Description
Primary PCT Control Efficiency
Start Time
Start Date
Inventory Type Code
SIC code
PCT Capture Efficiency
End Time
End Date
Transaction Creation Date
NAICS
Total Capture Control Efficiency
Actual Throughput
Start Time
Incremental Submission Number
Winter Throughput PCT
Primary Device Type
Throughput Unit Numerator
End Time
Reliability Indicator
Spring Throughput PCT
Secondary Device Type
Material
Emission Numeric Value
Transaction Comments
Summer Throughput PCT
Control System Description
Material I/O
Emission Unit Numerator
Contact Person Nameb
Fall Throughput PCT
Submittal Flag
Period Days Per Week
Emission Type
Contact Phone Number'
Annual Average Days Per Week
Tribal Code
Period Weeks Per Period
EM Reliability Indicator
Telephone Number Type Name
Annual Average Weeks Per Year

Period Hours Per Day
Factor Numeric Value
Electronic Address Textd
Annual Average Hours Per Day

Period Hours Per Period
Factor Unit Numerator
Electronic Address Type Name
Annual Average Hours Per Year

Submittal Flag
Factor Unit Denominator
Source Type
Heat Content

Tribal Code
Material
Affiliation Type
Sulfur Content


Material I/O
Format Version
Ash Content


Emission Calculation Method Code
Tribal Code
Process MACT Compliance Status


EF Reliability Indicator

Submittal Flag


Rule Effectiveness

Tribal Code


Rule Effectiveness Method




Rule Penetration




Submittal Flag




Tribal Code




Data Source Flag6
a "US EPA EFIG" for this version.
b Ms. Laurel Driver
c 919-541-2859
d driver.laurel@epa.gov
e Indicates source of estimates: state, local, tribal agency, ESD, EFIG, 1996 NEI

-------
Revisions and additions were solicited on several versions of the point source NEI for HAPs.
Details on the comment/review process are provided in the NEI for HAPs point source report
(Point99.pdf). For the most part, all revisions and additions provided by state, local, and tribal
agencies, EPA, and industry were incorporated. EFIG closely reviewed the site and HAP
deletion records however, and retained some sites and HAPs if it was determined that the sites
were truly operating in 1999, or to retain as complete a list of HAPs emitted as possible.
EFIG also identified duplicate facilities and revisions between the multiple data sets, and with
the draft inventory. If no duplicates were identified in these steps, the facility was added to the
NEI, or the requested revisions were processed as appropriate. If it was determined that a facility
was included in one or more data sets, the new data submitted for the facility were added using a
prioritization scheme of local-, state-, ESD- and then industry-submitted data. Four exceptions to
this approach should be noted: ESD/MACT data for municipal waste combustors were given
priority, as well as mercury estimates for coal-fired utilities and cadmium estimates for sewage
sludge incinerators, and industry-supplied methylene diphenyl disocyanate (MDI) estimates.
EFIG revisions focused on identifying and removing duplicate facilities and HAPs, correcting for
outliers with erroneous emissions data, refining the assignment of MACT codes and default stack
parameters, and correcting erroneous SIC codes, SCCs, zip codes, and FIPS codes.
During review of the point source inventory files, you can distinguish the data source (state,
local/tribal, EPA, TRI, or 96NTI) in a number of ways. In the Emission record, the data origin is
flagged as:
I	= Industry 2002 revision
12	= Industry 2003 revision
L	= Local agency submittal June 2001
LI	= Local agency submittal February 2002
L2	= Local agency submittal June 2002
L3	= Local agency submittal March 2003
Ml	= ESD original submittal
M2	= ESD 2002 revision
M3	= ESD 2003 revision
S	= State agency submittal June 2001
51	= State agency submittal February 2002
52	= State agency submittal June 2002
53	= State agency submittal March 2003
T	= TRI 99 data
N	= Data from the 1996 NEI
Difference between Site and Facility ID
It is important to distinguish between the terms "site" and "facility" as used in the NEI for HAPs.
Without understanding this distinction, a reviewer may mistakenly assume that two sites are
duplicates. In the NEI for HAPs, there can be multiple sites associated with the same NTI
Unique Facility ID. (The NTI Unique Facility ID is currently stored in the
strFacilityRegistryIdentifier field in the Site table.) Each of these sites will have a unique record
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
9

-------
in the Site table, with a unique site ID (strStateFacilityldentifier). However, these different site
IDs should ultimately be linked to different emissions sources and/or HAP emissions at the
facility. There are two reasons for this one-to-many relationship between facilities and sites:
Multiple data sources have supplied data to the NEI for the same facility; or
One source supplied multiple site records for co-located facilities.
For example, in the first case, a state may have submitted a set of records for a facility with site
ID AL001. This site ID is part of the primary key in all of the remaining tables, Emission Unit,
Emission Process, etc. (The NIF Version 3.0 documentation contains more information on the
data structure of the NEI. See http://www.epa. 2Qv/ttn/chief/nif/index.html) The EPA may have
provided MACT data for the same facility under site ID EM234. Although these data are for the
same facility, the emissions are for different processes at that facility and do not duplicate the
emissions data submitted by the state. Rather than attempt to change the site ID in all tables to
be consistent with one ID or the other, a common NTI Unique Facility ID is assigned to the two
different site IDs. Not only is it easier to make this assignment than change the site IDs in the
remaining tables, this approach preserves the original site IDs. This aids users in tracing the
origin of data, and helps EPA compare data from the same sites from year to year.
The records in the Site table would appear as follows:
State
FIPS
County FIPs
Site ID
NTI Unique ID
Facility Name
01
001
EM234
NTIAL001
AAAPaperMill
01
001
AL001
NTIAL001
AAAPaocrMill
In the second case, one data source may have submitted data for closely located, but distinctly
separate sources of emissions under separate Site IDs. This is a situation similar to the one
discussed above. For example, Randolph Air Force Base submitted data under several Site IDs.
Each of these sites correspond to a different emission process:
NTI
Unique ID
Site ID
Facility Name
see
Process
Description
NTH 1234
TX0113947
Randolph Air Force Base
10200602
Boiler
NTI11234
TX0113950
Randolph Air Force Base
20400101
IC Engine
NTI11234
TX0112953
Randolph Air Force Base
40400498
Working Losses
NTI11234
TX0113961
Randolph Air Force Base
40400270
Standing Losses
Coordinate and Stack Parameter Defaults
Default flags are also included for coordinate data and stack parameters in the Emission Release
Point record. The table below indicates the default coordinate defaults:
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
10

-------
Code
Description
Exact
Match is to within a unique intersection or within a single side of a
single street block.
Near
Match is to a single street block but the correct placement within
block is unknown.
Zipcode+2
Match to a 5-digit zip code, plus the first two digits of the 4-digit
extension.
Zipcode5
Match to a 5-digit zip code.
Zipcode3
Match to multiple 3-digit zip codes based on postal service
Sectional Center Facility (SCF).
Ambig
Match is to multiple street segments.
Cntycent
County centroid.
FRS
Coordinate found in the Federal Registry System (FRS) database.
Site-Avg
Average of accurate coordinates of other emission release points at
the same site.
Stack defaults were added to records that were missing any of the five variables (height,
diameter, temperature, velocity, and flow). Default values for these parameters were obtained
from the 1999 NEI, version 1. For details, see
http://www.epa.20v/ttn/chief/emch/invent/qaau2mementationmemo 99nei 60603.pdf
The coding system used to identify the source of default stack parameters is:
0	= Original value (not a default)
1	= SCC default
2	= SIC code default
3	= National default
4	= Calculated value
A single NIF field is used to represent the source of all five stack parameters. The codes are
presented in this field in the following order:
Stack height, stack temperature, stack diameter, stack velocity, stack flow
Thus, the code "00114" indicates that stack height and exit gas temperature are original values,
stack diameter and exit gas velocity are SCC defaults, and exit gas flowrate was calculated based
on the stack diameter and exit gas velocity values.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
11

