Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases, 57669-57686 [2010-23674]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
and center mounting rods, and rod ends. If
any corrosion is found during any inspection,
before further flight, do the actions required
by paragraphs (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), and (f)(1)(iii)
of this AD, as applicable. Do all actions
required by this paragraph in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–49–0023,
Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008.
(i) If light corrosion (characterized by
discoloration or pitting) is found on a
mounting rod, remove the corrosion and
apply an anticorrosive treatment.
(ii) If moderate corrosion (characterized by
surface blistering or evidence of scaling and
flaking), or heavy corrosion (characterized by
severe blistering exfoliation, scaling and
flaking) is found, replace the affected
mounting rod with a new mounting rod
having the same part number.
(iii) If any corrosion is detected on the rod
ends, remove the corrosion and apply an
anticorrosive treatment.
(2) Accomplishing of the inspection and
corrective actions required by paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD before the effective date of
this AD in accordance with EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 120–49–0023, dated April
18, 2008, is acceptable for compliance with
the corresponding requirements of paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD.
(3) For mounting rods with moderate or
heavy corrosion, submit a report of the
positive findings (including level of
corrosion such as moderate or heavy;
guidance on corrosion can be found in
Chapter 51–11–01 of the EMBRAER
Corrosion Prevention Manual) of the
inspection required by paragraph (f)(1) of this
AD to Mr. Antonio Claret—Customer Support
Group, Embraer Aircraft Holding, Inc, 276
S.W 34th Street Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315—
USA; telephone (954) 359–3826; e-mail
structure@embraer.com.br; at the applicable
time specified in paragraph (f)(3)(i) or
(f)(3)(ii) of this AD. The report must include
the inspection results, a description of any
discrepancies found, the airplane serial
number, and the number of landings and
flight hours on the airplane.
(i) If the inspection was done on or after
the effective date of this AD: Submit the
report within 30 days after the inspection.
(ii) If the inspection was accomplished
prior to the effective date of this AD: Submit
the report within 30 days after the effective
date of this AD.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
FAA AD Differences
Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI
and/or service information as follows:
(1) Although Brazilian Airworthiness
Directive 2008–08–01, dated October 21,
2008, does not include a reporting
requirement, the service bulletin identified in
paragraph (f)(1) of this AD does specify
reporting findings to EMBRAER. This AD
requires that operators report the results of
the inspections to EMBRAER because the
required inspection report will help
determine the extent of the corrosion in the
affected fleet, from which we will determine
if further corrective action is warranted. This
difference has been coordinated with ANAC.
(2) Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2008–
08–01, dated October 21, 2008, allows
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
replacement of the affected APU mounting
rods by ‘‘new ones bearing a new P/N [part
ˆ
number] approved by ANAC [Agencia
Nacional de Aviacao Civil].’’ However,
¸˜
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this AD requires
replacing the affected mounting rod only
with a new mounting rod having the same
part number. Operators may request approval
of an alternative method of compliance to
install a new part number in accordance with
the procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1)
of this AD. This difference has been
coordinated with ANAC.
Other FAA AD Provisions
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, International
Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
Send information to ATTN: Todd Thompson,
Aerospace Engineer, International Branch,
ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425)
227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using
any approved AMOC on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies, notify your
principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as
appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector,
your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically
reference this AD.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement
in this AD to obtain corrective actions from
a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective
actions are considered FAA-approved if they
are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required
to assure the product is airworthy before it
is returned to service.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any
reporting requirement in this AD, under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
(4) Special Flight Permits: Special flight
permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and
21.199) to operate the airplane to a location
where the airplane can be modified (if the
operator elects to do so), except if two or
more center mounting rods or rod ends are
heavily corroded or broken, a special flight
permit is not permitted.
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness
Directive 2008–08–01, dated October 21,
2008; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 120–
49–0023, Revision 01, dated June 30, 2008;
for related information.
Material Incorporated by Reference
(i) You must use EMBRAER Service
Bulletin 120–49–0023, Revision 01, dated
June 30, 2008, to do the actions required by
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57669
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
approved the incorporation by reference of
this service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Empresa Brasileira de
Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro
˜
Faria Lima, 2170–Putim–12227–901 Sao Jose
dos Campos–SP–BRASIL; telephone +55 12
3927–5852 or +55 12 3309–0732; fax +55 12
3927–7546; e-mail distrib@embraer.com.br;
Internet https://www.flyembraer.com.
(3) You may review copies of the service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.
(4) You may also review copies of the
service information that is incorporated by
reference at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, or go
to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/
code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on August
30, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–22849 Filed 9–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925; FRL–9204–7]
RIN 2060–AQ02
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This action amends the Final
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases Rule to require reporters subject
to the rule to provide: The name,
address, and percentage ownership of
their U.S. parent company(s); their
primary North American Industry
Classification System code(s) as well as
all additional applicable North
American Industry Classification
System code(s); and an indication of
whether or not any of their reported
emissions are from a cogeneration unit.
This final action also corrects an
editorial error in revisions made to the
General Provisions published earlier
this year.
DATES: The final rule is effective on
November 22, 2010.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57670
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at EPA’s Docket Center, Public
ADDRESSES:
Reading Room, EPA West Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20004. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For
technical information and
implementation materials, please go to
the Web site https://www.epa.gov/
climatechange/emissions/
ghgrulemaking.html. To submit a
question, select Rule Help Center,
followed by Contact Us. You may also
contact Carole Cook, Climate Change
Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs (MC–6207J), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (202) 343–9263; fax
number: (202) 343–2342; e-mail address:
GHGMRR@epa.gov.
Regulated
Entities. This amendment to 40 CFR part
98 affects facilities that are direct
emitters of GHGs, and suppliers of fuels
and industrial gases that are already
subject to the rule. Regulated categories
and entities include those listed in
Table 1 of this preamble.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY
Category
NAICS Code
Examples of regulated entities
General Stationary Fuel Combustion
Sources.
................................
Facilities operating boilers, process heaters, incinerators, turbines, and internal
combustion engines:
Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas.
Manufacturers of lumber and wood products.
Pulp and paper mills.
Chemical manufacturers.
Petroleum refineries and manufacturers of coal products.
Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic products.
Steel works, blast furnaces.
Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring.
Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.
Electric, gas, and sanitary services.
Health services.
Educational services.
Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities.
Fossil-fuel fired electric generating units, including units owned by Federal and
municipal governments and units located in Indian Country.
Adipic acid manufacturing facilities.
Primary Aluminum production facilities.
Anhydrous and aqueous ammonia manufacturing facilities.
Portland Cement manufacturing plants.
Ferroalloys manufacturing facilities.
Flat glass manufacturing facilities.
Glass container manufacturing facilities.
Other pressed and blown glass and glassware manufacturing facilities.
Chlorodifluoromethane manufacturing facilities.
Electricity Generation .............................
211
321
322
325
324
316, 326, 339
331
332
336
221
622
611
325193
221112
Adipic Acid Production ...........................
Aluminum Production .............................
Ammonia Manufacturing ........................
Cement Production ................................
Ferroalloy Production .............................
Glass Production ....................................
325199
331312
325311
327310
331112
327211
327213
327212
325120
HCFC–22 Production and HFC–23 Destruction.
Hydrogen Production .............................
Iron and Steel Production ......................
325120
331111
Lead Production .....................................
............................................................
Lime Production .....................................
Magnesium Production ..........................
331419
331492
327410
331419
331492
325311
32511
325199
325110
325182
324110
325312
322110
322121
322130
327910
325181
212391
325188
212113
212112
Nitric Acid Production .............................
Petrochemical Production ......................
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Petroleum Refineries ..............................
Phosphoric Acid Production ...................
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing ..............
Silicon Carbide Production .....................
Soda Ash Manufacturing ........................
Titanium Dioxide Production ..................
Underground Coal Mines .......................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Hydrogen manufacturing facilities.
Integrated iron and steel mills, steel companies, sinter plants, blast furnaces,
basic oxygen process furnace shops.
Primary lead smelting and refining facilities.
Secondary lead smelting and refining facilities.
Calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, dolomitic hydrates manufacturing facilities.
Primary refiners of nonferrous metals by electrolytic methods.
Secondary magnesium processing plants.
Nitric acid manufacturing facilities.
Ethylene dichloride manufacturing facilities.
Acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide, methanol manufacturing facilities.
Ethylene manufacturing facilities.
Carbon black manufacturing facilities.
Petroleum refineries.
Phosphoric acid manufacturing facilities.
Pulp mills.
Paper mills.
Paperboard mills.
Silicon carbide abrasives manufacturing facilities.
Alkalies and chlorine manufacturing facilities.
Soda ash, natural, mining and/or beneficiation.
Titanium dioxide manufacturing facilities.
Underground anthracite coal mining operations.
Underground bituminous coal mining operations.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
57671
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF REGULATED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY—Continued
Category
NAICS Code
Zinc Production ......................................
331419
331492
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills .............
562212
221320
562212
322110
322121
322122
322130
311611
311411
311421
221320
562212
322110
322121
322122
322130
311611
311411
311421
221320
325193
112111
112120
112210
112310
112330
112320
211111
324110
221210
211112
325120
325120
Industrial Waste Landfills .......................
Industrial Wastewater Treatment ...........
Manure Management a ...........................
Suppliers of Coal Based Liquids Fuels ..
Suppliers of Petroleum Products ...........
Suppliers of Natural Gas and NGLs ......
Suppliers of Industrial GHGs .................
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) ........
Examples of regulated entities
Primary zinc refining facilities.
Zinc dust reclaiming facilities, recovering from scrap and/or alloying purchased
metals.
Solid waste landfills.
Sewage treatment facilities.
Solid waste landfills.
Pulp mills.
Paper mills.
Newsprint mills.
Paperboard mills.
Meat processing facilities.
Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities.
Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.
Sewage treatment facilities.
Solid waste landfills.
Pulp mills.
Paper mills.
Newsprint mills.
Paperboard mills.
Meat processing facilities.
Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities.
Fruit and vegetable canning facilities.
Sewage treatment facilities.
Ethyl alcohol manufacturing facilities.
Beef cattle feedlots.
Dairy cattle and milk production facilities.
Hog and pig farms.
Chicken egg production facilities.
Turkey Production.
Broilers and Other Meat type Chicken Production.
Coal liquefaction at mine sites.
Petroleum refineries.
Natural gas distribution facilities.
Natural gas liquid extraction facilities.
Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.
Industrial gas manufacturing facilities.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
a EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a
Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this purpose.
Table 1 of this preamble is not
intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding
entities likely to be affected by this
action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the
types of entities that may be reporting
under 40 CFR part 98 and, therefore,
may be affected by this action. However,
other types of entities not listed in the
table could also be subject to reporting
requirements. To determine whether an
entity is affected by this action, you
should carefully examine the
applicability criteria found in 40 CFR
part 98, subpart A. EPA has also
proposed reporting requirements for
several other source categories (rule
subparts). If these subparts are finalized,
entities subject to them would be also
subject to this action starting with their
first reports. The following subparts
have been proposed, but not yet
finalized, by EPA:
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart I
(Electronics Manufacturing) (75 FR
18652, April 12, 2010);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart L
(Fluorinated Gas Production) (75 FR
18652, April 12, 2010);
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart W
(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems)
(75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010);
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart DD (Electric
Transmission and Distribution
Equipment Use) (75 FR 18652, April 12,
2010);
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart QQ
(Imports and Exports of Fluorinated
GHGs Inside Pre-charged Equipment
and Closed-cell Foams (75 FR 18652,
April 12, 2010);
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart RR
(Injection and Geologic Sequestration of
Carbon Dioxide (75 FR 18576, April 12,
2010); and
• 40 CFR part 98, subpart SS
(Electrical Equipment Manufacture or
Refurbishment) (75 FR 18652, April 12,
2010).
If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the Web site or
the person listed in the preceding FOR
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FURTHER GENERAL INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
judicial review of this final rule is
available only by filing a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by
November 22, 2010. Note, under CAA
section 307(b)(2), the requirements
established by this final rule may not be
challenged separately in any civil or
criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
The following acronyms and
abbreviations are used in this document:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e CO2-equivalent
CUSIP Committee on Uniform Security
Identification Procedures
DUNS Data Universal Numbering System
EIA Economic Impact Analysis
EO Executive Order
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57672
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEIN Federal Employer Identification
Numbers
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
ICR Information Collection Request
LDC Local Distribution Company
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995
OMB Office of Management and Budget
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
SEC Securities and Exchange Commission
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S. United States
Table of Contents
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
I. Background
A. Background on the Final Rule
B. Summary of the Final Rule
C. Legal Authority
D. Relationship to Other Programs
II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public
Comments
A. U.S. Parent Company
B. NAICS Code(s)
C. Cogeneration
D. Frequency of Reporting
E. Applicability of the Reporting
Requirements
F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and
Responses
G. Correction to Subpart A
III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule
A. How were compliance costs estimated?
B. What are the costs of the rule?
C. What are the economic impacts of the
rule?
D. What are the impacts of the rule on
small businesses?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
A. Background on the Final Rule
On April 12, 2010, EPA proposed this
rule amending 40 CFR part 98, which
provides the regulatory framework for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
the GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP).1
The GHGRP requires the reporting of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and
other relevant information from certain
source categories in the United States
(U.S). The GHGRP, which became
effective December 29, 2009, includes
reporting requirements for facilities that
emit GHGs (‘‘facilities’’) and for
suppliers of fuels and industrial gases
(‘‘suppliers’’). Facilities and suppliers
that meet the applicability criteria in 40
CFR part 98, subpart A (‘‘regulated
entities’’ or ‘‘reporters’’) must submit
annual GHG reports in accordance with
the provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(c).2 For
more detailed background information
on the GHGRP, see the preamble to the
final rule that established the program
(74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009).
