TRI-NATA Explorer

2008 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) National Training Conference Washington, DC

February 12, 2008

Ted Palma - EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and StandardsKim Balassiano - EPA OEI/OIAA Information Access Division

2

Development of TRI-NATA Explorer

Goal - Put TRI air emissions into risk context OEI has developed TRI database OAQPS has developed NATA database OAQPS had initially developed NATA-

explorer tool (unfunded!) OEI Staff have begun enhancing the tool

3

What is NATA?

Characterization of air toxics risks across the nation Modeling assessment performed by the USEPA to characterize

chronic cancer and noncancer risk estimates for the 133 HAPs Includes many sources of outdoor origin Inhalation only

Tools for State/Local/Tribal Agencies (and EPA) to prioritize pollutants, emission sources and locations of interest Provides a starting point for local-scale assessments Focuses on community efforts Informs monitoring programs

Results are available in database on NATA website

4

NATA History

1996 NATA Based on 1996 NTI Release May 2002 33 HAPs

1999 NATA Based on 1999 NEI Released Feb 2006 177 HAPs

2002 NATA Will be based on 2002 NEI Expected Release Early 2008

5

Who currently uses NATA? EPA

Data for standard setting Risk and Technology Review Area source rulemaking MSAT Rule used NATA for current and projected risk levels

Air Toxics monitoring NATTS Priority HAPs/Site locations Support Urban monitoring efforts

Accountability Measures GPRA, 112(k), PART AQM Phase 1 ( Recommendation 1.5 Framework for Accountability)

Used to link Air Toxic to Criteria Program Overlay “Hot Spots” with nonattainment areas (e.g. Detroit) Evaluate the toxic components of PM

States Many State Air Toxic Program set air toxic priorities using NATA Identify gaps in emissions inventories and encourages inventory improvements

Communities Serves as a starting point Information and priority setting

6

Improvements in the 2002 NATA

Inventory Improvements Cr speciation More tribal data RTR review Integration of HAPs and CAPs QA/QC

Improved point source characterization Model at census block using HEM3 (AERMOD) Retain individual source contributions

Will group into source categories

Improved non-point source characterization Area sources - grouped into 27 area source bins Mobile sectors - grouped into 9 source bins

Updated exposure characterization approach Using exposure ratios in lieu of running HAPEM Allows us to retain individual facility and areas source category contribution to risk

Improved Background Characterization Updated monitoring data (NATTS) Improved regional representation

1999 NATA - National Scale AssessmentPredicted County Level Cancer Risk – County Medians

Spatially, most of country predicted to have risk between 1 and 25 in a millionMost urban locations greater than 25 in a millionTransportation corridors and some locations greater than 50 in a millionSeveral counties greater than 100 in a million

M edian R isk Level

<1 in a M illion

25 - 50 in a M illion

>100 in a M illion

75 - 100 in a M illion

50 - 75 in a M illion

1 - 25 in a M illion

TRI NATA GISTRI-NATA

Explorer+ + =

The whole is greater than

the sum of the parts.

11

Getting the Right Information

How can TRI-NATA Explorer better provide information community audiences are interested in?

How can we make the risk information presented by TRI-NATA Explorer more understandable and useful?

How can we help people better understand the uncertainty associated with the information provided by TRI-NATA Explorer?

How can TRI-NATA Explorer be made easier to use?

12

Putting Risk Info into Context

Feedback from focus group was that people want to know: What does a cancer risk of 25 in a million

actually mean? Should I be concerned?

Risk ladder is a visual tool that depicts magnitude of risk. Risk in question compared against more

familiar types of risk

N E W F O U N D L A N D

N O VA S C O T I A

N E W B R U N S W IC K P R INC E E DWA R D I .

Q U E B E C

US

A

M A I N E

1996 MAGELLAN GeographixSMSanta Barbara, CA (805) 685-3100

C ornerB roo k

G ande r

C am pbellton

M adaw aska

E dm und ston

Frederic to n

St. Joh n

M oncton

A m herstN ew G lasgow

Cha rlo tte tow n

Sum m ersid e

K entv illeD artm o uth

H a lifa xBridgew ater

C larenvilleSt John’s.

S t. B arbe

C hann el-Po rtau x Ba sques

St. L aw re nce

M arytow n

Baie Verte

W esleyville

La Scie

St. A lbans

Stephenville

S t. A nthon y

St. Shotts

Bran ch

B urg eo P la centia

S heet H arb or

Syd ney

S helburne

Parrsboro

C araq uet

T ig nish

M oisie

Tra cadieracad ie

K edgw ick

A tla n tic O cea n

1 in 1 — person

1 in 10 — family

1 in 100 — street

1 in 1,000 — village

1 in 10,000 — small town

1 in 100,000 — large town

1 in 1 million — city

1 in 10 million — small country

1 in 100 million — large country

Com

mun

ity R

isk

Sca

leR

isk

Mag

nitu

de

14

Putting Risk Info into Context

OEI and OAQPS considering other possible risk ladders

Examples Risks of daily life: car, plane, bike accidents Other health risks: smoking, dietary habits Risk associated with EPA decisions: residual

drinking water and air risks

15

What does the tool look like?

Select Geography & Data

Get Map

Zoom into

area of concern

Query NATA Data

Query TRI

Data

Generate Envirofacts

Report

Directly Import Data into Google Earth

Generate Demographic Information of Area

24

Planned Application Enhancements

Replace or add 1999 NATA data with 2002 NATA data

Retool for public consumption by adding explanatory text (i.e., risk ladder)

Standardize the map controls (pan, zoom, identify) to be consistent with today's mapping applications

25

TRI-NATA Explorer Tentative Schedule

Internal EPA Focus Group Review – September 2007

Initial Software Enhancements - Fall 2007 External Focus Group Review –

Spring/Summer 2008 Final Enhancements – Summer 2008 Update with 2002 NATA – Summer 2008 Public Release – Late 2008

26

TRI-NATA Explorer Development Team Ted Palma – OAQPS Kim Balassiano – OEI Art Koines - OEI Dave Wolf – OEI Mike Petruska - OEI