-------
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Codes
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes are gradually being replaced by the NAICS codes
that were adopted by Canada, Mexico, and the United States in 1997. The NAICS is a
classification of business establishments by economic activity. It supercedes the SIC. The
NAICS code consists of 6 digits which are arranged hierarchically:
Two digits - Economic sector (North American Industry Classification Sector Code)
•	Three digits - Economic subsector (North American Industry Classification
Subsector Code)
•	Four digits - A group of related industries within the economy (North American
Industry Classification Industry Code)
•	Five digits - An industry within the economy (North American Industry
Classification Industry Code)
Six digits - A subdivision of an industry (North American Industry Classification
Code)
To satisfy the EPA's NAICS Data Standard, EFIG adapted the Census Bureau's 1987 SIC to
2002 NAICS crosswalk (see http://www.census.20v epcd naics()2 ) and applied it to the NEI.
NAICS codes supplied by the data submitter were not overwritten. The Census bureau crosswalk
was modified to accommodate those situations in which one SIC code maps to multiple NAICS
codes. Where all the NAICS codes associated with one SIC code shared the first 5 digits, the
SIC code was mapped to this 5 digit NAICS code. If no common 5 digit NAICS code existed,
EFIG applied the common 4 digit NAICs code, and so on. In those cases where all of the NAICS
codes associated with an SIC code did not share the same 5, 4, 3 or 2 digit NAICS code, then the
most common 5, 3, 4, 2 digit NAICS code was selected. These are the flags associated with
defaulted NAICS codes:
NAICS
Flag
Match Type
Description
01
one to one
One SIC maps to only one NAICS code.
02
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code all of which share the first 5-digits.
03
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code. Have chosen the most common 5 digit
NAICS among these.
04
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code all of which share the first 4-digit.
05
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code. Have chosen the most common 4 digit
NAICS among these.
06
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code all of which share the first 3 -digits.
07
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code. Have chosen the most common 3 digit
NAICS among these.
08
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code all of which share the first 2-digits.
09
one to many
One SIC maps to many NAICS code. Have chosen the most common 2 digit
NAICS among these.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
12

-------
Latitude/Longitude Standard Data Elements
The EPA's Latitude/Longitude Standard consists of the group of data elements used for
recording horizontal and vertical coordinates and associated metadata that define a point on
earth. Table 3 summarizes these changes. This standard will help users gauge the accuracy and
reliability of a given set of coordinates. The primary responsibility for populating these fields
lies with the data submitter, as it is difficult if not impossible to discern the origin of a
latitude/longitude without being the primary author of the data. Since this standard was not part
of NIF 2.0, EFIG only populated these fields whenever latitude/longitudes were obtained from
the TeleAtlas Geocoding EZ Locator Service (http://zeocode.com). Geocoder latitude/longitudes
are assigned whenever the existing coordinates are null, clearly incorrect, or plotted well outside
the county boundaries.
The geocoded coordinate pairs in the NEI are flagged with the explanatory codes listed in
Table 4. The latitude/longitude data standards for these geocoded coordinates were populated
with the default values shown there.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
13

-------
Table 3. Latitude/Longitude Data Standard
L atitu de/L on gitude
Standard
Change
Description
Comments
Latitude Measure
Rename
field
Y Coordinate - The measure of
the angular distance on a
meridian north or south of the
equator.
+78.123456
The number of decimal
positions recorded is
determined by the precision
of the measurement.
Longitude Measure
Rename
field
X Coordinate - The measure of
the angular distance on a
meridian east or west of the
prime meridian.
-123.234561
The number of decimal
positions recorded is
determined by the precision
of the measurement
Source Map Scale
Number
Add field
The number that represents the
proportional distance on the
ground for one unit of measure
on the map or photo.
Only used when a map has
been used to determine
latitude/longitude, e.g.,
125,000
Horizontal
Collection Method
Code
Add field
Method used to determine the
latitude and longitude
coordinates for a point on the
earth.
e.g., 001 = address-
matching house number,
018 on interpolation-map,
028 = Global Positioning
Method, with unspecified
parameters.
Horizontal Accuracy
Measure
Add field
The measure of the accuracy (in
meters) of the latitude and
longitude coordinates.

Horizontal Reference
Datum Code
Add field
The code that represents the
reference datum used in
determining latitude and
longitude coordinates.
001= North American
Datum of 1927
002	= North American
Datum of 1983
003	= World Geodetic
System of 1984
Reference Point
Code
Add field
The code that represents the
place for which geographic
coordinates were established.
e.g. 101 = Entrance point
of a facility or station.; 105
= Point where substance is
processed, treated, settled,
or stored.; 106 = Point
where a substance is
released.
Coordinate Data
Source Code
Add field
The code that represents the
party responsible for providing
the latitude and longitude
coordinates
e.g. EPA Headquarters, a
state agency, tribal
organization, EPA regional
office etc.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
14

-------
Table 4. Geocoder Default Flags and Default Values for Latitude/Longitude Standard
Code
Description
Source
Map
Scale
Horizontal Collection Method Code
& Description
Horizontal
Reference
Datum
Horizontal
Accuracy
(meters)
Coordinate
Data Source
Code
Exact
Match is to within a unique
intersection or within a
single side of a single street
block.
24000
002 - Determination method based on
address matching-block face.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
12
080 or 084*
Near
Match is to a single street
block but the correct
placement within block is
unknown.
24000
003 - Determination method based on
address matching-street centerline.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
50
080 or 084*
Zipcode+2
Match to a 5-digit zip code,
plus the first two digits of the
4-digit extension.
24000
038 - Determination method based the
center of an area defined by the
5-digit ZIP code and its 2-digit
geographic segment extension.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
100
080 or 084*
Zipcode5
Match to a 5-digit zip code.
24000
026 - Determination method based on
zipcode-centroid.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
10000
080 or 084*
Zipcode3
Match to multiple 3-digit zip
codes based on postal service
Sectional Center Facility
(SCF).
24000
021 - Determination method based on
interpolation-other.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
1000
080 or 084*
Ambig
Match is to multiple street
segments.
24000
007 - Determination method based on
address matching-other.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927 001
20000
080 or 084*
Cntycent
County centroid, (all states
except Puerto Rico)
N/A
021 - Determination method based on
interpolation-other.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
N/A
082
County centroid, Puerto Rico
100,000
018 - Determination method based on
interpolation-map.
002 - North
American Datum
of 1983
N/A
084
FRS
Facility Registry System
N/A
021 - Determination method based on
interpolation-other.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
N/A
082
Site-Avg
Average of accurate
coordinates at the site
N/A
021 - Determination method based on
interpolation-other.
001 - North
American Datum
of 1927
N/A
083 (Other)
* Coordinates are derived from USPS, Census Bureau Tiger server, or Eagle's TeleAtlas. These correspond to codes 080 (org. that contracts to perform work)
and 084 (federal gov't other than EPA).