This rule amends 40 CFR part 98 to
include new requirements for reporters
to provide information on their U.S.
parent company(s), on their primary and
additional applicable North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
code(s), and on whether any of their
reported emissions are from a
cogeneration unit (also called combined
heat and power). Facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 must
provide this additional information in
their annual reports. This action also
amends 40 CFR part 98, subpart A to
correct a drafting error in the revisions
to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) published on July
12, 2010 (75 FR 39758).
This preamble is divided into four
sections. The first section of the
preamble provides background and an
overview of the final rule, discusses
EPA’s legal authority under the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for collecting the
additional information and summarizes
the relationship between this
information and the information already
collected by other programs. The second
section of the preamble describes the
new reporting requirements finalized by
this action, describes major changes
since proposal, discusses public
comments and EPA responses, and
describes the revisions made to 40 CFR
98.2(a)(2) to correct the editorial error
published on July 12, 2010. The third
section of the preamble provides a
summary of the impacts and costs of the
final rule and discusses comments on
the regulatory impacts analyses. The
fourth and final section of the preamble
discusses the various statutory and
executive order requirements applicable
to the final rule.
1 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR
part 98.
2 Because mobile sources are not covered under
40 CFR part 98, this rule does not apply to them.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Summary of the Final Rule
This action amends 40 CFR part 98 by
adding several data elements to the list
specified in 40 CFR 98.3. These data
elements must be included in the
annual GHG reports that facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 are
required to submit. Specifically, this
rule requires each reporter to (1) Provide
the names and physical addresses of all
of its U.S. parent companies and their
respective percentages of ownership; (2)
provide its primary NAICS code(s) and
all additional applicable NAICS code(s);
and (3) indicate whether any of its
reported emissions are from a
cogeneration unit located at the facility.
This rule applies to all facilities and
suppliers required to report under 40
CFR part 98, including those covered by
subparts published on October 30, 2009
(74 FR 56260) and on July 12, 2010 (75
FR 39736).3 Therefore, all facilities and
suppliers that meet the applicability
criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A are
required to report the additional data
elements included in this rule.4
C. Legal Authority
EPA is finalizing this rule under the
existing authority provided in CAA
section 114. As noted in the preamble
to the Final Rule for Mandatory
Reporting of GHGs (Part 98), CAA
section 114 provides EPA with broad
authority to require the information
mandated by this final rule because
such information will inform EPA’s
implementation of various CAA
provisions (74 FR 66264). Under CAA
section 114(a)(1), the Administrator may
require emission sources, persons
subject to the CAA, manufacturers of
emission control or process equipment,
or persons whom the Administrator
believes may have necessary
information, to monitor and report
emissions and to provide such other
information as the Administrator
requests for the purposes of carrying out
any provision of the CAA (except for a
provision of title II with respect to
motor vehicles).
As discussed in greater detail in
Sections I.C and II.Q of the preamble to
the final Part 98 rule and in the
response to comments for 40 CFR part
98,5 EPA may gather information for a
3 If additional categories are finalized in 40 CFR
part 98, then this rule applies to those categories as
well.
4 EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the
Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule using funds
provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a
Congressional restriction prohibiting the
expenditure of funds for this purpose.
5 Responses to major comments can be found in
the preamble to the final Part 98 (74 FR 56260).
Responses to additional comments can be found in
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
variety of purposes, including for the
purpose of assisting in the development
of emissions standards under CAA
section 111, determining compliance
with implementation plans or
standards, or more broadly for ‘‘carrying
out any provision’’ of the CAA.
In particular, CAA section 103
authorizes EPA to establish a national
research and development program,
including nonregulatory approaches and
technologies, for the prevention and
control of air pollution, including
GHGs. The data collected under this
final rule would be immediately
available to EPA and could inform
EPA’s implementation of CAA section
103(g) regarding improvements in
sector-based nonregulatory strategies
and technologies for preventing or
reducing air pollutants.
The data collected through this final
rule would be immediately available to
EPA and could be used for the purposes
of providing additional information to
support more effective research and
develop actions to address GHG
emissions. For example, corporate
parent and NAICS data would assist
EPA in developing and improving
emission inventories, as well as
characterizing emissions data in several
different ways. A more detailed
understanding of the sources and
operational categories of GHG emissions
could lead to improvements in air
pollution emissions information that is
relied upon to develop effective control
strategies. For example, EPA could use
the NAICS code information gathered by
this rule to compare results both within
industries and across industry sectors.
Finally, the information gathered
through this rule will be immediately
available to enhance EPA’s
implementation of various
nonregulatory programs aimed at
encouraging voluntary reductions of
GHG emissions. Under the authority of
CAA section 103, EPA has launched a
variety of nonregulatory programs
aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs.6
The additional data will assist EPA by
providing more detailed information on
possible sources, and facility operations
within industrial sectors for EPA to
work with in the context of these
programs.
Given the broad scope of CAA section
114, it is appropriate for EPA to gather
volumes 1 through 42 of the response to comments
document entitled ‘‘Mandatory Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule: EPA’s Response to Public
Comments’’ in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508
(see https://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/
home.html#docketDetail?R=EPA-HQ-OAR-20080508).
6 For example, Climate Leaders, Combined Heat
and Power Partnership, and Energy Star.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
57673
1. EPA and Other Federal Data
Collection Programs
company.7 TRI requires reporters to
report the name of their one parent
company with the largest ownership
interest in the facility. TRI also requires
the parent company’s Dun & Bradstreet
Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) 8 identifier to be reported
annually. This amendment to 40 CFR
part 98 differs from TRI parent company
reporting requirements in that it
requires reporting of: (1) All parent
companies, rather than just one parent
company; (2) the physical address of
each parent company, but not the DUNS
identifier; and (3) the percentage of
ownership interest for each parent
company. EPA estimates that
approximately two-thirds of the
reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98 are
also required to report to TRI.
Several EPA programs under the
CAA, including the GHGRP,9 require
reporters to identify the ‘‘owner or
operator’’ of each affected facility.
Although in some cases, the owner or
operator is also the highest-level U.S.
parent company, the information
currently collected under the majority of
CAA programs is not designed to
specifically identify the highest-level
U.S. parent company, because that
information is not necessary to
determine compliance with particular
regulatory requirements.
Primary and Other NAICS Codes:
The final rule also requires facilities
and suppliers reporting under 40 CFR
part 98 to report their primary and all
additional applicable NAICS codes.10 In
the large majority of cases, facilities and
suppliers will submit a single NAICS
Federal voluntary programs, such as
Climate Leaders and U.S. Department of
Energy’s Voluntary Reporting of
Greenhouse Gases Program, collect
some data elements (such as data related
to NAICS codes) that are similar to the
data that EPA will collect under this
rule. However, none of the voluntary
programs collect data from all of the
facilities and suppliers subject to 40
CFR part 98. In addition, the voluntary
programs that collect these data do not
use the same definitions for data
elements.
U.S. Parent Company:
Currently, three EPA programs collect
parent company information: The
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under
Section 313 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act;
Risk Management Plans under CAA
section 212(r); and the Inventory Update
Rule under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA). Of these three
programs, TRI is the only one that
requires reporters to submit information
on their highest-level U.S. parent
7 For purposes of TRI reporting, a reporter’s
parent company is defined as the highest-level
company located in the U.S. that directly owns at
least 50 percent of the voting stock of the company.
When a facility is owned by more than one
company and none of the owners directly owns 50
percent or more of the voting stock, the facility
reports the name of either the facility operator or
the owner with the largest ownership interest in the
facility as its U.S. parent company. (Toxic Chemical
Release Inventory Reporting Forms and
Instructions, EPA 260–R–09–006, October 2009.
page 34).
8 The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS)
is a unique 9-digit numerical identifier used to
identify individual business entities in databases
maintained by Dun & Bradstreet.
9 GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR
part 98.
10 North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) code(s) are defined as the six-digit code(s)
that represents the product(s)/activity(s)/service(s)
at a facility or supplier as listed in the Federal
Register and defined in ‘‘North American Industrial
Classification System Manual 2007,’’ available from
the U.S. Department of Commerce, National
Technical Information Service. A reporter’s primary
NAICS code is the NAICS code that most accurately
describes the reporter’s primary product/activity/
service based on revenue. Additional NAICS codes
describe the product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at the
facility that are not related to the principal source
of revenue.
the information required by this final
rule because such information is
relevant to EPA’s implementation of a
wide variety of CAA provisions and the
burden of submitting such information
is low.
D. Relationship to Other Programs
EPA investigated other Federal and
non-Federal reporting programs that
collect information similar to the
information that EPA will collect under
this rule to determine if any existing
sources of information met all EPA’s
objectives. These objectives included:
Identifying each reporter’s highest-level
U.S. parent company(s); identifying
each reporter’s primary and any
additional applicable NAICS codes;
identifying facilities using cogeneration;
covering all reporters subject to 40 CFR
part 98; collecting data annually; and
having the information available to EPA.
This section of the preamble
summarizes EPA’s findings from our
review of other programs. For additional
information on reporting requirements
for these data elements in existing
Federal and non-Federal programs,
please see Section I.D of the proposal
preamble (75 FR 18455, April 12, 2010)
and the following memoranda ‘‘Review
of Non-Federal Existing Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Programs Requiring Reporting
of Parent Company Ownership’’ and
‘‘Summary of Existing State Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Programs’’ located in
Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57674
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
code. However, infrequently a facility/
supplier may have two distinct
products/activities/services providing
comparable revenue. In these cases the
facility/supplier may also report a
second primary NAICS code. Among all
EPA programs, only TRI requires
reporters to submit primary NAICS
codes as well as other relevant NAICS
codes. As noted above, EPA estimates
that approximately two-thirds of the
reporters required to report under the
GHGRP are also required to report to
TRI.
EPA collects some NAICS code
information through routine compliance
reporting in multiple programs,11 but
those programs either do not require
primary and other NAICS codes be
designated as such, or they do not
define a primary NAICS code as it is
defined in this rule. In addition, none of
the compliance databases provide
complete coverage of the facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98.
Cogeneration:
There are currently no EPA programs
that require facilities or suppliers to
identify and report the use of
cogeneration units located at the
facility. EPA’s Combined Heat and
Power Partnership, a voluntary program,
requires that partners agree to provide
data on existing cogeneration projects to
help EPA determine climate benefits.12
However, this is a voluntary program
and does not provide coverage of all
cogeneration units. The Energy
Information Administration collects
information on cogeneration from utility
and non-utility power generators greater
than 1 megawatt,13 but does not collect
this information from all facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98.
2. Non-Federal Data Collection
Programs
EPA reviewed State and other
reporting initiatives or protocols to
determine whether they contain
information on U.S. parent companies,
NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that is
comparable in terms of coverage (of
facilities and suppliers), and whether
the specific information collected is
comparable in data quality and
timeliness to that required under this
rule. EPA also considered whether the
Agency had access to and could itself
release the data collected under these
programs.
In general, the State and voluntary
initiatives do not collect information on
U.S. parent company, NAICS code(s), or
cogeneration that is comparable to that
required under this final rule regarding
coverage (of facilities and suppliers),
specific information collected, and data
quality and timeliness. For additional
information on the collection of parent
company, NAICS codes, and
cogeneration information by States, and
other programs or initiatives, please see
Section I.D. of the proposal preamble
(75 FR 18455) and the following
memoranda ‘‘Review of Non-Federal
Existing Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Programs Requiring Reporting of Parent
Company Ownership’’ and ‘‘Summary of
Existing State Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Programs,’’ located in Docket
EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925.
II. The Final Rule and Reponses to
Public Comments
This section of the preamble explains
the requirements for the final rule,
describes the major changes to the
proposed rule, and summarizes the
public comments and responses.
A. U.S. Parent Company
In the proposed rule published on
April 12, 2010 (75 FR 18455), EPA
defined United States parent
company(s) as the highest-level United
States company(s) with an ownership
interest in the reporting entity as of
December 31 of the reporting year.
Although the proposed rule language
included the requirements for only one
option, EPA proposed two options in
the preamble for reporting U.S. parent
company information. As proposed,
Option 1 would require all facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 to
provide the legal name and physical
address of their highest-level U.S.
parent company. Reporters would then
select the appropriate ownership status
from a list of three types of ownership:
‘‘Single ownership’’ for entities owned by a
single company that is itself not owned by
another company.
‘‘Wholly owned’’ for entities owned by a
single company that is itself owned by
another company.
‘‘Multiple ownership’’ for entities owned by
more than one company).
Alternatively, in the proposed Option
2, reporters would provide the names
and physical addresses of all of their
U.S. parent companies and their
respective percentages of ownership.
1. Summary of U.S. Parent Company
Reporting Requirements
After considering all the comments
received, EPA has selected Option 2.
Option 2 requires reporters to report the
name(s) and physical address(es) of all
of their U.S. parent companies and their
respective percentages of ownership.
For the final rule, EPA has defined U.S.
parent company(s) as highest-level U.S.
company(s) with an ownership interest
in the reporting entity as of December
31 of the year for which data are being
reported. The physical address of a U.S.
parent company is defined as the street
address, city, state and zip code of the
U.S. parent company’s physical
location. Table 2 of this preamble
provides instructions for how facilities
or suppliers should report based on
various ownership structures.
TABLE 2—INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING U.S. PARENT COMPANY(IES)
How to report U.S. parent company
The reporting entity is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that is
not owned by any other company (e.g., it is not a subsidiary or division of another company).
The reporting entity is entirely owned by a single U.S. company which
is, itself, owned by another company (e.g., it is a division or subsidiary of a higher-level company).
The reporting entity is owned by more than one U.S. company (e.g.,
company A owns 40 percent, company B owns 35 percent, and company C owns 25 percent).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Reporting scenario
Provide that company’s legal name and physical address as the U.S.
parent company and report 100 percent ownership.
11 List of Programs Collecting NAICS: AIR Facility
System (AFS); Facility Response Plan (FRP);
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS);
National Emissions Inventory (NEI); National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES);
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
Provide the legal name and physical address of the highest-level company in the ownership hierarchy as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership.
Provide the legal names and physical addresses of all of the highestlevel companies with an ownership interest as U.S. parent companies, and report the percent ownership of each company.
Information (RCRAInfo); Risk Management Plan
(RMP); and Toxics Release Inventory System
(TRIS).
12 https://www.epa.gov/chp.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
13 Energy Information Agency-860, Annual
Electric Generator Report https://www.eia.doe.gov/
cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html and, Energy
Information Agency-861, Annual Electric Power
Industry Report https://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/
electricity/page/eia861.html.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
57675
TABLE 2—INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING U.S. PARENT COMPANY(IES)—Continued
Reporting scenario
How to report U.S. parent company
The reporting entity is entirely owned by a foreign company ..................
Provide the legal name and physical address of the foreign company’s
highest-level company based in the U.S. as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership.
Provide the legal name and physical address of the foreign entity’s
highest-level company based in the U.S., along with the legal names
and physical addresses of the other U.S. parent companies, and report the percent ownership of each company.
The joint venture or cooperative is its own U.S. parent company. Provide the joint venture or cooperative’s legal name and physical address as the U.S. parent company and report 100 percent ownership.
Enter U.S. Government, and do not report physical address or percent
ownership.14
The reporting entity is partially owned by a foreign company and partially owned by one or more U.S. companies.
The reporting entity is owned by a joint venture or cooperative .............
The reporting entity is a federally owned facility ......................................
2. Summary of Major Changes Since
Proposal
There are no major changes to the
proposed rule for U.S. parent company
reporting requirements for Option 2.
That option requires facilities to report
the name(s) and physical address(es) of
all of their U.S. parent companies and
their respective percentages of
ownership. The rationale for the
selection of Option 2 can be found in
Section II.A.3 of this preamble.
3. Summary of Public Comments and
Responses
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
This section provides a summary of
the comments and responses on EPA’s
proposal to require reporting of U.S.
parent company and ownership
information. Also summarized in this
section are public comments and
responses on EPA’s consideration of
reporting numeric identifiers for parent
companies, in addition to parent
company names.
General Comments on Reporting of
U.S. Parent Company and Ownership
Information:
Comments: One commenter noted
that collecting corporate identifier
information only from those facilities
that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of
CO2 per year would provide only a
partial picture of a company’s overall
emissions, as some companies may own
facilities with emissions below the
25,000 metric ton threshold. This same
commenter suggested that EPA should
encourage company-level data reporting
and require companies to report the
relative emissions of each of their
14 Federally owned facilities are not required to
report percent ownership because all federally
owned facilities are 100 percent owned by the
Federal government. Additionally, the highest-level
U.S. ‘‘parent’’ for federally owned facilities is the
U.S. Government, and a physical address is not
required to establish a unique identity for the U.S.
Government.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
facilities subject to the reporting rule as
compared to total company emissions.
Response: Regarding the first issue,
when EPA established the GHGRP last
year, we completed a comprehensive
threshold analysis and determined that
a 25,000 metric ton threshold generally
suited the needs of the Agency by
providing comprehensive coverage of
emissions with a reasonable number of
reporters, thereby creating the robust
data set necessary for the quantitative
analyses of the range of likely GHG
policies, programs and regulations. For
additional background on thresholds,
please see Section II.E. of the preamble
of the final Part 98 (74 FR 56271,
October 30, 2009). We did not reopen
that decision in the April 12, 2010
proposal to add U.S. parent company,
NAICS codes, and cogeneration as data
elements to the annual report required
under 40 CFR 98.3.
Regarding the second issue, EPA
interprets the commenter’s remarks to
indicate that companies, rather than
individual facilities, should report
emissions. This issue was also
addressed when EPA established the
GHGRP and was not revisited in the
April 12, 2010 proposal. As described in
Section II.F of the preamble of the final
Part 98, the Agency elected to require
reporting at the facility level in 40 CFR
part 98 because the purpose of this rule
is to collect data from suppliers and
from facilities with direct GHG
emissions above selected thresholds for
use in analyzing, developing, and
implementing current and potential
future CAA GHG policies and programs.
Facility-level data are needed to support
analyses of some types of potential GHG
reduction programs, such as New
Source Performance Standards.
Corporate-level reporting was not
selected because corporate reporting
without facility-specific details would
not provide sufficient data to assess
many potential CAA GHG policies and
programs. For additional discussion of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the level of reporting, please see Section
II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98
(74 FR 56273, October 30, 2009).
Moreover, as explained in the
proposal and earlier in this preamble,
EPA determined that reporting of all
U.S. parent companies and their percent
ownership will provide the Agency with
necessary data to develop and improve
emission inventories and to enhance
EPA’s implementation of various
nonregulatory programs aimed at
encouraging voluntary reductions of
GHG emissions. Requiring individual
facilities to report how their emissions
compare to the total emissions of their
parent companies would be
burdensome, because it would require
each facility to obtain information from
all the other facilities (including those
located overseas) owned by their parent
company(ies) in order to make this type
of comparison. EPA has concluded that
the benefit of this information does not
outweigh the additional burden to the
regulated entity because the Agency and
the public can compile similar
information at a much lower burden by
analyzing all GHG reports submitted by
facilities with the same reported U.S.
parent company. Furthermore, as stated
above, the GHGRP is a facility and
supplier level program designed to
inform future programs and policies
under the CAA. EPA does not consider
a full corporate footprint analysis to be
necessary to meet the goals of this
program at this time.
Comment: A commenter from the
offshore operations sector requested that
EPA clearly define the parent company
reporting requirements specific to
offshore petroleum and natural gas
facilities. In particular, the commenter
noted that while the offshore facility
itself may have a single or multiple
owners, each development and/or
production field associated with the
facility may have multiple owners. The
commenter added that this situation
could complicate the determination of
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
57676
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
percentage of ownership interest for
each reporting entity.
Response: Reporting entities (facilities
or suppliers) are required to report
information on their own parent
company or companies, as described in
Table 2 of this preamble. Parent
company reporting is limited to
information on the parents of the
reporting entity itself, and does not
include parent company information on
any associated entities or customers that
are not part of the reporting entity. The
facility definition for an offshore
petroleum/natural gas operator in the
proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart W:
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
rulemaking (75 FR 18608, April 12,
2010) is limited to the offshore platform.
Production fields and development
fields that produce oil or gas sent to the
platform are not considered part of the
facility. Therefore, the facility reports
the parent company or companies for
the platform and secondary platform
structures connected to the platform via
walkways, storage tanks associated with
the platform structure and floating
production and offloading equipment,
and does not include company
information for any associated entities,
such as production or development
fields.
To further clarify, the rule language
was modified to include the phrase, ‘‘of
the reporting entity’’ in paragraph
98.3(c)(11), which requires that
reporting entities report ‘‘Legal name(s)
and physical address(es) of the highestlevel United States parent company(s) of
the reporting entity and the percentage
of ownership interest for each listed
parent company as of December 31 of
the year for which data are being
reported * * *.’’
EPA understands that operations at
facilities in the oil and natural gas sector
can be complex with many partners
working together to explore for,
produce, process, transport, and
distribute oil and natural gas products.
Given the commenter’s use of the term
‘‘owner’’, EPA clarifies here that
requirements to identify the ‘‘owner’’ of
an affected facility are different from the
requirements to report U.S. parent
company. For example, ‘‘owner’’ refers
to the person or legal entity that owns
the facility and its productive
infrastructure. Under this final rule,
U.S. parent company means the highestlevel U.S. company(s) with an
ownership interest in the reporting
entity. A regulated entity may report
‘‘owner’’ differently than U.S. parent
company in some cases. For example, a
facility may report ‘‘owner’’ and U.S.
parent company differently if the legal
entity that owns the facility is a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
subsidiary to a U.S. parent company. A
facility may also report ‘‘owner’’ and
U.S. parent company differently if an
individual with no company affiliation
has an ownership interest in a facility,
since ‘‘owner’’ covers persons while U.S.
parent company does not.
Proposed Options 1 and 2:
Comments: EPA received comments
supporting both options. Comments
favoring Option 1 (i.e., requiring
reporting the legal name and physical
address of the reporter’s highest-level
U.S. parent company with the largest
ownership share and the selection of the
ownership type that best describes the
ownership structure for the reporter),
noted that Option 1 is the less
burdensome option and questioned
whether the potential benefits of Option
2 outweighed the burden of collecting
the information. Furthermore, the
comments stated that complex
ownership structures make it unlikely
the person completing the form would
be able to provide the information on all
parent companies. The comments also
noted that identifying the general
corporate structure (as proposed in
Option 1) should provide the
information required by EPA and that
submission of the name of the highestlevel U.S. company with the largest
ownership interest is consistent with
TRI reporting requirements.
Commenters favoring Option 2 (i.e.,
requiring reporting of the legal names,
physical addresses and respective
percent ownership of all companies
with an ownership stake in the
regulated entity), noted that Option 1
would overstate the GHG contribution
of the largest ownership interest and
omit the contribution of the smaller
ownership interest(s). The commenters
stated that this bias could limit the
usefulness of the parent company data
and that Option 2 provides a more
complete picture of reporters’
ownership, thereby providing greater
transparency regarding corporate GHG
emissions. Some commenters added
that Option 2 would be more effective
in terms of corporate accountability. In
addition, commenters noted that Option
2 complements recent Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC)
Interpretive Guidance on certain
existing disclosure rules that requires
public companies to disclose the impact
that climate change or regulation related
to climate change may have on their
business. An industry commenter stated
that reporters should not have difficulty
completing the reporting under either
option.
Response: After reviewing the
comments received, EPA selected
Option 2 because it provides more
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
complete information on parent
company ownership for reporters with
multiple parent companies, thereby
providing greater accuracy in
aggregating emissions to the parent
company level.
EPA acknowledges that there is a
modest additional burden associated
with Option 2 for those reporters with
multiple owners and that Option 1
would be the lower cost Option.15 The
additional total national cost of Option
2 however, was estimated to be less than
two percent greater than Option 1. The
burden estimate for Option 2
incorporates the additional effort
associated with reporters asking legal or
management staff for information
regarding complex ownership structure.
Option 1 supporters neither offered
supporting information or estimates of
the additional burden nor refuted EPA’s
burden estimates. EPA concluded that
the additional benefits of Option 2
compared to Option 1 outweigh the
potential costs of collecting more
comprehensive parent company
information because the additional cost
of Option 2 is minimal while the
additional benefit is substantial.
Legal Authority to Collect Parent
Company Information:
Comments: Two commenters
questioned the need for EPA to collect
parent company information. One
commenter stated that company
affiliation should not be used as a factor
in policy development. The other
commenter’s primary objection was that
EPA had been vague and non-specific in
justifying collection of parent company
information. The commenter stated that
EPA’s authority to collect information
under CAA section 114 is limited by the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320), under
which EPA must demonstrate that the
requested information has ‘‘practical
utility.’’ The commenter stated that EPA
had not met the definition of ‘‘practical
utility’’ in its justification for collecting
parent company information. The
commenter added that because practical
utility is necessary for the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to grant
an Information Collection Request (ICR),
EPA should not finalize this
requirement until it has identified and
solicited comment on a practical use.
Response: As explained in the Section
I.C of this preamble, CAA section 114 is
15 EPA’s estimate of the burden of Option 1 versus
Option 2 was presented in the Economic Impact
Analysis for the proposed rule. An updated
estimate of the burden associated with Option 2
was included in the Economic Impact Analysis for
the final rule. These documents are available at
https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
sufficiently broad for EPA to collect this
information. Section 114 of the CAA
generally authorizes EPA to gather
information from any person who owns
or operates an emissions source, who is
subject to a requirement of the CAA,
who manufacturers control or process
equipment, or who the Administrator
believes has information necessary for
the purposes of CAA section 114(a).
EPA may gather information for
purposes of establishing
implementation plans or emissions
standards, determining compliance, or
‘‘carrying out any provision’’ of the CAA.
For these reasons, the Administrator
may request that a person, on a onetime, periodic or continuous basis,
establish and maintain records, make
reports, install and operate monitoring
equipment and, among other things,
provide such information the
Administrator may reasonably require.
This language has been interpreted to
grant EPA broad authority. See, e.g.,
Dow Chemical Co. v. U.S., 467 U.S. 227,
233 (1986) (‘‘Regulatory and
enforcement authority generally carries
with it all modes of inquiring and
investigation traditionally employed or
useful to execute the authority
granted’’). This information is included
in the existing ICR.
It is reasonable for EPA to request the
parent company information. Once EPA
has this information, EPA will be able
to immediately use it to assist in
implementation of agency policy and
program goals including developing and
improving emission inventories and
enhancing the implementation of
programs aimed at reducing emissions
of GHGs. For more information, refer to
Section I.C of this preamble, where EPA
has further explained the immediate
usefulness of this information under the
CAA.
Definition of U.S. Parent Company:
The proposed rule included a
definition of ‘‘United States parent
company(s)’’ as follows: ‘‘United States
parent company(s) means the highestlevel United States company(s) with an
ownership interest in the reporting
entity as of December 31 of the reporting
year.’’