-------
Total Capture Control Efficiency
To facilitate use of the data in dispersion and exposure modeling, EFIG attempted to fill in
missing total capture control efficiencies. The total capture control efficiency represents the
collective (aggregate) value for all control devices. In general, EFIG populated the total capture
control efficiency by reviewing the primary percent control efficiency, percent capture efficiency,
and total capture control efficiency fields. Where the total capture control was populated, this
value was not changed. If just the primary percent control efficiency or percent capture
efficiency was populated, the populated value was used as a proxy for the total capture control
efficiency. If both values were populated, and total capture control efficiency was not, these
values were multiplied to calculate the total capture control efficiency. In those cases where all
three values were provided, the primary percent control efficiency was multiplied by the percent
capture efficiency and compared with the total capture control efficiency. The greater of the two
values was chosen. All default flags are listed below:
Total Capture
Flag Code
Total Capture Flag Description
01
All Primary Percent Control Efficiency, Percent Capture Efficiency, and Total Capture
Control Efficiency fields are zero; Total Capture Control Efficiency remains zero.
02
Only field populated is Total Capture Control Efficiency; therefore Total Capture Contro
Efficiency = Total Capture Control Efficiency.
02a
Only field populated is Total Capture Control Efficiency; therefore Total Capture Contro
Efficiency = Total Capture Control Efficiency. Total Capture Control Efficiency is
corrected by multiplying by 100.
03
Only field populated is Percent Capture Efficiency; therefore Total Capture Control
Efficiency = Percent Capture Efficiency.
04
Percent Capture Efficiency and Total Capture Control Efficiency are populated; therefore
Total Capture Control Efficiency = Total Capture Control Efficiency.
05
Percent Capture Efficiency and Primary Percent Control Efficiency are populated;
therefore Total Capture Control Efficiency = Percent Capture Efficiency * Primary
Percent Control Efficiency.
06
Only field populated is Primary Percent Control Efficiency; therefore Total Capture
Control Efficiency = Primary Percent Control Efficiency.
06a
Only field populated is Primary Percent Control Efficiency; therefore Total Capture
Control Efficiency = Primary Percent Control Efficiency.
07
Primary Percent Control Efficiency and Total Capture Control Efficiency are populated;
therefore Total Capture Control Efficiency = Total Capture Control Efficiency.
08
All three fields are populated; chose whichever was greater: Total Capture Control
Efficiency or Percent Capture Efficiency * Primary Percent Control Efficiency.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
16

-------
Nonpoint Source Files
The 1999 NEI nonpoint source estimates were primarily developed using top-down methods
based on national, regional, or state level emission estimates. The estimates were developed by
combining emission factors with activity data, from information provided for MACT source
categories, and from data and revisions provided by state and local agencies.
The development of the nonpoint source inventory using top-down methods may mean that the
emission estimates for a given county may over- or underestimate true emissions, or an important
nonpoint source category may be missing from a given county. EFIG needs those most familiar
with a given state or county to help missing or erroneous data.
As you review the nonpoint source inventory files, you can again distinguish the data source
(state, local, tribal, EPA, TRI, or 96NTI). In the Emission record, the data are flagged as:
S	=	State agency provided data
L	=	Local agency provided data
T	=	Tribal agency provided data
M	=	EPA/ESD provided MACT data
E	=	EFIG generated 1999 estimates
N	=	NTI96 data
WHO ARE THE CONTACTS FOR STATE, LOCAL, AND MACT DATA?
The following tables summarize the state and local agencies who provided data for the 1999 NEI,
as well as the EPA contacts for MACT data (Tables 5-7).
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
17

-------
Table 5. Point Source State, Local, and Tribal Agency Contacts
State
Contact
Email
Alabama
Cala Obenauf
cj o@adem. state. al .us
Jefferson Co., Alabama
Ed Wright
ewright@jcdh.org
Maricopa Co., Arizona
Bob Downing
bdowning@mail.maricopa.gov
Salt River Tribe, Arizona
Sarah Kelly
sarah.kelly@nau.edu
Arkansas
Kenya Branson
branson@adeq. state .ar.us
California
Andy Alexis
aalexis@arb.ca.gov
Colorado
David Thayer
david.thayer@ state.co .us
Connecticut
William Simpson
william.simpson@po. state, ct.us

Christopher Mulcahy
chris .mulcahy@po .state .ct. us

Hicham Bouijaili
hicham.bouij aili@po.state .ct.us
Delaware
John Outten
j ohnoutten@state. de .us

Mark Prettyman
mark.prettyman@state .de .us

David Fees
david.fees@state.de.us
Florida
YiZhu
yi. zhu@dep. state. fl .us
Pinellas County, Florida
Pwu-Sheng Lui
pliu@co .pinelias. fl .us
Idaho
Michael Dubois
mdubois@deq.state.id.us

Gary Reinbold
greinbol@deq.state.id.us
Illinois
Buzz Asselmeier
buzz. asselmeier@epa. state, il.us
Indiana
Jon Bates/Jay Koch
j koch@dem. state. in .us
Kansas
Dana Morris
dmorris@kdhe .state .ks .us

Wendy Vit
wvit@kdbe. state .ks .us
Kentucky
Debra Jennings
debra.jennings@mail.state.ky.us

Andrea Wilson
andrea. wilson@mail.state .ky.us
Jefferson Co, Kentucky
Jess Goldsmith
j goldsmith@co .j efferson .ky .us
Louisiana
Jennifer Walton
j ennifer_b@deq. state. la.us
Maine
Rich Greves
rich.greves@state .me .us
Maryland
J. Will Haus
N/A
Massachusetts
Jen D'Urso
jen.d'urso@state.ma.us

Robert Boisselle
robertboisselle@state.ma.us

Azin Kavian
azin.kavian@state .ma.us
Michigan
Allan Ostrander
ostrander@state .mi .us
Minnesota
Chun Yi Wu
chun.yi.wu@pca. state .mn.us
Mississippi
Susan Holden
susan_holden@deq. state .ms .us
Missouri
Nathan J. Holm
nrholmn@mail.dnr.state .mo .us
Montana
Charles Homer
N/A
Nebraska
Dave Brown
N/A
Omaha, Nebraska
Tim Burns
tburns@ci.omaha.ne.us
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
18

-------
Table 5. Point Source State, Local, and Tribal Agency Contacts (Continued)
State
Contact
Email
Lincoln Co., Nebraska
Charles Riley
criley @ci. lincoln .ne .us

Stacy Munger
smunger@ci .lincoln.ne .us
Nevada
Lori Campbell
loric@ndep. state .nv.us
New Hampshire
Sonny Strickland
sstrickland@des. state .nh.us

Rick Rumba
R_rumba@de s. state .nh .us
New Jersey
Lisa Jones
ljones@deq.state.nj .us