Comment: One commenter requested
that EPA clarify that ‘‘reporting year’’
means the year for which emissions data
are being reported and not the year
when the report is submitted to EPA.
Response: The intent in the proposal
was for ‘‘reporting year’’ to be
interpreted as the year during which
GHG data are monitored and collected.
The language has been clarified in the
final rule. The revised definition of U.S.
parent company in the final rule reads:
‘‘United States parent company(s)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
means the highest-level United States
company(s) with an ownership interest
in the reporting entity as of December
31 of the year for which data are being
reported.’’
Reporting by Foreign Owned
Companies:
EPA solicited comments on whether
facilities and suppliers owned by
foreign companies always have a U.S.based parent company as defined in the
proposed rule. EPA was interested in
receiving comments, data, and analysis
on whether there may be instances in
which foreign-owned facilities and
suppliers do not have a U.S. parent
company because we wanted to
determine if U.S. parent company
reporting would be appropriate for all
reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98.
No comments were received on this
topic, but some minor clarifying
changes were made in the final rule
requirements for parent company
reporting for foreign corporations. For
consistency, some of these minor
clarifying changes were also made in the
final rule requirements for parent
company reporting for multiple U.S.
companies. In the final rule, if the
reporting entity is entirely owned by a
foreign company, reporters must
provide the legal name and physical
address of the foreign company’s
highest-level company based in the U.S.
as the U.S. parent company, and report
100 percent ownership. If the reporting
entity is partially owned by a foreign
company and partially owned by one or
more U.S. companies, reporters provide
the legal name and physical address of
the foreign owner’s highest-level
company based in the U.S. as the U.S.
parent company, along with the legal
names and physical addresses of the
other U.S. parent companies and the
percent ownership of each of these
companies.
Reporting of Numeric Corporate
Identifiers:
In the preamble for the proposed rule,
we discussed a requirement to report a
numeric identifier for parent
company(s) in addition to the parent
company name. EPA requested
comments on corporate identifiers and
whether there are any additional
numeric identifiers that should be
considered for this final rule.
Ultimately, EPA chose not to require
reporting of a corporate numeric
identifier, upon review of comments
received and in recognition of the
limitations of the possible private and
public sources for such identifiers.
Comments: Numerous comments
stated that requiring a unique numeric
identifier for each parent company
would facilitate aggregation of the data
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57677
and would achieve the most accurate
reporter-to-parent linkages. These
commenters noted that inconsistencies
in reporting corporate parent names
(‘‘E.I. Du Pont De Nemours’’ versus ‘‘Du
Pont Inc.’’) increases the difficulty of the
reporter-to-parent aggregation and that
numerical identifiers would increase the
accuracy and consistency of the
reported data. While commenters
acknowledged the significant
limitations in the numeric identifiers
discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule, including Data Universal
Number System (DUNS), Committee on
Uniform Security Identification
Procedures (CUSIPs), Federal Employer
Identification Numbers (FEINs), and
stock tickers, some commenters
recommended using these identifiers, or
using new, EPA-generated identifiers.
Commenters noted that using numeric
identifiers could provide consistent and
accurate reporting that minimizes the
potential of data entry errors. Several
comments supported EPA’s decision not
to include a requirement to report
numeric corporate identifiers because
existing and available identifiers do not
meet EPA’s objective of collecting
comprehensive corporate identifier
information for all facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98.
Response: Based on a review of the
comments received and on prior
research, EPA decided to retain its
position as stated in the proposal, and
the final rule does not include reporting
of a corporate identifier for the reasons
described in this section of the
preamble.
EPA agrees with the comments that
numeric identifiers could potentially
facilitate data aggregation, however, the
currently available numeric identifiers
considered by EPA and proposed by
commenters have shortcomings such
that they would not enable EPA to
adequately aggregate data. As noted in
Section II.A of the preamble and in the
memorandum ‘‘Summary of Existing
Company Identifier System’’ (located in
docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925),
some of the identifiers considered (e.g.,
stock tickers, CUSIP, SEC central index
key, and LexisNexis) cover only public
companies. EPA expects that reporters
under the GHGRP will cover both public
and privately-held companies and does
not want to exclude a portion of
reporters from Agency analyses.
Furthermore, limiting the reporting of a
numeric identifier to only public
companies would place an additional
burden on only this subset of reporters.
The privately held databases, such as
DUNS and CUSIPs, require licensing
agreements, which potentially restrict
the public use of that data. Finally, in
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57678
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
accordance with Internal Revenue Code
6103, FEINs can only be collected and
released on a voluntary basis and EPA
would have no means to ensure that all
facilities/suppliers would report their
FEINs.
Additionally, the final rule requires
both the reporter’s parent company
name and the parent company’s
headquarters physical address, which is
intended to improve considerably on
EPA’s ability to uniquely identify
corporate parents. To address comments
related to difficulties in aggregating data
using the reported parent company
name, EPA plans to implement methods
to standardize the parent company
names reported. Standardizing the
parent company names will improve the
accuracy of aggregating data by parent
company name by limiting human
errors (e.g., typing entry errors), and
removing inconsistent abbreviations
(e.g., Co. vs. Company).
In response to comments suggesting
EPA assign new numeric identifiers to
parent companies, that task is outside
the scope of this rulemaking. However,
the Agency is broadly exploring future
development of unique, EPA-generated
numeric identifiers for parent
companies. These comments reinforce
EPA’s understanding that such
identifiers would be valuable for
aggregating facility level data to the
corporate level. Any development of
these identifiers would be a future
effort, and submission of such
identifiers is not included in this final
rule.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
B. NAICS Code(s)
The proposed rulemaking (75 FR
18455) includes a requirement to report
the primary NAICS code applicable to
each reporter, as well as any additional
NAICS codes in order of largest revenue
to smallest. The proposal defined
NAICS code as the six-digit code(s) that
represents the product(s)/activity(s)/
service(s) at a facility or supplier as
defined in ‘‘North American Industrial
Classification System Manual 2007,’’
available from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Technical
Information Service.
Inclusion of NAICS code reporting
was proposed to provide information to
assist EPA in aggregating and analyzing
the data collected under 40 CFR part 98
at the sector level.
1. Summary of NAICS Code Reporting
Requirements
After considering all of the comments
received, this final rule requires that
each facility or supplier required to
report under 40 CFR part 98 report its
primary NAICS code and any additional
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
applicable NAICS codes. For the
purposes of this rule, EPA considers a
reporter’s primary NAICS code to be the
six-digit code (or codes) that most
accurately describes the reporter’s
primary product/activity/service, as
defined in ‘‘North American Industry
Classification System Manual 2007,’’
available from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Technical
Information Service.16 The primary
NAICS code (or codes) is the product/
activity/service that is the principal
source of revenue for the facility or
supplier. For the purposes of this rule,
EPA considers additional NAICS codes
to be those codes that describe the
product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at the
facility, but that are not related to the
principal source of revenue.
The following instructions apply to
reporters regarding the reporting of
NAICS codes: Enter the six-digit NAICS
code that most accurately describes the
reporter’s principal product/activity/
service and designate it as ‘‘primary.’’
Each reporter must provide one primary
NAICS code, but may also designate a
second code as primary if the reporter
has two distinct products/activities/
services providing comparable revenue.
Provide all additional NAICS codes that
describe the reporter’s products/
activities/services but that are not
related to the principal source of
revenue. Federal facilities should report
the NAICS code that most closely
represents the activities taking place at
the site. For example, a Federallyowned, fossil fuel-fired electric power
plant would be classified as NAICS
221112 — Fossil Fuel Electric Power
Generation. For additional guidance on
how to determine the proper NAICS
code(s), go to https://www.census.gov/
eos/www/naics/.
The use of the term ‘‘primary NAICS
code’’ in this rule and the methodology
for determining the primary NAICS
code are consistent with the NAICS
code use and methodology used by the
U.S. Census Bureau and other
government agencies. In addition, the
instructions for reporting NAICS codes
in the final rule are similar to those used
by EPA’s TRI and other EPA
information collections.
16 The Office of Management and Budget has
proposed revisions to the North American Industry
Classification System for 2012 onward. See ‘‘North
American Industry Classification System—Updates
for 2012’’ 75 FR26855, May 12, 2010. These
revisions will not affect this rulemaking, which
requires reporters to use the NAICS codes defined
in the North American Industry Classification
System Manual 2007, regardless of whether these
codes are updated in the future.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. Summary of Major Changes Since
Proposal
The major changes since proposal are
identified in the following list. The
rationale for these changes can be found
in Section II.B.3 of this preamble:
• In the final rule, reporters must
provide one primary NAICS code and
may also provide a second primary
NAICS code if they have two distinct
products/activities/services providing
comparable revenue. The proposed rule
did not specify the number of primary
NAICS codes that should be reported.
• In this final rule, no ordering of the
additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS
codes is required. The proposed rule
required that additional NAICS codes be
entered in order of largest revenue to
smallest.
3. Summary of Public Comments and
Responses
This section provides a summary of
the comments and responses on EPA’s
proposal to require reporting of primary
and all additional NAICS codes by
facilities and suppliers subject to 40
CFR part 98.
Primary NAICS Code Reporting
Requirements:
Comments: Many commenters
supported the NAICS codes reporting
requirements as proposed. Commenters
stated that requiring the full six-digit
NAICS code(s) will allow data users to
connect reported GHG data with other
information on U.S. industries,
facilitating comparisons within and
across industry sectors. Other
commenters noted that collection of
NAICS codes greatly expands the utility
of 40 CFR part 98 data, and provides
important data relevant to industry
sector analyses. One industry source
added that NAICS codes are easily
obtained.
Two commenters requested that EPA
allow reporting of more than one
primary NAICS code. These
commenters stated that this is
particularly important for large facilities
that consist of separate economic units,
such as a petroleum refinery and a
chemical plant. The commenters added
that this could be important if any
future climate change legislation
differentiates regulatory requirements
according to industry sector or NAICS
codes, where requirements for refineries
and chemical plants could differ.
Accordingly, the commenters
concluded, EPA should ensure that the
final rule and any required electronic
reporting tool allow for entering more
than one primary NAICS code per
reporter.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Finally, one commenter stated that
EPA should obtain primary NAICS
codes from the Census Bureau.
Response: EPA agrees with the
commenters that the NAICS code
information will provide a valuable data
element for sector-level analyses. EPA
considered using three- and four-digit
NAICS codes, but proposed and is
requiring reporting of the six-digit
NAICS codes because they provide more
detailed information for analyses. In
addition, use of the six-digit NAICS
codes is consistent with TRI and other
EPA databases, allowing sector-level
data to be compared across EPA data
sets.
Upon consideration of the comments
received regarding multiple primary
NAICS, EPA requires reporting in the
final rule of one primary NAICS code
that most accurately describes the
reporting entity’s primary product/
activity/service. A reporting entity that
has two distinct products/activities/
services providing comparable revenue
may report a second primary NAICS
code. Allowing a second NAICS code to
be designated as a primary NAICS code
gives facilities and suppliers that have
two distinct lines of business with
comparable revenue the ability to more
accurately reflect the nature of their
operations.
In response to the commenters’
statement that the electronic reporting
tool for the GHGRP should allow entry
of more than one primary NAICS code
per reporter, EPA’s reporting tool will
require the reporters to designate one
NAICS code as primary, and will allow
up to two NAICS codes to be designated
as primary.
EPA also considered whether primary
NAICS codes could be obtained from
the Census Bureau, as suggested by one
commenter. However, the facility-level
Census Bureau data are confidential as
specified in U.S. Code Title 13 17, and
cannot be accessed by EPA. Therefore,
the final rule requires primary and all
additional NAICS codes to be reported
to EPA by the reporting entity.
Additional NAICS Codes Reporting
Requirements:
Comments: Several commenters
opposed EPA’s proposal that the
additional (i.e., non-primary) NAICS
codes reported be listed in the order of
the largest source of revenue to the
smallest. Comments in opposition stated
this ranking: (1) Would add an
additional and unnecessary burden and
expense; (2) does not add value to the
17 U.S. Code Title 13 guarantees the
confidentiality of census information and
establishes penalties for disclosing this information.
See https://www.census.gov/geo/www/luca2010/
luca_title13.html.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
emissions information being reported;
(3) is an arbitrary exercise, where
different companies, or different
employees within a company, could
derive different ranking of the
additional NAICS codes; (4) is
inconsistent with TRI requirements
where non-primary NAICS codes are
reported, but not ranked; and (5) could
disclose CBI that could be accessed by
foreign or domestic competitors. One
commenter suggested that reporting of
NAICS codes beyond the primary
NAICS codes should be voluntary.
Response: EPA carefully considered
the information provided by
commenters on reporting additional
(i.e., non-primary) NAICS codes in
descending order based on revenue. As
a result of this review, the final rule
does not require that the additional
NAICS codes be reported in a particular
order. After reviewing the comments
received, EPA agrees that ordering the
additional NAICS codes by revenue
could result in added burden that may
not provide additional benefit compared
to a list of additional NAICS codes that
is not ordered, because emissions are
not necessarily related to revenue.
Ranking of additional NAICS codes,
therefore, is not required in the final
rule. The comments regarding the
ranking of additional NAICS codes,
including the possibility of different
rankings by different employees, the
need for consistency with TRI, and the
possibility of divulging CBI are not
addressed because EPA has determined
that requiring ranking will not provide
the Agency with useful additional data
when compared to the burden.
In response to the comment
suggesting that reporting of additional
NAICS codes be voluntary, EPA retains
the proposed approach that requires
mandatory reporting of all additional
NAICS codes. To conduct analyses of
the GHG emissions associated with
different sectors or different types of
operations, it is critical that these data
be reported consistently among
reporters. If reporting of additional (i.e.,
non-primary) NAICS were voluntary, it
would not be possible to distinguish if
a reporter entered only one NAICS code
because only one type of operation is
conducted, or if only one NAICS code
was entered due to a voluntary decision
not to enter additional NAICS codes.
This inconsistency in reporting
additional NAICS codes would limit the
value of analyses characterizing nonprimary operations. To maintain the
ability to conduct robust analyses using
the reported NAICS codes, reporting of
additional NAICS codes is required in
the final rule.
Definition of NAICS Codes:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57679
In the proposed rule, EPA provided a
definition for ‘‘North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes’’ as
follows: ‘‘North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code(s)
means the six-digit code(s) that
represents the product(s)/activity(s)/
service(s) at a facility or supplier as
defined in ‘‘North American Industrial
Classification System Manual 2007,’’
available from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Technical
Information Service.’’ No comments
were received on this definition, and no
changes were made in the final rule to
the definition of ‘‘North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes.’’
C. Cogeneration
In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR
18455), EPA proposed requirements for
reporting the use of cogeneration by
indicating (i.e., checking yes or no)
whether some or all of the reported GHG
emissions are from one or more
cogeneration units. EPA also solicited
comment on whether this reporting
should be mandatory or voluntary. In
the proposal, EPA defined a
cogeneration unit as a unit that
produces electrical energy and useful
thermal energy for industrial,
commercial, or heating or cooling
purposes, through the sequential or
simultaneous use of the original fuel
energy.
1. Summary of Cogeneration Reporting
Requirements
The final rule requires reporters to
indicate whether reported emissions
include emissions from a cogeneration
unit (yes or no) located at the facility.
Cogeneration units can result in net
reductions (i.e., across facilities) of GHG
emissions compared to separate power
and heat generation.
Information on the types and
characteristics of facilities that employ
cogeneration technologies and the
performance of cogeneration units could
be important to future development of
GHG mitigation strategies. EPA
recognizes that the information required
under this rule may not, by itself, be
sufficient to determine the actual
quantity of GHG emissions occurring
from cogeneration units at individual
reporting facilities, companies or NAICS
sectors. It also does not provide the
degree to which those cogeneration
emissions displace fossil fuel or other
fuel source emissions from central
station generation plants. However, the
information reported will allow EPA
and States to identify facilities using
cogeneration. In addition, EPA
recognizes that not all emissions at
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57680
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
individual reporting facilities with
cogeneration are attributable to the
cogeneration unit(s). As such, it should
not be inferred that all emissions at an
individual reporting facility with
cogeneration are attributed to the
cogeneration unit(s).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
2. Summary of Major Changes Since
Proposal
The final rule retains the proposed
rule language and requires reporters to
indicate whether reported emissions
include emissions from a cogeneration
unit. Reporting of this information is
mandatory.
3. Summary of Public Comments and
Responses
This section provides a summary of
the comments and responses on EPA’s
proposal to require reporters to identify
use of a cogeneration unit located at the
facility.
Cogeneration Reporting
Requirements:
Comments: Numerous comments
strongly supported EPA’s proposal to
require reporters to indicate whether
some or all of the reported GHG
emissions are from a cogeneration unit.
Commenters stated that collecting the
information on cogeneration use will
help EPA understand where the practice
is being used, and how to encourage its
use where appropriate. None of the
comments opposed EPA’s proposal to
collect cogeneration information.
One commenter requested that EPA
provide in the rule additional
discussion of the benefits of
cogeneration technology as an efficient
method to reduce net GHG emissions.
This commenter also requested that EPA
require power production facilities to
report GHG emissions on a net GHG per
usable energy produced basis to ensure
that the benefits of total system
efficiency are recognized.
Another commenter recommended
EPA consider whether additional
information on cogeneration units
should be required in the future, such
as their capacity or how frequently they
are used.
Finally, a commenter recommended
that EPA clarify and/or modify the rule
to state that: (1) Local Distribution
Companies (LDCs) should be required to
report only the presence of cogeneration
units at facilities owned and operated
by the LDC; and (2) as suppliers, LDCs
are not responsible for reporting
cogeneration units owned and operated
by the LDC’s individual customers.
Response: EPA agrees with comments
that the cogeneration information will
be informative, enabling EPA to identify
the types and characteristics of facilities
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
that employ cogeneration technologies.
By collecting this information annually,
EPA will also be able to track changes
in the use of this technology in
individual sectors and across the U.S.
economy.
EPA agrees with the comment that
there are efficiencies related to the use
of cogeneration. However, the regulatory
framework for the GHGRP is not the
appropriate place to describe the
benefits of a technology.
In response to the comment
requesting that power production
facilities report GHG emissions on a net
GHG per usable energy produced, the
information the commenter asks EPA to
collect is well beyond the intended
scope of this rule. The scope of this rule
is to obtain general information on
cogeneration use for future development
of GHG mitigation strategies and not to
support the development of standards of
performance for industrial facilities or
to amend the units in which data are
required to be reported in 40 CFR part
98.
In response to the comments
requesting EPA collect more detailed
information on reporters’ cogeneration
units, EPA recognizes that the
information required under this rule
will not, by itself, be sufficient to
determine the actual quantity of GHG
emissions occurring from cogeneration
units at individual reporting facilities,
companies or NAICS sectors. The
cogeneration information required
under the final rule will improve EPA’s
understanding of the current
implementation of cogeneration while
minimizing burden on reporters;
therefore, EPA is not currently exploring
expansion of the cogeneration reporting
requirements.
EPA agrees with the comment
regarding the requirements for LDCs to
report cogeneration. It was not our
intent to require LDCs to collect
cogeneration information on their
customers. EPA is clarifying in this
response that LDCs are required to
report the presence of cogeneration
facilities owned and operated by the
LDC, but are not required to report
whether units owned and operated by
the LDC’s customers have cogeneration
units.
Comments on Making Cogeneration
Reporting Voluntary:
EPA requested comments on whether
the cogeneration reporting in the final
rule should be mandatory or voluntary.
No comments supported voluntary
reporting of the cogeneration
information; however, many
commenters stated their support for
EPA’s proposal to require that reporters
indicate whether or not any of their
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
reported emissions are from a
cogeneration unit at the facility. As in
the proposed rule, the final rule
includes mandatory reporting to
indicate if any reported emissions are
from cogeneration units located at the
facility.
Definition of Cogeneration:
The proposed rule included a
definition of ‘‘cogeneration unit’’ as
follows: ‘‘Cogeneration unit means a
unit that produces electrical energy and
useful thermal energy for industrial,
commercial, or heating or cooling
purposes, through the sequential or
simultaneous use of the original fuel
energy.’’ EPA based this definition of
cogeneration on the Agency’s Acid Rain
Program to promote consistency and
comparable data collection across EPA
regulatory programs. No comments were
received on this definition, and no
changes were made in the final rule to
the definition of ‘‘cogeneration’’
included in the proposed rule.
D. Frequency of Reporting
In the proposed rulemaking (75 FR
18455), EPA proposed that facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 be
required to submit information
regarding their U.S. parent company(s),
their NAICS code(s), and whether or not
any of their reported emissions are from
a cogeneration unit, on an annual basis,
as part of their annual reports. EPA
further proposed that regulated entities
be required to report this information as
it exists on December 31 of the year for
which data are being reported, to be
consistent with other EPA reporting
programs, such as TRI.
1. Summary of the Final Rule
Requirements
Under the final rule, facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 are
required to annually submit information
regarding their U.S. parent company(s),
their NAICS code(s), and whether or not
any of their reported emissions are from
a cogeneration unit, as part of their
annual GHG reporting. Regulated
entities report this information as it
exists on December 31 of the year for
which data are being reported. Facilities
will be required to report this data
beginning in 2011 for the 2010 reporting
year.
2. Summary of Major Changes Since
Proposal
There have been no changes since
proposal.
3. Summary of Public Comments and
Responses
This section provides a summary of
the comments and responses on EPA’s
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
proposal to require annual reporting for
the data elements added to 40 CFR part
98 in the final rule (i.e., U.S. parent
company(s), NAICS code(s), and
cogeneration by facilities and suppliers).
While EPA was interested in receiving
comments on the proposal in its
entirety, EPA specifically solicited
comments on the utility and burden of
updating the additional information
required by the proposed rule on a more
frequent basis than annually, for
example, whenever changes occur with
respect to a reporter’s U.S. parent
company or NAICS code(s).
Comments: The comments received
largely supported EPA’s proposal to
require reporting of U.S. parent
company(s), NAICS code(s), and
cogeneration units on an annual basis,
rather than more frequently. One
commenter supporting annual reporting
stated a concern with the potential
burden and complexity of updating
corporate parent information more often
than annually. For more frequent
reporting, the commenter added, EPA
would need to identify a specific need
for the increased level of detail.
One commenter noted that if
reporting were required quarterly, data
could be aggregated to each parent
company’s fiscal year. Another
commenter stated that requiring updates
to be reported whenever a change
occurs in the reporter’s parent company
or NAICS code should not be a problem.
This commenter added that the annual
reporting requirement, however, may be
sufficient.
Response: EPA recognizes that a
reporter’s U.S. parent company(s) and/
or NAICS code(s) may change during
the course of the year. In some instances
this information may even change
multiple times throughout the year.
However, EPA agrees with the
commenters that requiring updates to
these data elements more than once a
year, such as every time there is a
change in a reporter’s U.S. parent
company(s) or NAICS code(s), would
result in an increased burden for
minimal additional information. In
addition, requiring annual reporting
would be consistent with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 98.
Therefore, the final rule requires annual
reporting of reporters’ U.S. parent
company(s), NAICS code(s), and
whether or not any of their reported
emissions are from a cogeneration unit,
as part of their regularly scheduled
annual reports, as proposed. More
frequent reporting, such as when a
change in parent company or NAICS
occurs, is not required.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
57681
E. Applicability of the Reporting
Requirements
F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and
Responses
1. Summary of Applicability of the
Reporting Requirements
EPA also received comments of a
more general nature that did not relate
specifically to reporting of parent
company, NAICS codes, cogeneration,
frequency of reporting, or applicability.
These comments and EPA’s responses
are summarized in this section.
Comments: Two commenters voiced
general support for this rule. The
commenters asserted that the inclusion
of the requirements to report NAICS
codes and corporate information will
enable researchers to conduct analyses
of corporate GHG emissions. Another
commenter voiced opposition to the
rule, stating that the government already
has enough rules and regulations.
Response: EPA thanks the
commenters for their input. The focus of
this rule is to collect accurate data on
U.S. GHGs from suppliers and facilities
above specified thresholds for use in
analyzing and developing potential
GHG policies and environmental
programs. This rule will help EPA carry
out its duties under the CAA while
adding a very minimal burden to
reporting entities.
Comment: One commenter requested
that EPA make the information collected
under this rule available to the public
and easily accessible to all interested
parties.
Response: EPA published a proposed
confidentiality determination on July 7,
2010 (75 FR 39094), which addressed
the confidentiality of data reported
under 40 CFR part 98. In that action,
EPA proposed which specific data
elements would be treated as CBI and
which data elements must be available
to the public under CAA section 114.
EPA has received several comments on
the proposal, and is in the process of
considering these comments. A final
determination will be issued before any
data are released, and data that are not
determined to be confidential will be
published in a way that will be easily
accessible to the public.
Comment: One commenter suggested
that EPA should develop a
comprehensive company-level GHG
inventory.
Response: While the development of
a comprehensive company-level GHG
inventory is outside the scope of this
rulemaking, EPA notes the commenter’s
suggestion and thanks the commenter
for their input. For a discussion of why
EPA chose to require facility-level
reporting, please see Section II.F of the
preamble of the final Part 98 (74 FR
56273, October 30, 2009) as well as
Section II.A of the preamble to this final
rule. For a discussion of why EPA chose
The final rule applies to all reporters;
it requires all facilities and suppliers
subject to 40 CFR part 98 to report the
additional information included in this
rule. The descriptions of the terms
‘‘primary NAICS code(s),’’ and
‘‘additional NAICS code(s),’’ and the
definitions of ‘‘United States parent
company’’ and ‘‘cogeneration unit’’ in
the final rule apply only to this rule,
which adds these data elements to the
list of items that must be reported under
40 CFR 98.3(c). The definitions and
descriptions of terms in this final rule
do not change the applicability of any
subpart in the promulgated 40 CFR part
98. They also do not change the level of
reporting or who is required to submit
reports.
The definition of United States parent
company does not override or change
the meaning of similar terms that refer
to company level or corporate level
requirements. Many subparts (including
40 CFR part 98, subparts A, C, G, K, P,
Q, R, Y, GG, and HH) use the term
‘‘company records,’’ which is defined in
40 CFR part 98, subpart A. The term
‘‘corporate level’’ is used in 40 CFR part
98, subpart MM to require importers
and exporters to report at the corporate
level, rather than the facility level.
‘‘Corporate documents’’ are referred to in
40 CFR part 98, subpart A. None of
these terms, definitions, or associated
requirements are affected by the
definition of ‘‘United States parent
company’’ in the final rule.
In addition, the definition of United
States parent company in the final rule
does not affect the definitions of
‘‘importer’’ and ‘‘exporter’’ in 40 CFR part
98, subpart A, or the applicability of the
suppliers source categories. The
definition in the final rule also does not
affect the term ‘‘local distribution
company’’ as described in 40 CFR part
98, subpart NN. These terms retain their
meaning in 40 CFR part 98.