Brad Bollen
brad.bollen@dep. state .nj .us
New Mexico
Jim Shively
j im_shively@nmenv. state ,nm. us
New Y ork
Mike Sheehan
mpsheeha@gov.dec.state.ny.us
North Carolina
Carol Walker
carol. walker@ncmail .net
Buncombe Co., North Carolina
Greg Davis
davisgr@co .buncombe .nc.us
Forsyth Co., North Carolina
Steve Lyda
lydask@co. forsyth .nc .us
Mecklenberg Co., North Carolina
S. David Ross
rosssd@co .mecklenburg .nc .us
Ohio
Tom Velalis
tom.velalis@epa.state.oh.us
Dayton, Ohio
Andrew J. Roth
rothaj @rapca.org
Oklahoma
Jeff Davidson
j eff davidson@deq. state. ok.us
Oregon
Steve Aalbers
aalbers. steve @deq. or .us
Pennsylvania
Carrie Eastman
eastman.carrie@dep. state .pa.us
Allegheny Co, Pennsylvania
Gary Fischman
gfishman@achd.net
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Thomas Weir
thomas .weir@phila.gov
Rhode Island
Karen Slattery
kslatter@dem. state. ri .us
South Carolina
Christopher Cheatham
cheathcc@dhec.state.sc .us

Lynn Barnes
barnesls@columb31 .dhec.state,
sc.us

Bob Betterton
betterij @dhec. state .sc.us
Tennessee
Ron Redus
rrdeus@mail. state .tn.us
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Heather Sandner
sandner_h@mail. chattanooga.gov
Shelby Co., Tennessee
Christopher Boyd
cboydengrbmschd@yahoo .com
Davidson Co., Tennessee
Laura Artates
laura.artates@nashville.gov
Texas
Russell Nettles
rnettles@tceq. state .tx.us
Utah
Scott D. Hanks
shanks@deq. state .ut.us
Vermont
Jeff Merrell
jeffm@dec.anr.state.vt.us
Virginia
Tom Ballou
trballou@deq.state.va.us
Washington
Sally Otterson
sott461 @ecy. wa.gov
Puget Sound, Washington
John K. Anderson
johna@pscleanair.org
West Virginia
David Porter
dporter@mail.dep. state. wv .us
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
19

-------
Table 5. Point Source State, Local, and Tribal Agency Contacts (Continued)
State
Contact
Email
Wisconsin
Ralph Patterson
patter@dnr. state. wi .us
Wvomina
Mark Arn
marn(®.state. wv .us
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
20

-------
Table 6. Nonpoint Source State and Local Agency Contacts
State/Local
Contact
Email
Alabama
Cala Obenauf
cj o@adem. state. al .us
California
Chris Nguyen
tnguyen@arb .ca.gov

Andy Alexis
aalexis@arb.ca.gov
Bishop Paiute Tribe,
Sarah Kelly
sarah.kelly@nau.edu
California


Colorado
Dale Wells
dale.wells@state.co.us
Ute Mountain Tribe,
Sarah Kelly
sarah.kelly@nau.edu
Colorado


Delaware
Mark Prettyman
mark.prettyman@state .de .us
Duval County, Florida
Lori Tilley
TILLEY @coj .net
Hillsborough Co., Florida
Alain Watson
watsona@epchc. org
Pinellas Co., Florida
Pwu-Sheng Liu
pliu@co .pine lias. fl .us
Idaho
Mike DuBois
mdubois@deq. state, id.us
Maine
Rich Greves
rich.greves@state .me .us
Maryland
Lief Hockstad
lhockstad@mde .state .md.us
Massachusetts
Jen D'Urso
jen.d'urso@state.ma.us

Azin Kavaian
azin.kavaian@state.ma.us
Michigan
Allan Ostrander
ostrander@state .mi .us
Minnesota
Chun-Yi Wu
chun.yi.wu@pca. state .mn.us
New Hampshire
David Healy
dhealy@des. state .nh.us
New Jersey
Olga Boyko
oboyko@dep. state .nj .us
New Y ork
Syed Alam
snalam@gw. dec. state .ny .us
North Dakota
Tom Bachman
tbachman@state .nd.us
Dayton, Ohio
Andy Roth
rothaj @rapca.org
Oregon
Jeffrey Stocum
stocum.j effrey@deq.state .or.us
Umatilla Tribe, Oregon
Sarah Kelly
sarah.kelly@nau.edu
Rhode Island
Karen Slattery
kslatter@dem. state. ri .us
South Carolina
Lynn Barnes
barnesls@columb31 .dhec.state.sc.us
South Dakota
Kyrik Rombough
kyrik.rombough@state.sd.us
Davidson Co., Tennessee
Laura Artates
laura.artates@nashville.gov
Texas
Peter Ogbeide
pogbeide@tceq.state .tx.us
Vermont
Jeff Merrell
jeffm@dec.anr.state.vt.us
Olympic Region,
John Kelly
john@orcaa.org
Puget Sound, Washington
Kwame Agyei
kwamea@pscleanair.org
West Virginia
Joe Morgan
joemorgan@mail. dep. state ,wv. us
Wisconsin
Orlando-Cabrera Rivera
orlando. cabrera-


rivera@dnr. state. wi. sus
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
21

-------
Table 7. MACT Source Category Contacts for the 1999 NEI
MACT Source Catesorv
Contact
Email
Acetal Resins Production
David Markwordt
markwordt. david@epa. gov
Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers Production
David Markwordt
markwordt.david@epa.gov
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Aerospace Industries
Tony Wayne
wayne.tony@epa.gov
Amino/Phenolic Resins Production
John Schaefer
schaefer.j ohn@epa. gov
Asphalt Roofing and Processing
Rick Colyer
colyer. rick@epa. gov
Asphalt/Coal Tar Application - Metal Pipes
Kim Teal
teal.kim@epa.gov
Auto & Light Duty Truck (Surface Coating)
Dave Salman
salman.dave@epa.gov
Boat Manufacturing
Mark Morris
morris.mark@epa.gov
Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing
Mary Johnson
johnson.mary@epa.gov
Butyl Rubber Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Carbon Black Production
Mark Morris
morris.mark@epa.gov
Cellulose Products Manufacturing
Bill Schrock
schrock.bill@epa.gov
Chlorine Production
Iliam Rosario
rosario.iliam@epa.gov
Chromic Acid Anodizing
Phil Mulrine
mulrine .phil@epa. gov
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
Mary Johnson
j ohnson. mary@epa.gov
Coke Ovens: Charging, Top Side, and Door Leaks
Amanda Aldridge
aldridge. amanda@epa. gov
Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, & Battery Stacks
Lula Melton
melton.lula@epa.gov
Commercial Sterilization Facilities
David Markwordt
markwordt.david@epa.gov
Commercial, Industrial, Solid Waste Incineration
Fred Porter
porter.fred@epa.gov
Cyanide Chemicals Manufacturing
Mark Morris
morris. mark@epa. gov
Decorative Chromium Electroplating
Phil Mulrine
mulrine.phil@epa.gov
Dry Cleaning: Perchloroethylene
Fred Porter
porter.fred@epa.gov
Engine Test Facilities
Jaime Pagan
pagan.j aime @epa. gov
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Epoxy Resins Production
Randy McDonald
mcdonald. randy @epa. gov
Ethylene Processes
Mark Morris
morris. mark@epa. gov
Ethylene-Propylene Rubber Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Ferroalloys Production
Conrad Chin
chin. conrad@epa. gov
Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operations
Maria Noell
noell.maria@epa.gov
Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production
Warren Johnson
johnson.warren@epa.gov
Friction Materials Manufacturing
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Gasoline Distribution (Stage I)
Steve Shedd
shedd. steve@epa.gov
Halogenated Solvent Cleaners
Paul Almodovar
almodovar.paul@epa.gov
Hard Chromium Electroplating
Phil Mulrine
mulrine.phil@epa.gov
Hazardous Waste Incineration
Mike Galbraith
galbraith.mike@epa.gov
Hospital Sterilizers
David Markwordt
markwordt.david@epa.gov
Hydrochloric Acid Production
Bill Maxwell
maxwell.bill@epa.gov
Hydrogen Fluoride Production
David Markwordt
markwordt.david@epa.gov
Hypalon (TM) Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Industrial Cooling Towers
Phil Mulrine
mulrine.phil@epa.gov
Industrial/Commercial/ Institutional Boilers & Process
Jim Eddinger
eddinger.jim@epa.gov
Integrated Iron & Steel Manufacturing
Phil Mulrine
mulrine.phil@epa.gov
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
22

-------
Table 7. MACT Source Category Contacts for the 1999 NEI (Cont.)
MACT Source Catesorv
Contact
Email
Iron Foundries
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Large Appliance (Surface Coating)
Lynn Dail
dail. ly nn@epa. gov
Leather Tanning & Finishing Operations
Bill Schrock
schrock.bill@epa. gov
Lime Manufacturing
Joe Wood
wood.j oe@epa. gov
Magnetic Tapes (Surface Coating)
Vinson Helwig
helwig. vinson@epa. gov
Manufacture of Nutritional Yeast
David Markwordt
markwordt.david@epa.gov
Marine Vessel Loading Operations
David Markwordt
markwordt. david@epa. gov
Medical Waste Incinerators
Rick Copland
copland.rick@epa.gov
Metal Can (Surface Coating)
Paul Almodovar
almodovar.paul@epa.gov
Metal Coil (Surface Coating)
Rhea Jones
jones.rhea@epa.gov
Metal Furniture (Surface Coating)
Mohamed Serageldin
serageldin. mohamed@epa. gov
Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Terpolymers
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Mineral Wool Production
Mary Johnson
johnson.mary@epa.gov
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
Randy McDonald
mcdonald.randy@epa.gov
Miscellaneous Metal Parts & Products (Surface Coating)
Kim Teal
teal.kim@epa.gov
Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Randy McDonald
mcdonald. randy @epa. gov
Municipal Landfills
Michele Laur
laur.michele@epa.gov
Municipal Waste Combustors
Walt Stevenson
stevenson.walt@epa.gov
Natural Gas Transmission & Storage
Greg Nizich
nizich.greg@epa.gov
Neoprene Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Non-Nylon Polyamides Production
Randy McDonald
mcdonald. randy @epa. gov
Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations
Elaine Manning
manning.elaine@epa.gov
Oil & Natural Gas Production
Greg Nizich
nizich. greg@epa. gov
Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)
Gregory LaFlam
laflam. gregory @epa. gov
Other Solid Waste Incineration - Crematories
Fred Porter
porter.fred@epa.gov
Paint Stripping Operations
Tony Wayne
wayne.tony@epa.gov
Paper & Other Webs (Surface Coating)
Paul Almodovar
almodovar.paul@epa. gov
Pesticide Active Ingredient Production
Randy McDonald
mcdonald.randy@epa.gov
Petroleum Refineries
Bob Lucas
lucas .bob@epa. gov
Pharmaceuticals Production
Randy McDonald
mcdonald. randy @epa. gov
Phosphate Fertilizers Production
Mary Johnson
j ohnson. mary@epa.gov
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturng
Mary Johnson
j ohnson. mary @epa. gov
Plastic Parts & Products (Surface Coating)
Kim Teal
teal.kim@epa.gov
Plywood and Composite Wood Products
Greg Nizich
nizich. greg@epa. gov
Polybutadiene Rubber Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Polycarbonates Production
David Markwordt
markwordt. david@epa. gov
Polyether Polyols Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Polyethylene Terephthalate Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Polystyrene Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Polysulfide Rubber Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Polyvinyl Chloride & Copolymers Production
Warren Johnson
j ohnson. warren@epa. gov
Portland Cement Manufacturing
Joe Wood
wood.joe@epa.gov
Primary Aluminum Production
Steve Fruh
fruh. steve@epa.gov
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
23

-------
Table 7. MACT Source Category Contacts for the 1999 NEI (Cont.)
MACT Source Catesorv
Contact
Email
Primary Copper Smelting
Gene Crumpler
crumpler.gene@epa.gov
Primary Lead Smelting
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Primary Magnesium Refining
Iliam Rosario
rosario.iliam@epa.gov
Printing, Coating & Dyeing Of Fabrics
Vinson Helwig
helwig.vinson@epa.gov
Printing/Publishing (Surface Coating)
Dave Salman
salman.dave@epa.gov
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) Emissions
Bob Lucas
lucas.bob@epa.gov
Pulp & Paper Production
Steve Shedd
shedd. steve@epa. gov
Refractory Products Manufacturing
Susan Zapata
zapata.susan@epa.gov
Reinforced Plastic Composites Production
Keith Barnett
barnett.keith@epa.gov
Rocket Engine Test Firing
Jaime Pagan
pagan.jaime@epa.gov
Rubber Tire Production
Tony Wayne
wayne .tony @epa. gov
Secondary Aluminum Production
John Schaefer
schaefer.john@epa.gov
Secondary Lead Smelting
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Semiconductor Manufacturing
Bill Schrock
schrock.bill@epa.gov
Shipbuilding & Ship Repair (Surface Coating)
Mohamed Serageldin
serageldin.mohamed@epa.gov
Site Remediation
Greg Nizich
nizich.greg@epa.gov
Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production
Greg Nizich
nizich.greg@epa.gov
Spandex Production
Elaine Manning
manning.elaine@epa.gov
Stationary Combustion Turbines
Sims Roy
roy.sims@epa.gov
Stationary Reciprocal Internal Combustion Engines
Sims Roy
roy. sims@epa. gov
Steel Foundries
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Steel Pickling - HCL Process
Kevin Cavender
cavender.kevin@epa.gov
Styrene Acrylonitrile Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber & Latex Production
Bob Rosensteel
rosensteel.bob@epa.gov
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing (HON)
Mark Morris
morris. mark@epa. gov
Iaconite Iron Ore Processing
Conrad Chin
chin.conrad@epa.gov
Utility Boilers: Coal
Bill Maxwell
maxwell.bill@epa.gov
Utility Boilers: Natural Gas
Bill Maxwell
maxwell.bill@epa.gov
Utility Boilers: Oil
Bill Maxwell
maxwell.bill@epa.gov
Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production
Juan Santiago
Santiago .juan@epa. gov
Wood Building Products (Surface Coating)
Vinson Helwig
helwig.vinson@epa.gov
Wood Furniture (Surface Coating)
Paul Almodovar
almodovar.paul@epa. gov
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing
Mary Johnson
johnson.mary@epa.gov
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
24