2. Summary of Major Changes Since
Proposal
There have been no changes since the
proposal.
3. Summary of Public Comments and
Responses
No comments were received on the
applicability of the reporting
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57682
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
a 25,000 metric ton CO2e reporting
threshold for most sources, please see
Section II.E. of the preamble of the final
Part 98 (74 FR 56271, October 30, 2009)
as well as Section II.A of the preamble
to this final rule.
G. Correction to Subpart A
We also are correcting a drafting error
in the revision to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) that
was published on July 12, 2010 (75 FR
39758). In the July 12, 2010 notice, we
restructured 40 CFR 98.2(a) to move the
lists of source categories that are subject
to the rule from the text into tables. This
restructuring revision made no
substantive change to the applicability
provisions of the rule, but just
reformatted that section of the rule to
better accommodate the addition of new
source categories for which reporting
would become effective in future years.
To make this change required
conforming changes to the text of 40
CFR 98.2(a) to refer to the tables. The
July 12, 2010 change to 40 CFR
98.2(a)(2) reads that the rule applies to:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
A facility that contains any source category
that is listed in Table A–4 of this subpart that
emits 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per
year in combined emissions from stationary
fuel combustion units, miscellaneous uses of
carbonate, and all applicable source
categories that are listed in Table A–3 and
Table A–4 of this subpart.
The published clause inadvertently
omitted the word ‘‘and’’ prior to the
clause ‘‘* * * that emits 25,000 metric
tons CO2e * * *’’ Despite this omission,
the regulatory text as it appears in the
July 12, 2010 final rule can and should
be interpreted to apply to a facility that
contains any source category listed in
Table A–4 of this subpart if combined
emissions from all applicable source
categories at the facility are 25,000
metric tons CO2e per year or more.
Nonetheless, restoring the inadvertently
omitted word ‘‘and’’ to the paragraph
makes it absolutely clear that the 25,000
metric tons CO2e threshold applies at
the facility level and not at the source
category level. This interpretation is
clear from the original rule and from the
preamble to the proposal for the subpart
A restructuring (75 FR 12451 and 75 FR
12489) and the preamble to the final
rule for the restructuring (75 FR 39739).
As published, 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) is
technically correct, but reinserting the
‘‘and’’ makes it clearer and less subject
to misinterpretation, and makes the
sentence structure parallel to that of the
original rule text. Therefore, we are
revising 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) by restoring
the word ‘‘and’’ to read as follows
(emphasis added):
A facility that contains any source category
that is listed in Table A–4 of this subpart and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
that emits 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more
per year in combined emissions from
stationary fuel combustion units,
miscellaneous uses of carbonate, and all
applicable source categories that are listed in
Table A–3 and Table A–4 of this subpart.
III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule
This section of the preamble examines
the costs and economic impacts of the
final rulemaking and the estimated
economic impacts of the rule on affected
entities, including estimated impacts on
small entities. Complete detail on the
economic impacts of the final rule can
be found in the text of the Economic
Impact Analysis (EIA) for the final rule
(located in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–
2009–0925).
A. How were compliance costs
estimated?
1. Summary of Method Used To
Estimate Compliance Costs
The cost analysis estimates the
incremental contributions to total
reporting burden expected under 40
CFR part 98 and compliance costs
associated with reporting the data
elements described above. EPA
estimated compliance costs based on the
time reporters spend meeting the
requirements and the associated labor
wage rates. EPA’s estimated costs of
compliance are discussed in this section
of the preamble and in greater detail in
Section 4 of the EIA.
Labor Costs. All of the reporting cost
estimates include the time of managers,
lawyers, and technical staff in both the
private sector and the public sector. To
reflect that both management and
technical staff will be involved in
reporting the above data elements, an
overall blended wage rate was
developed based on estimates from the
TRI program for similar data element
reporting at similar facilities.
Management staff is estimated to be
involved in approximately 0.8 percent
of the reporting, while technical staff is
likely to be needed for the remaining
99.2 percent. Thus, the blended wage
rate used in this analysis is $60.22 per
hour. The amount of time required for
facilities with one owner is 80 minutes
per facility in the first year and 40
minutes per facility in subsequent years;
time estimated for facilities with more
than one owner is 125 minutes per
facility in the first year and 85 minutes
per facility in subsequent years.
Cost basis. The cost analysis is based
on facilities and suppliers currently
subject to 40 CFR part 98, including
subparts that were finalized after EPA
proposed the rule to require reporting of
corporate parent information, NAICS
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
codes and cogeneration.18 Specifically,
the finalization of 40 CFR part 98,
subparts T (Magnesium Production), FF
(Underground Coal Mines), TT
(Industrial Waste Landfills), and II
(Industrial Wastewater Treatment)
resulted in a higher number of facilities
and suppliers subject to this final rule.
The analysis does not account for those
expected to be added to 40 CFR part 98
through upcoming actions. The methods
and assumptions used to estimate the
compliance costs for facilities and
suppliers currently subject to the rule
would likewise apply to those facilities
and suppliers that may be added to the
40 CFR part 98 reporting program in the
future. The addition of new facilities or
suppliers would therefore increase the
total compliance costs in proportion to
the increase of the reporting universe.
Accordingly, EPA does not expect the
burden for newly added industries to
change the conclusions of this economic
analysis.
B. What are the costs of the rule?
1. Summary of Costs
As shown in Table 3 of this preamble,
the total national cost under this final
rule is approximately $944,000 in the
first year and about $470,000 in
subsequent years (all estimates are in
$2006). Costs include a public sector
burden estimate of $90,000 in the first
year and $40,000 in subsequent years
for program implementation and data
verification activities. See Table 3 in
Section IV.A of this preamble for a
summary of the costs.
C. What are the economic impacts of the
rule?
1. Summary of Economic Impacts
EPA prepared an economic analysis to
evaluate the impacts of the final rule.
The analysis estimates the private direct
compliance costs per facility and
provides a national burden estimate,
which includes public costs associated
with program implementation and
verification activities. Reporting costs
were estimated to be less than $100 per
facility. As a result, the rule is unlikely
to result in significant changes in firms’
production decisions or economic
choices.
18 See Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases
from Magnesium Production, Underground Coal
Mines, Industrial Wastewater Treatment, and
Industrial Waste Landfills; Final Rule (75 FR 39736,
July 12, 2010).
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
D. What are the impacts of the rule on
small businesses?
1. Summary of Impacts on Small
Businesses
As required by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) and the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA), EPA assessed
the potential impacts of the rule on
small entities (small businesses,
governments, and non-profit
organizations). (See Section IV.C of this
preamble for definitions of small
entities.)
EPA conducted a screening
assessment comparing compliance costs
for affected industry sectors to industryspecific receipts data for establishments
owned by small businesses. This ratio
constitutes a ‘‘sales’’ test that computes
the annualized compliance costs of this
rule as a percentage of sales and
determines whether the ratio exceeds
some level (e.g., 1 percent or 3 percent).
The average ratio of annualized
reporting program costs to revenues of
small entities would be less than 0.01
percent. As a result, EPA has concluded
that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
57683
Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore
not subject to review under the EO.
Although this is not a significant
economic rule, EPA prepared an
analysis of the potential costs and
benefits associated with the final rule to
provide insights on the potential effects.
This analysis is contained in the
Economic Impact Analysis. A copy of
the analysis is available in the docket
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925) for this
action and is briefly summarized here.
In the economic analysis, EPA
identified the final rule’s compliance
burden and the costs. The cost analysis,
presented in Section III.B of this
preamble, estimates the total annualized
burden, which is presented in Table 3
of this preamble.
TABLE 3—COST SUMMARY UNDER THE FINAL RULEMAKING (IN THOUSANDS, $2006)
Cost
Year 1
Subsequent years
National compliance ................................................................................................................................
Public .......................................................................................................................................................
$854
90
$430
40
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
944
470
Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding.
Overall, EPA has concluded that the
costs of collecting U.S. parent
company(s), NAICS codes, and
cogeneration information as part of 40
CFR part 98 are outweighed by the
potential benefits of more
comprehensive information about GHG
emissions.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements for this final rule have
been submitted for approval to OMB
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An ICR document
was previously prepared for 40 CFR part
98 and was assigned EPA ICR number
2300.03. The information collection
requirements of this amendment to 40
CFR part 98 are documented in an
additional ICR document, which was
assigned EPA ICR number 2374.02.
The data collected through this final
rule would be immediately available to
EPA and could be used for the purposes
of providing additional information to
support more effective research and
develop actions to address GHG
emissions. For example, corporate
parent and NAICS data would assist
EPA in developing and improving
emission inventories, as well as
characterizing emissions data in several
different ways. A more detailed
understanding of the sources and
operational categories of GHG emissions
could lead to improvements in air
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
pollution emissions information that is
relied upon to develop effective control
strategies. For example, EPA could use
the NAICS code information gathered by
this rule to compare results both within
industries and across industry sectors.
In addition, the information gathered
through this rule will be immediately
available to enhance EPA’s
implementation of various
nonregulatory programs aimed at
encouraging voluntary reductions of
GHG emissions. Under the authority of
CAA section 103, EPA has launched a
variety of nonregulatory programs
aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs.
The additional data will assist EPA by
providing more detailed information on
possible sources, and facility operations
within industrial sectors for EPA to
work with in the context of these
programs.
This information collection is
mandatory and will be carried out under
CAA section 114. EPA published a
proposed confidentiality determination
on July 7, 2010 (75 FR 39094) that
specified which data reporting elements
in 40 CFR part 98 would be treated as
CBI and which data elements must be
available to the public under CAA
section 114. A final determination will
be issued before any part 98 data are
released.
As outlined in ICR number 2374.02,
the projected average annual cost and
hour burden for non-Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
respondents is about $571,000 and
9,500 hours. The estimated average
annual burden per response is 0.15
hour; the frequency of response is
annual for all respondents that must
comply with the final rule; and the
estimated average number of likely
respondents per year is 10,551. The cost
burden to respondents resulting from
the collection of information includes
the total capital cost annualized over the
equipment’s expected useful life
(averaging $0), a total operation and
maintenance component (averaging $0
per year), and a labor cost component
(averaging $571,000). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). These cost numbers
differ from those shown elsewhere in
the EIA (EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925)
because ICR costs represent the average
cost over the first three years of the rule,
whereas the EIA reports costs separately
for the first and subsequent years of the
rule. Also, the total cost estimate of the
rule in the EIA includes the cost to the
Agency to administer the program. The
ICR differentiates between respondent
burden and cost to the Agency.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57684
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute,
unless the agency certifies that the rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of the final rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
as defined by the Small Business
Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of the final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The additional per-entity costs under
the final rule are substantially smaller
(less than $81 in year 1 and $41 in
subsequent years) than the burden for
the overall rule. The costs are therefore
not enough to constitute a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The small
entities directly regulated by the final
rule include small businesses across all
sectors encompassed by the rule, small
governmental jurisdictions and small
non-profits. We have determined that
some small businesses will be affected
because their production processes emit
GHGs that must be reported, or because
they have stationary combustion units
on site that emit GHGs that must be
reported. Small governments and small
non-profits are generally affected
because they have regulated landfills or
stationary combustion units on site, or
because they own a local distribution
company subject to 40 CFR part 98,
subpart NN (natural gas suppliers).
At promulgation of 40 CFR part 98,
EPA examined the impact on small
entities (74 FR 56369, October 30, 2009).
In addition, EPA described the steps
taken by EPA to reduce the impact of 40
CFR part 98 on small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531–1538, requires Federal agencies,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
unless otherwise prohibited by law, to
assess the effects of their regulatory
actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector.
Federal agencies must also develop a
plan to provide notice to small
governments that might be significantly
or uniquely affected by any regulatory
requirements. The plan must enable
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates and must
inform, educate, and advise small
governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
The final rule does not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or the private sector in
any one year. As shown in the EIA
(EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0925), EPA
estimated the several national cost
estimates and found annual
expenditures were below $100 million
threshold. Thus, the final rule is not
subject to the requirements of UMRA
sections 202 or 205.
The final rule is also not subject to the
requirements of UMRA section 203
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The
final new rule requires facilities and
suppliers already subject to 40 CFR part
98 to provide additional data in each
annual GHG report, and the additional
data elements required are the same for
all reporters (private and public). In
addition, EPA’s small entity analysis
shows the average ratio of annualized
reporting program costs to revenues
would be less than 0.01 percent.
This final rule amends 40 CFR part 98
and applies directly to reporters that
supply fuel or industrial gases that
when used emit GHGs, and to reporters
that directly emit GHGs. The final rule
does not apply to governmental entities
unless the government entity owns a
facility that directly emits GHGs above
threshold levels such as a landfill or
large stationary combustion source. In
addition, the final rule does not impose
any implementation responsibilities on
State, local, or Tribal governments and
it is not expected to increase the cost of
existing regulatory programs managed
by those governments. Thus, the
impacts on governments affected by the
final rule are expected to be minimal.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in EO
13132. However, for a more detailed
discussion about how 40 CFR part 98
relates to existing State programs, please
see Section II of the preamble to the
final Part 98 (74 FR 56266, October 30,
2009).