-------
HOW DOES mi NEI SATISFY THE INFORMATION QUALITY GUIDELINES?
To ensure maximum objectivity, utility, and integrity of data disseminated by federal agencies,
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has required that all federal agencies issue
information quality guidelines.® In response, EPA developed the Guidelines for Ensuring and
Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the
Environmental Protection Agency (http://www. epa. eov/oei/qualitveuidelinesA. The Guidelines
embody the following performance goals:
Disseminated information should adhere to a basic standard of quality, including
objectivity, utility, and integrity;
Principles of information quality should be integrated into each step of EPA's
development of information, including creation, collection, maintenance, and
dissemination; and
Administrative mechanisms for correction should be flexible, appropriate to the
nature of and timeliness of the disseminated information and incorporated into
EPA's processes.
These guidelines apply to information that EPA disseminates to the public. Such information
includes any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts or data, in any medium
or form, including web sites, FTP sites, brochures, data flat files, scientific studies, etc. EPA's
guidelines require data producers to closely adhere to existing EPA quality procedures and ensure
the transparency of their information products. Data providers must include sufficient
documentation such that potential end-users can assess the suitability of the data product for their
own uses. The documentation for the NEI is the obvious place to meet many of the objectives of
the Guidelines. To this end, this Information Quality Guidelines section has been compiled as a
stand-alone guide to describe the purpose, potential uses, product content, product limitations,
and contacts for the 1999 point and nonpoint source NEI for HAPs.
Purpose
The National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is a comprehensive inventory covering all criteria
pollutants and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) for all areas of the United States. The NEI was
created by the EPA's Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) in Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina. This version (Version 3) of the 1999 base year NEI for HAPs will be used to
support air quality modeling and other activities. To this end, the EPA established a goal to
compile comprehensive, facility-specific data in its 1999 base year NEI for HAPs for point
sources, in addition to preparing nonpoint area and mobile source 1999 base year inventories.
a Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 2002. Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality,
Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies.
http://www.whitehouse.sov/omb/fedres/reproducible.html
25
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd

-------
Explanation of Potential Uses
The Clean Air Act (CAA) includes many mandates for the EPA related to HAPs. The CAA
presents a list of 188 HAPs for which EPA is to identify their sources, quantify their emissions
by source category, develop regulations for each source category, and assess public health and
environmental impacts after the regulations are put into effect. The NEI is a tool that EPA can
use to meet the CAA mandates.
It is anticipated that the 1999 point and nonpoint source inventories developed from this effort
will have multiple end uses. The NEI is a critical component of the EPA's national Air Toxics
Program. The initial objective is to make the data available to EPA modelers for use in the
National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA). In addition, the emissions data compiled as part of
this inventory effort will be used in residual risk assessments conducted by EPA, and to prepare
the air toxics portion of the annual EPA publication entitled National Air Pollutant Emission
Trends, which is referred to as the EPA Trends report (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Product Content - Point Source NEI Inputs, Methodologies, and Outputs
The scope of the inventory effort was to compile 1999 base year HAP emissions data for point
source facilities in the United States and its territories. Point sources may be either major or area
sources, depending on their annual emissions. Major sources are defined in the CAA as
stationary sources that:
•	Have the potential to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of one HAP; or
•	Have the potential to emit 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAPs.
Smaller point source facilities with annual emissions below these thresholds are defined as area
sources.
The goal in developing the point source NEI was to obtain facility-specific data such as facility
name, location, stack information, emissions, and process descriptions. It was hoped that the
data would be sufficient to support exposure modeling and risk assessment needs. The starting
point for obtaining this facility-specific data was, therefore, state and local air pollution control
agencies, who are most likely to have this type of detailed HAP inventory data.
State and local agencies and tribes were asked to supply HAP emission inventory data to the
EPA. Inventory data were also requested from the EPA's Emission Standards Division (ESD)
for Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) source categories. The information
requested from ESD was identical to the information requested from state and local agencies.
To develop a complete point source NEI, TRI data were also used. The purpose of appending
TRI data to the local-, state-, and ESD-combined databases was to make sure all emissions data
for facilities that report to TRI are included in the NEI.
As a last step, state and local agency, ESD, and TRI data for 1999 were supplemented with
MACT and state-submitted data from the 1996 NEI for HAPs. State-submitted data from the
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
26

-------
1996 base year inventory were only added for states and counties that did not provide a 1999 NEI
submittal.
Because the goal of this project was to create a point source inventory that includes facility-
specific information needed for exposure modeling, information was needed to supplement the
NEI with stack parameters if not provided by state and local agencies or ESD. TRI also does not
include stack parameters. Default stack parameters were generated by EFIG, using data from
NEI99, version 1, for more than 3,000 SCCs. These data were added to state and local agency
and ESD databases that reported emissions at the SCC level, but did not include the necessary
stack parameters. Default stack parameters were also generated for over 900 SIC codes. In
addition to some state, local, and tribal agency and ESD databases, TRI-reported emissions are
reported at the SIC code level. The assumptions that were made in populating the NEI with
default stack parameters are discussed below:
•	Stack and fugitive parameters provided by state and local agencies and ESD were
reviewed to determine if they are physically plausible or if a reporting error has
possibly occurred. Values outside of the ranges shown below were either
recalculated or replaced with a default value.
Stack Height (ft): 0.1 to 1,000
- Fugitive or release vent height (ft): 0.1 to 100
Stack Diameter (ft): 0.1 to 50
Stack Temperature (°F): 50 to 1,800
Stack Velocity (ft/sec): 0.1 to 560
Stack Flow (cu ft/sec): 0.001 to 1,100,000
•	For each emission release point, default or calculated stack parameters were added
if any of the five fields were blank or out of range, if height was less than
diameter, or if the calculated flowrate and the reported flowrate were not within
10% of one another;
•	SCC default stack parameters, when available, took priority over SIC code default
stack parameters;
•	For facilities where no information was available on the type of emission release
(i.e., stack vs. fugitive) or if the emission release point was reported as horizontal,
goose neck, vertical with rain cap, or downward facing vent, it was assumed that
the emission release point is a stack, and, where available, default stack
parameters where added. Only emission release points reported as fugitives were
treated as fugitives.
•	The following national default stack values were developed from NEI99 data, and
applied if there was no match on the SCC or SIC code.
Height: 10 ft
Diameter: 1 ft
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
27

-------
Temperature: 72°F
Velocity: 15 ft/sec
-	Flow: 12 cu ft/sec
•	The following national default fugitive emission release point values were applied
if the existing height was outside the acceptable range for fugitive emission
release points:
Height: 10 ft
Diameter: 0.003 ft
Temperature: 72°F
Velocity: 0.0003 ft/sec
-	Flow: 0 cu ft/sec
If the height was within range, the height was retained and the all other stack
parameters were replaced with the national defaults.
•	Each default/derived stack parameter is identified by a flag. The flags indicate
whether a certain default parameter was SIC code-based, SCC-based, or based on
EFIG's national default stack values. The default flags are included in the NEI
Emission Release Point record.
Because the NEI is a modeling inventory, the association of a specific latitude/longitude to each
emission release point is required. In the absence of actual coordinate data, a process was
developed to fill in missing coordinates. If the missing coordinates could not be filled in with the
average site location calculated from other coordinates associated with the site, then site address
was used to determine the associated latitude and longitude. If address information was
incomplete (including no zip code) and the Facility Registry System (FRS) database did not have
valid latitude/longitude data for the site, then the location was defaulted to the county centroid as
a last result. The locational default flags are shown in the NEI Emission Release Point record.
Locational data provided by state/local agencies, ESD, and TRI were also verified to determine
if the latitude and longitude of each release point is within the county indicated. If the plotted
release point is within 10 kilometers of an outside boundary of the county, it is assumed to be
valid. Furthermore, all emission release points associated with a site must be within 3.0 km of
one another. If one or more emission release points are outliers, they are replaced with the
average site latitude/longitude calculated from the acceptable coordinates.
As discussed previously, the NEI will be used in the National Air Toxics Assessment. To this
end, EFIG strived to identify point source processes that are, or will be, subject to MACT
standards that will result in HAP emission reductions. Processes (in some cases all processes at a
facility) are assigned a MACT code if ESD provided the data, or provided a facility list that was
used to identify state/local agency and TRI data as subject to a MACT standard. The MACT
codes can be found in the inventory files in the Emission Process record. This table also includes
field to indicate that either the state or ESD specifically identified the process as subject to the
MACT standard.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
28

-------
EFIG then used an SCC/SIC code/MACT dictionary to identify all facilities in the NEI that may
be subject to MACT standards. This dictionary was developed by comparing all of the SCCs and
SIC codes with information on types of sources that may be subject to each MACT standard.
ESD engineers then reviewed the NEI to verify or revise the facilities listed as possibly subject to
MACT standards. Their comments were incorporated in the 1999 NEI. Any MACT assignments
made using this dictionary also appear on the inventory in the Emission Process record, and there
is a field that indicate that the MACT code was assigned based on an SCC or an SIC code
default.
Throughout the development of the 1999 NEI, EFIG requested state, local, and tribal agency,
industry, and EPA review of draft versions. To the extent possible, EFIG incorporated all
revisions and new data provided. In the inventory files, the Emission record indicates the source
of the current reported emissions value. The following data source codes indicate if the data
were provided or revised by state, local, or tribal agencies, EPA/ESD, industry, TRI, or pulled in
from the 1996 NEI:
I	= Industry 2002 revision
12	= Industry 2003 revision
L	= Local agency submittal June 2001
LI	= Local agency submittal February 2002
L2	= Local agency submittal June 2002
L3	= Local agency submittal March 2003
Ml	= ESD original submittal
M2	= ESD 2002 revision
M3	= ESD 2003 revision
S	= State agency submittal June 2001
51	= State agency submittal February 2002
52	= State agency submittal June 2002
53	= State agency submittal March 2003
T	= TRI 99 data
N	= Data from the 1996 NEI
An in-depth QA/QC program was implemented in conjunction with the inventory development
process. The NEI QA/QC process was initiated immediately after each phase when state and
local agency and EPA files or revisions were provided to EFIG. An automated QA program was
developed and used to check each file for format and data field errors. Format checks were based
on the minimum data requirements for file acceptance by EFIG. Data field checks were related
to the codes, numeric data ranges, and locational data in the file. The EFIG accepted data with
data field errors, as these could be corrected with minimal effort. Duplicate records were then
removed, along with records that had null and zero emissions values. Referential integrity
violations, invalid codes, and erroneous locational data were then corrected (or added) if
possible.
Other QA/QC activities included identifying and correcting erroneous emissions data. For the
most part, the errors detected were outliers with very high emissions estimates. The EFIG
developed a series of internal QA/QC reports to target outliers and duplicate emissions. The first
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
29

-------
approach was to evaluate significant changes between the 1996 NEI and 1999 NEI data, and/or
extreme variation within the 1999 data. This included comparing 1996 HAP emission estimates
to 1999 HAP estimates for each facility, total emissions for each state between 1996 and 1999,
and total emissions for each MACT category between 1996 and 1999. These big pictures
summaries highlighted source categories, states, and facilities with potential problems. The next
set of QA/QC reports specifically highlighted individual facilities, and included identifying the
top emitters for each HAP nationwide, ranking each facility based on its emissions of each HAP
on a national basis, and listing the top emitters for HAP/MACT combination nationwide.
Outliers are usually difficult to spot - what appears to be a high emissions value may in fact be
acceptable for a particular facility or source category. To aid in detecting these errors, the
emissions data were compared to the range of values in the NEI and the percent contribution to
total emissions. A summary table with the list of facilities that appear multiple times as top
emitters for different HAPs also helped identify sites with outliers. These high values may be
due to a series of outliers or duplicated emission records. The high emissions may also be
correct for that facility and category. Thus, these summary data needed to be closely reviewed
before any records were marked for deletion. In some cases, the state/local agency submitting the
data was contacted to discuss the quality of the estimates, and if revisions were needed.
NEI point source output data are released in a number of formats. EPA's file transfer protocol
(ftp) site has separate point source files for each state, including Washington, DC, Puerto Rico,
and the Virgin Islands, containing the 1999 NEI HAP files for the state. The specific data
structure used for the 1999 NEI for HAPs is based on NEI Input Format (NIF) Version 3.0. The
files posted include an inventory documentation file that describes how the NEI was developed,
and a READ ME file describes the different files posted on the site and how to use them.
In addition to the NEI documentation and NIF data files, additional files are provided to facilitate
evaluation of the NEI, and to help put the emission estimates presented into perspective by state,
county, source category, and facility. In each summary file, emissions are presented for each 188
HAP category, as the sum of the 188 HAPs, and as the sum of the 33 urban HAPs used by EPA
in many air toxics programs. Each 33 urban HAP is flagged as such. Each county is flagged
with the urban/rural designation developed under EPA's Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy.
A county is considered "urban" if either:
1)	it includes a metropolitan statistical area with a population greater than 250,000; or
2)	the U.S. Census Bureau designates more than fifty percent of the population as
"urban."
The county emission summary presents HAP emissions by state, and county for major, area,
onroad, and nonroad sources. Major and area sources are also summarized as MACT vs. non-
MACT source categories.
The source category summary presents emissions by state, and county for major, area, onroad,
and nonroad sources. The area sources are delineated as point or nonpoint. Each stationary
source category is presented by MACT code, SIC code, or just source category name if there is
no applicable MACT or SIC code.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
30