This final rule applies directly to
reporters that supply fuel or chemicals
that when used emit GHGs or facilities
that directly emit GHGs. It does not
apply to governmental entities unless
the government entity owns a facility
that directly emits GHGs above
threshold levels such as a landfill or
large stationary combustion source, so
relatively few government facilities
would be affected. This final rule also
does not limit the power of States or
localities to collect GHG data and/or
regulate GHG emissions. Thus, EO
13132 does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This final rule is not expected to have
Tribal implications, as specified in EO
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The final rule applies directly to entities
that supply fuel or chemicals that when
used emit GHGs or facilities that
directly emit GHGs. This final rule does
not pose significant costs on either a
per-entity or national basis; few, if any,
facilities or suppliers that are expected
to be affected by the final rule are
anticipated to be owned by Tribal
governments. This final rule also does
not limit the power of Tribes to collect
GHG data and/or regulate GHG
emissions. Thus, EO 13175 does not
apply to the final rule.
Although EO 13175 does not apply to
this final rule, EPA sought opportunities
to provide information to Tribal
governments and representatives during
development of the rule, as documented
in the preamble to the promulgated final
Part 98 (74 FR 56371).
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it does not establish
an environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to EO 13211
(66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because
it is not a significant regulatory action
under EO 12866.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104–
113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to
use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications,
test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This final rule does not involve
technical standards. Therefore, EPA is
not considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. The final rule does not
affect the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment
because it addresses information
collection and reporting.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective November 22, 2010.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Greenhouse gases, Suppliers, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 16, 2010.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
■
PART 98—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 98
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart A—[Amended]
2. Section 98.2 is amended by revising
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:
■
§ 98.2
Who must report?
(a) * * *
(2) A facility that contains any source
category that is listed in Table A–4 of
this subpart and that emits 25,000
metric tons CO2e or more per year in
combined emissions from stationary
fuel combustion units, miscellaneous
uses of carbonate, and all applicable
source categories that are listed in Table
A–3 and Table A–4 of this subpart. For
these facilities, the annual GHG report
must cover stationary fuel combustion
sources (subpart C of this part),
miscellaneous use of carbonates
(subpart U of this part), and all
applicable source categories listed in
Table A–3 and Table A–4 of this
subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 98.3 is amended as follows:
■ a. By adding paragraph (c)(4)(v).
■ b. By adding paragraph (c)(10).
■ c. By adding paragraph (c)(11).
§ 98.3 What are the general monitoring,
reporting, recordkeeping and verification
requirements of this part?
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00029
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
57685
(c) * * *
(4) * * *
(v) Indicate (yes or no) whether
reported emissions include emissions
from a cogeneration unit located at the
facility.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) NAICS code(s) that apply to the
reporting entity. (i) Primary NAICS
code. Report the NAICS code that most
accurately describes the reporting
entity’s primary product/activity/
service. The primary product/activity/
service is the principal source of
revenue for the reporting entity. A
reporting entity that has two distinct
products/activities/services providing
comparable revenue may report a
second primary NAICS code.
(ii) Additional NAICS code(s). Report
all additional NAICS codes that describe
all product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at the
reporting entity that are not related to
the principal source of revenue.
(11) Legal name(s) and physical
address(es) of the highest-level United
States parent company(s) of the
reporting entity and the percentage of
ownership interest for each listed parent
company as of December 31 of the year
for which data are being reported
according to the following instructions:
(i) If the reporting entity is entirely
owned by a single United States
company that is not owned by another
company, provide that company’s legal
name and physical address as the
United States parent company and
report 100 percent ownership.
(ii) If the reporting entity is entirely
owned by a single United States
company that is, itself, owned by
another company (e.g., it is a division or
subsidiary of a higher-level company),
provide the legal name and physical
address of the highest-level company in
the ownership hierarchy as the United
States parent company and report 100
percent ownership.
(iii) If the reporting entity is owned by
more than one United States company
(e.g., company A owns 40 percent,
company B owns 35 percent, and
company C owns 25 percent), provide
the legal names and physical addresses
of all the highest-level companies with
an ownership interest as the United
States parent companies, and report the
percent ownership of each company.
(iv) If the reporting entity is owned by
a joint venture or a cooperative, the joint
venture or cooperative is its own United
States parent company. Provide the
legal name and physical address of the
joint venture or cooperative as the
United States parent company, and
report 100 percent ownership by the
joint venture or cooperative.
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
57686
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
(v) If the reporting entity is entirely
owned by a foreign company, provide
the legal name and physical address of
the foreign company’s highest-level
company based in the United States as
the United States parent company, and
report 100 percent ownership.
(vi) If the reporting entity is partially
owned by a foreign company and
partially owned by one or more U.S.
companies, provide the legal name and
physical address of the foreign
company’s highest-level company based
in the United States, along with the
legal names and physical addresses of
the other U.S. parent companies, and
report the percent ownership of each of
these companies.
(vii) If the reporting entity is a
federally owned facility, report ‘‘U.S.
Government’’ and and do not report
physical address or percent ownership.
*
*
*
*
*
3. Section 98.6 is amended by adding
definitions of ‘‘Cogeneration unit,’’
‘‘North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code(s),’’ ‘‘Physical
address,’’ and ‘‘United States parent
company(s)’’ in alphabetical order to
read as follows:
■
§ 98.6
Definitions.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
Cogeneration unit means a unit that
produces electrical energy and useful
thermal energy for industrial,
commercial, or heating or cooling
purposes, through the sequential or
simultaneous use of the original fuel
energy.
*
*
*
*
*
North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code(s)
means the six-digit code(s) that
represents the product(s)/activity(s)/
service(s) at a facility or supplier as
listed in the Federal Register and
defined in ‘‘North American Industrial
Classification System Manual 2007,’’
available from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, National Technical
Information Service, Alexandria, VA
22312, phone (703) 605–6000 or (800)
553–6847. https://www.census.gov/eos/
www/naics/.
*
*
*
*
*
Physical address, with respect to a
United States parent company as
defined in this section, means the street
address, city, state and zip code of that
company’s physical location.
*
*
*
*
*
United States parent company(s)
means the highest-level United States
company(s) with an ownership interest
in the reporting entity as of December
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:31 Sep 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
31 of the year for which data are being
reported.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–23674 Filed 9–17–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 261
[EPA–R05–RCRA–2010–0758; FRL–9201–2]
Hazardous Waste Management
System; Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste Amendment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; amendment.
AGENCY:
The EPA (also, ‘‘the Agency’’
or ‘‘we’’) is amending the exclusion for
the American Steel Cord facility in
Scottsburg, Indiana to reflect changes in
ownership and name.
DATES: This amendment is effective on
September 22, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Todd Ramaly, Land and Chemicals
Division, Region 5, Mail Code LR–8J,
Environmental Protection Agency,
77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois
60604; telephone number: (312) 353–
9317; fax number: (312) 582–5190;
e-mail address: ramaly.todd@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
In this document EPA is amending
appendix IX to part 261 to reflect a
change in the status of a particular
exclusion and, as such, will apply to a
single facility.
B. How can I get copies of related
information?
EPA has established a docket for this
action under Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
2010–0758. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Records Center, 7th floor, U.S. EPA
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. We recommend you telephone
Todd Ramaly at (312) 353–9317 before
visiting the Region 5 office. The public
may copy material from the regulatory
docket at $0.15 per page.
C. Why is EPA taking this action?
The petition process under Title 40
Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR)
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
260.20 and 260.22 allows facilities to
demonstrate that a specific waste from
a particular generating facility should
not be regulated as a hazardous waste.
Based on waste-specific information
provided by the petitioner, EPA granted
an exclusion for up to 3,000 cubic yards
of F006, wastewater treatment sludges
from electroplating operations, annually
to American Steel Cord, Scottsburg (64
FR 3869, January 26, 1999).
On April 22, 2010, the Agency was
notified that ownership of the
Scottsburg facility had been transferred
to Tokusen U.S.A., Inc. Scottsburg (Tokusen). Tokusen certified
it will meet all terms and conditions set
forth in the delisting and will not
change the characteristics of the waste
at the Scottsburg facility without prior
Agency approval. This notice
documents the change by updating
appendix IX to incorporate a change in
name.
There are also a number of minor
typographical errors identified in the
existing exclusion that will be fixed by
this amendment. The sentences
containing the list of verification
constituents in condition 1 of the
exclusion are combined with a colon
and the list of allowable concentrations
with semicolons. The constituent
‘‘benzo butyl phthlate’’ is corrected to
‘‘benzylbutylphthalate’’. A zero is added
before the decimal for concentrations
that are less than 1. The description of
the waste is corrected from ‘‘wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) sludge’’ to
‘‘wastewater treatment sludges’’
(description based on the listing).
Confusing timing language in condition
4(d) of the exclusion is corrected from
‘‘* * * (if no information is presented
under paragraph (c) the initial receipt of
information described in paragraph (a)
* * *’’ to ‘‘* * * if no information is
presented under paragraph (c) * * *’’
These changes to appendix IX of part
261 are effective September 22, 2010.
The Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 amended section
3010 of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) to allow rules to
become effective in less than six months
when the regulated community does not
need the six-month period to come into
compliance. As described above, the
facility has certified that it is prepared
to comply. Therefore, a six-month delay
in the effective date is not necessary in
this case. This provides the basis for
making this amendment effective
immediately upon publication under
the Administrative Procedures Act
pursuant to 5 United States Code
(U.S.C.) 5531(d).
E:\FR\FM\22SER1.SGM
22SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 22, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57669-57686]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23674]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925; FRL-9204-7]
RIN 2060-AQ02
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends the Final Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases Rule to require reporters subject to the rule to provide: The
name, address, and percentage ownership of their U.S. parent
company(s); their primary North American Industry Classification System
code(s) as well as all additional applicable North American Industry
Classification System code(s); and an indication of whether or not any
of their reported emissions are from a cogeneration unit. This final
action also corrects an editorial error in revisions made to the
General Provisions published earlier this year.
DATES: The final rule is effective on November 22, 2010.
[[Page 57670]]
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925. All documents in the docket are listed on the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
EPA's Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. This Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is
(202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information and
implementation materials, please go to the Web site https://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html. To submit a question,
select Rule Help Center, followed by Contact Us. You may also contact
Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs
(MC-6207J), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-9263; fax
number: (202) 343-2342; e-mail address: GHGMRR@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. This amendment to 40 CFR
part 98 affects facilities that are direct emitters of GHGs, and
suppliers of fuels and industrial gases that are already subject to the
rule. Regulated categories and entities include those listed in Table 1
of this preamble.
Table 1--Examples of Regulated Entities by Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS Code entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Stationary Fuel .................. Facilities operating
Combustion Sources. boilers, process
heaters,
incinerators,
turbines, and
internal combustion
engines:
211 Extractors of crude
petroleum and
natural gas.
321 Manufacturers of
lumber and wood
products.
322 Pulp and paper mills.
325 Chemical
manufacturers.
324 Petroleum refineries
and manufacturers of
coal products.
316, 326, 339 Manufacturers of
rubber and
miscellaneous
plastic products.
331 Steel works, blast
furnaces.
332 Electroplating,
plating, polishing,
anodizing, and
coloring.
336 Manufacturers of
motor vehicle parts
and accessories.
221 Electric, gas, and
sanitary services.
622 Health services.
611 Educational services.
325193 Ethyl alcohol
manufacturing
facilities.
Electricity Generation....... 221112 Fossil-fuel fired
electric generating
units, including
units owned by
Federal and
municipal
governments and
units located in
Indian Country.
Adipic Acid Production....... 325199 Adipic acid
manufacturing
facilities.
Aluminum Production.......... 331312 Primary Aluminum
production
facilities.
Ammonia Manufacturing........ 325311 Anhydrous and aqueous
ammonia
manufacturing
facilities.
Cement Production............ 327310 Portland Cement
manufacturing
plants.
Ferroalloy Production........ 331112 Ferroalloys
manufacturing
facilities.
Glass Production............. 327211 Flat glass
manufacturing
facilities.
327213 Glass container
manufacturing
facilities.
327212 Other pressed and
blown glass and
glassware
manufacturing
facilities.
HCFC-22 Production and HFC-23 325120 Chlorodifluoromethane
Destruction. manufacturing
facilities.
Hydrogen Production.......... 325120 Hydrogen
manufacturing
facilities.
Iron and Steel Production.... 331111 Integrated iron and
steel mills, steel
companies, sinter
plants, blast
furnaces, basic
oxygen process
furnace shops.
Lead Production.............. 331419 Primary lead smelting
and refining
facilities.
331492 Secondary lead
smelting and
refining facilities.
Lime Production.............. 327410 Calcium oxide,
calcium hydroxide,
dolomitic hydrates
manufacturing
facilities.
Magnesium Production......... 331419 Primary refiners of
nonferrous metals by
electrolytic
methods.
331492 Secondary magnesium
processing plants.
Nitric Acid Production....... 325311 Nitric acid
manufacturing
facilities.
Petrochemical Production..... 32511 Ethylene dichloride
manufacturing
facilities.
325199 Acrylonitrile,
ethylene oxide,
methanol
manufacturing
facilities.
325110 Ethylene
manufacturing
facilities.
325182 Carbon black
manufacturing
facilities.
Petroleum Refineries......... 324110 Petroleum refineries.
Phosphoric Acid Production... 325312 Phosphoric acid
manufacturing
facilities.
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing. 322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322130 Paperboard mills.
Silicon Carbide Production... 327910 Silicon carbide
abrasives
manufacturing
facilities.
Soda Ash Manufacturing....... 325181 Alkalies and chlorine
manufacturing
facilities.
212391 Soda ash, natural,
mining and/or
beneficiation.
Titanium Dioxide Production.. 325188 Titanium dioxide
manufacturing
facilities.
Underground Coal Mines....... 212113 Underground
anthracite coal
mining operations.
212112 Underground
bituminous coal
mining operations.
[[Page 57671]]
Zinc Production.............. 331419 Primary zinc refining
facilities.