-------
The point source facility summary presents emissions by NTI Unique facility (often consisting of
multiple sites) and individual site for major and area point sources. Included with each facility
record is the address, site latitude/longitude, emission type (entire period, average day, maximum
allowable, etc.), MACT and/or SIC code. The source of the emission estimate, whether original
data or recently revised, is also noted as state/local/tribal, MACT, TRI, industry, or 1996 NTI.
The point source stack summary presents emissions by NTI Unique facility (often consisting of
multiple sites) and individual site for major and area point sources. Included with each record is
the emission type (actual, allowable, potential, etc.), emission unit ID, process ID, emission
release point ID, SCC, MACT and/or SIC code, emission release point type (stack/vent or
fugitive), and latitude/longitude of the emission release point. The source of the emission
estimate, whether original data or recently revised, is also noted as state/local/tribal, MACT, TRI,
industry, or 1996 NTI.
Product Content - Nonpoint Source Inputs, Methodologies, and Outputs
The scope of the nonpoint source NEI for HAPs inventory effort was to compile 1999 base year
HAP emissions data for nonpoint area sources in the United States and its territories.
There are essentially two definitions that can be used for area sources. First, area sources can be
stationary point sources whose facility-specific emissions can be inventoried individually. Based
on their HAP emissions, these "area" sources are defined as such because they have emissions
below the major source threshold as defined in the CAA. According to the CAA, a major source
is:
Any stationary source . . . that emits or has the potential to emit considering
controls, in the aggregate, 10 tons per year or more of any hazardous air pollutant
or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of hazardous air pollutants.
EPA, state- and local agency-supplied facility level data, including area source facilities that emit
below the major source threshold, are stored in the point source NEI.
Another area source definition is applied based on how the emission estimates are developed.
Emission estimates for nonpoint area sources typically use "top-down" methods to estimate
emissions. Top-down methods use national-, regional-, or state-level information to estimate
emissions, which are then allocated to the local level. These methods simplify and generalize in
order to estimate emissions from nonpoint sources.
The goal in developing the nonpoint area source NEI was to obtain/develop as much county-
level information such as allocation data, county regulations, throughput, emissions, and process
descriptions as possible. It was hoped that the data would be sufficient to support exposure
modeling and risk assessment needs. The starting point for obtaining this nonpoint area source
data was a combination of EFIG-derived estimates and state/local/tribal air pollution control
agencies, who are most likely to have this type of detailed HAP inventory data.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
31

-------
State and local agencies and tribes were asked to supply HAP emission inventory data to the
EPA. Inventory data were also requested from the EPA's ESD for MACT source categories.
The information requested from ESD was identical to the information requested from state and
local agencies.
As a last step, state/local/tribal agency, ESD, and EFIG-calculated data for 1999 were
supplemented with MACT submitted data from the 1996 NEI for HAPs.
As discussed previously, the NEI will be used in the National Air Toxics Assessment. To this
end, EFIG strived to identify nonpoint area sources that are, or will be, subject to MACT
standards that will result in HAP emission reductions. Source categories are assigned a MACT
code if ESD provided the data subject to a MACT standard. The MACT codes can be found in
the inventory files in the Emission Process record.
Throughout the development of the 1999 NEI, EFIG requested state, local, and tribal agency, and
EPA review of draft versions. To the extent possible, EFIG incorporated all revisions and new
data provided. In the inventory files, the Emission record indicates the source of the current
reported emissions value. The following data source codes indicate if the data were provided or
revised by state, local, or tribal agencies, EPA/ESD, or pulled in from the 1996 NEI:
E	= Emission records calculated by EFIG;
L	= Local agency submittal;
S	= State agency submittal;
T	= Tribal agency submittal;
N	= Data from the 1996 NEI; and
M	= EPA/ESD provided MACT data.
An in-depth QA/QC program was implemented in conjunction with the inventory development
process. The NEI QA/QC process was initiated immediately after each phase when state and
local agency and EPA files or revisions were provided to EFIG. An automated QA program was
developed and used to check each file for format and data field errors. Format checks were based
on the minimum data requirements for file acceptance by EFIG. Data field checks were related
to the codes and numeric data ranges in the file. The EFIG accepted data with data field errors,
as these could be corrected with minimal effort. Duplicate records were then removed, along
with records that had null and zero emissions values. Referential integrity violations, invalid
codes, and erroneous locational data were then corrected (or added) if possible. Additionally,
nonpoint data were checked against the point source NEI to identify possible overlaps between
the two inventories. Where overlap existed, the point source data had priority. Thus, the area
nonpoint data were either removed or adjusted.
NEI nonpoint source output data are released in a number of formats. EPA's file transfer
protocol (ftp) site has separate nonpoint source files for each state, including Washington, DC,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, containing the 1999 NEI HAP files for the state. The
specific data structure used for the 1999 NEI for HAPs is based on NIF Version 3.0. The files
posted include an inventory documentation file that describes how the NEI was developed, and a
READ ME file describes the different files posted on the site and how to use them.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
32

-------
In addition to the NEI county and source category summary files discussed above, the nonpoint
stationary source summary presents the NEI HAP emissions by state, county, and area source
category. Included with each record is the emission type (actual, allowable, potential, etc.), SCC,
MACT, and/or SIC code.
Point Source NEI Product Limitations and Caveats
The 1999 NEI was developed initially for use in EPA's National Air Toxics Assessment
(NATA). The goal of the national-scale assessment is to identify those air toxics which are of
greatest potential concern, in terms of contribution to population risk. The results will be used to
set priorities for the collection of additional air toxics data (e.g., emissions data and ambient
monitoring data).
The 1999 NEI is a composite of emission estimates generated by state and local regulatory
agencies, industry, and EPA. Because the estimates originated from a variety of sources and
estimation methods, as well as differing purposes, they will in turn vary in quality, including
pollutants, level of detail and geographic coverage. However, this compilation of emissions
estimates represents the best available information to date.
Users of the data should consider that pollutants emitted from a particular source may have little
impact on the immediate geographic area, and the amount of pollutants emitted does not indicate
whether the source is complying with applicable regulations.
In addition, state and local agency-supplied emissions data are given priority in the point source
NEI. These submissions are reviewed by the EFIG for data handling and entry errors, and
potential double counting. The estimation methods, reliability of data sources and calculations,
and other quality assurance issues are the responsibility of the preparing agency. To the extent
possible, state and local agency-supplied data that appear as outliers in the data set are flagged for
further review, and state/local agency officials are contacted to verify the validity of the data. In
some cases, the questionable data are removed.
For some source facilities, emission estimates were not available for 1999. In these cases, data
for other base years were used. For some of these source categories, ESD provided emissions
data for a year other than 1999 and noted that the data is the best available to represent 1999.
When data are reported for a year other than 1999, it is noted in the NEI.
Nonpoint Source NEI Product Limitations and Caveats
In addition to the point source limitations and caveats discussed above, state/local/tribal agency-
supplied nonpoint source emissions data are given priority in the nonpoint source NEI, but these
submissions are reviewed by the EFIG only for data handling and entry errors, and potential
double counting. The estimation methods, reliability of data sources and calculations, and other
quality assurance issues are the responsibility of the preparing agency. To the extent possible,
state and local agency-supplied data that appear as outliers in the data set are flagged for further
review, and state/local/tribal agency officials are contacted to verify the validity of the data. In
some cases, the questionable data are removed.
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
33

-------
For some source categories, emission estimates were not available for 1999. In these cases, data
for other base years were used. For some of these source categories, ESD provided emissions
data for a year other than 1999 and noted that the data is the best available to represent 1999.
When data are reported for a year other than 1999, it is noted in the nonpoint source NEI.
Contact Information
NEI point source questions should be forwarded to:
Ms. Anne Pope
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Factor and Inventory Group
Emissions Monitoring and Analysis Division (D205-01)
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
pope. anne(a),epa. gov
919-541-5373
NEI nonpoint source questions should be forwarded to:
Ms. Laurel Driver
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Emission Factor and Inventory Group
Emissions Monitoring and Analysis Division (D205-01)
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
driver. laurel(a),epa. gov
919-541-2859
jt\K:\0173\001\005\1999 Point Report\readme99NEI-HAPs.wpd
34

-------
United States	Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards	Publication No. EPA-454/B-20-003
Environmental Protection	Air Quality Assessment Division	July 2003
Agency	Research Triangle Park, NC

-------