331492 Zinc dust reclaiming
facilities,
recovering from
scrap and/or
alloying purchased
metals.
Municipal Solid Waste 562212 Solid waste
Landfills. landfills.
221320 Sewage treatment
facilities.
Industrial Waste Landfills... 562212 Solid waste
landfills.
322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322122 Newsprint mills.
322130 Paperboard mills.
311611 Meat processing
facilities.
311411 Frozen fruit, juice,
and vegetable
manufacturing
facilities.
311421 Fruit and vegetable
canning facilities.
221320 Sewage treatment
facilities.
Industrial Wastewater 562212 Solid waste
Treatment. landfills.
322110 Pulp mills.
322121 Paper mills.
322122 Newsprint mills.
322130 Paperboard mills.
311611 Meat processing
facilities.
311411 Frozen fruit, juice,
and vegetable
manufacturing
facilities.
311421 Fruit and vegetable
canning facilities.
221320 Sewage treatment
facilities.
325193 Ethyl alcohol
manufacturing
facilities.
Manure Management \a\........ 112111 Beef cattle feedlots.
112120 Dairy cattle and milk
production
facilities.
112210 Hog and pig farms.
112310 Chicken egg
production
facilities.
112330 Turkey Production.
112320 Broilers and Other
Meat type Chicken
Production.
Suppliers of Coal Based 211111 Coal liquefaction at
Liquids Fuels. mine sites.
Suppliers of Petroleum 324110 Petroleum refineries.
Products.
Suppliers of Natural Gas and 221210 Natural gas
NGLs. distribution
facilities.
211112 Natural gas liquid
extraction
facilities.
Suppliers of Industrial GHGs. 325120 Industrial gas
manufacturing
facilities.
Suppliers of Carbon Dioxide 325120 Industrial gas
(CO2). manufacturing
facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG Reporting
Rule using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due to a
Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds for
this purpose.
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the types of
entities that may be reporting under 40 CFR part 98 and, therefore, may
be affected by this action. However, other types of entities not listed
in the table could also be subject to reporting requirements. To
determine whether an entity is affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 98,
subpart A. EPA has also proposed reporting requirements for several
other source categories (rule subparts). If these subparts are
finalized, entities subject to them would be also subject to this
action starting with their first reports. The following subparts have
been proposed, but not yet finalized, by EPA:
40 CFR part 98, subpart I (Electronics Manufacturing) (75
FR 18652, April 12, 2010);
40 CFR part 98, subpart L (Fluorinated Gas Production) (75
FR 18652, April 12, 2010);
40 CFR part 98, subpart W (Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems) (75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010);
40 CFR part 98, subpart DD (Electric Transmission and
Distribution Equipment Use) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 2010);
40 CFR part 98, subpart QQ (Imports and Exports of
Fluorinated GHGs Inside Pre-charged Equipment and Closed-cell Foams (75
FR 18652, April 12, 2010);
40 CFR part 98, subpart RR (Injection and Geologic
Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide (75 FR 18576, April 12, 2010); and
40 CFR part 98, subpart SS (Electrical Equipment
Manufacture or Refurbishment) (75 FR 18652, April 12, 2010).
If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular entity, consult the Web site or the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER GENERAL INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of this final
rule is available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by November 22,
2010. Note, under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established
by this final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or
criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
The following acronyms and abbreviations are used in this document:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e CO2-equivalent
CUSIP Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures
DUNS Data Universal Numbering System
EIA Economic Impact Analysis
EO Executive Order
[[Page 57672]]
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FEIN Federal Employer Identification Numbers
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
HCFC hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
ICR Information Collection Request
LDC Local Distribution Company
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
OMB Office of Management and Budget
SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
SEC Securities and Exchange Commission
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S. United States
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Background on the Final Rule
B. Summary of the Final Rule
C. Legal Authority
D. Relationship to Other Programs
II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public Comments
A. U.S. Parent Company
B. NAICS Code(s)
C. Cogeneration
D. Frequency of Reporting
E. Applicability of the Reporting Requirements
F. Miscellaneous Public Comments and Responses
G. Correction to Subpart A
III. Economic Impacts of the Final Rule
A. How were compliance costs estimated?
B. What are the costs of the rule?
C. What are the economic impacts of the rule?
D. What are the impacts of the rule on small businesses?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
A. Background on the Final Rule
On April 12, 2010, EPA proposed this rule amending 40 CFR part 98,
which provides the regulatory framework for the GHG Reporting Program
(GHGRP).\1\ The GHGRP requires the reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and other relevant information from certain source categories
in the United States (U.S). The GHGRP, which became effective December
29, 2009, includes reporting requirements for facilities that emit GHGs
(``facilities'') and for suppliers of fuels and industrial gases
(``suppliers''). Facilities and suppliers that meet the applicability
criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A (``regulated entities'' or
``reporters'') must submit annual GHG reports in accordance with the
provisions in 40 CFR 98.3(c).\2\ For more detailed background
information on the GHGRP, see the preamble to the final rule that
established the program (74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR part 98.
\2\ Because mobile sources are not covered under 40 CFR part 98,
this rule does not apply to them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule amends 40 CFR part 98 to include new requirements for
reporters to provide information on their U.S. parent company(s), on
their primary and additional applicable North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code(s), and on whether any of their
reported emissions are from a cogeneration unit (also called combined
heat and power). Facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98
must provide this additional information in their annual reports. This
action also amends 40 CFR part 98, subpart A to correct a drafting
error in the revisions to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) published on July 12, 2010
(75 FR 39758).
This preamble is divided into four sections. The first section of
the preamble provides background and an overview of the final rule,
discusses EPA's legal authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for
collecting the additional information and summarizes the relationship
between this information and the information already collected by other
programs. The second section of the preamble describes the new
reporting requirements finalized by this action, describes major
changes since proposal, discusses public comments and EPA responses,
and describes the revisions made to 40 CFR 98.2(a)(2) to correct the
editorial error published on July 12, 2010. The third section of the
preamble provides a summary of the impacts and costs of the final rule
and discusses comments on the regulatory impacts analyses. The fourth
and final section of the preamble discusses the various statutory and
executive order requirements applicable to the final rule.
B. Summary of the Final Rule
This action amends 40 CFR part 98 by adding several data elements
to the list specified in 40 CFR 98.3. These data elements must be
included in the annual GHG reports that facilities and suppliers
subject to 40 CFR part 98 are required to submit. Specifically, this
rule requires each reporter to (1) Provide the names and physical
addresses of all of its U.S. parent companies and their respective
percentages of ownership; (2) provide its primary NAICS code(s) and all
additional applicable NAICS code(s); and (3) indicate whether any of
its reported emissions are from a cogeneration unit located at the
facility.
This rule applies to all facilities and suppliers required to
report under 40 CFR part 98, including those covered by subparts
published on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 56260) and on July 12, 2010 (75 FR
39736).\3\ Therefore, all facilities and suppliers that meet the
applicability criteria in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A are required to
report the additional data elements included in this rule.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ If additional categories are finalized in 40 CFR part 98,
then this rule applies to those categories as well.
\4\ EPA will not be implementing subpart JJ of the Mandatory GHG
Reporting Rule using funds provided in its FY2010 appropriations due
to a Congressional restriction prohibiting the expenditure of funds
for this purpose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Legal Authority
EPA is finalizing this rule under the existing authority provided
in CAA section 114. As noted in the preamble to the Final Rule for
Mandatory Reporting of GHGs (Part 98), CAA section 114 provides EPA
with broad authority to require the information mandated by this final
rule because such information will inform EPA's implementation of
various CAA provisions (74 FR 66264). Under CAA section 114(a)(1), the
Administrator may require emission sources, persons subject to the CAA,
manufacturers of emission control or process equipment, or persons whom
the Administrator believes may have necessary information, to monitor
and report emissions and to provide such other information as the
Administrator requests for the purposes of carrying out any provision
of the CAA (except for a provision of title II with respect to motor
vehicles).
As discussed in greater detail in Sections I.C and II.Q of the
preamble to the final Part 98 rule and in the response to comments for
40 CFR part 98,\5\ EPA may gather information for a
[[Page 57673]]
variety of purposes, including for the purpose of assisting in the
development of emissions standards under CAA section 111, determining
compliance with implementation plans or standards, or more broadly for
``carrying out any provision'' of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Responses to major comments can be found in the preamble to
the final Part 98 (74 FR 56260). Responses to additional comments
can be found in volumes 1 through 42 of the response to comments
document entitled ``Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: EPA's
Response to Public Comments'' in docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508 (see
https://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#docketDetail?R=EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, CAA section 103 authorizes EPA to establish a
national research and development program, including nonregulatory
approaches and technologies, for the prevention and control of air
pollution, including GHGs. The data collected under this final rule
would be immediately available to EPA and could inform EPA's
implementation of CAA section 103(g) regarding improvements in sector-
based nonregulatory strategies and technologies for preventing or
reducing air pollutants.
The data collected through this final rule would be immediately
available to EPA and could be used for the purposes of providing
additional information to support more effective research and develop
actions to address GHG emissions. For example, corporate parent and
NAICS data would assist EPA in developing and improving emission
inventories, as well as characterizing emissions data in several
different ways. A more detailed understanding of the sources and
operational categories of GHG emissions could lead to improvements in
air pollution emissions information that is relied upon to develop
effective control strategies. For example, EPA could use the NAICS code
information gathered by this rule to compare results both within
industries and across industry sectors.
Finally, the information gathered through this rule will be
immediately available to enhance EPA's implementation of various
nonregulatory programs aimed at encouraging voluntary reductions of GHG
emissions. Under the authority of CAA section 103, EPA has launched a
variety of nonregulatory programs aimed at reducing emissions of
GHGs.\6\ The additional data will assist EPA by providing more detailed
information on possible sources, and facility operations within
industrial sectors for EPA to work with in the context of these
programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For example, Climate Leaders, Combined Heat and Power
Partnership, and Energy Star.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the broad scope of CAA section 114, it is appropriate for EPA
to gather the information required by this final rule because such
information is relevant to EPA's implementation of a wide variety of
CAA provisions and the burden of submitting such information is low.
D. Relationship to Other Programs
EPA investigated other Federal and non-Federal reporting programs
that collect information similar to the information that EPA will
collect under this rule to determine if any existing sources of
information met all EPA's objectives. These objectives included:
Identifying each reporter's highest-level U.S. parent company(s);
identifying each reporter's primary and any additional applicable NAICS
codes; identifying facilities using cogeneration; covering all
reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98; collecting data annually; and
having the information available to EPA. This section of the preamble
summarizes EPA's findings from our review of other programs. For
additional information on reporting requirements for these data
elements in existing Federal and non-Federal programs, please see
Section I.D of the proposal preamble (75 FR 18455, April 12, 2010) and
the following memoranda ``Review of Non-Federal Existing Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Programs Requiring Reporting of Parent Company Ownership''
and ``Summary of Existing State Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs''
located in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925.
1. EPA and Other Federal Data Collection Programs
Federal voluntary programs, such as Climate Leaders and U.S.
Department of Energy's Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program,
collect some data elements (such as data related to NAICS codes) that
are similar to the data that EPA will collect under this rule. However,
none of the voluntary programs collect data from all of the facilities
and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98. In addition, the voluntary
programs that collect these data do not use the same definitions for
data elements.
U.S. Parent Company:
Currently, three EPA programs collect parent company information:
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) under Section 313 of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act; Risk Management Plans under
CAA section 212(r); and the Inventory Update Rule under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). Of these three programs, TRI is the only
one that requires reporters to submit information on their highest-
level U.S. parent company.\7\ TRI requires reporters to report the name
of their one parent company with the largest ownership interest in the
facility. TRI also requires the parent company's Dun & Bradstreet Data
Universal Numbering System (DUNS) \8\ identifier to be reported
annually. This amendment to 40 CFR part 98 differs from TRI parent
company reporting requirements in that it requires reporting of: (1)
All parent companies, rather than just one parent company; (2) the
physical address of each parent company, but not the DUNS identifier;
and (3) the percentage of ownership interest for each parent company.
EPA estimates that approximately two-thirds of the reporters subject to
40 CFR part 98 are also required to report to TRI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For purposes of TRI reporting, a reporter's parent company
is defined as the highest-level company located in the U.S. that
directly owns at least 50 percent of the voting stock of the
company. When a facility is owned by more than one company and none
of the owners directly owns 50 percent or more of the voting stock,
the facility reports the name of either the facility operator or the
owner with the largest ownership interest in the facility as its
U.S. parent company. (Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting
Forms and Instructions, EPA 260-R-09-006, October 2009. page 34).
\8\ The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) is a unique 9-
digit numerical identifier used to identify individual business
entities in databases maintained by Dun & Bradstreet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several EPA programs under the CAA, including the GHGRP,\9\ require
reporters to identify the ``owner or operator'' of each affected
facility. Although in some cases, the owner or operator is also the
highest-level U.S. parent company, the information currently collected
under the majority of CAA programs is not designed to specifically
identify the highest-level U.S. parent company, because that
information is not necessary to determine compliance with particular
regulatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ GHGRP refers to the implementation of 40 CFR part 98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary and Other NAICS Codes:
The final rule also requires facilities and suppliers reporting
under 40 CFR part 98 to report their primary and all additional
applicable NAICS codes.\10\ In the large majority of cases, facilities
and suppliers will submit a single NAICS
[[Page 57674]]
code. However, infrequently a facility/supplier may have two distinct
products/activities/services providing comparable revenue. In these
cases the facility/supplier may also report a second primary NAICS
code. Among all EPA programs, only TRI requires reporters to submit
primary NAICS codes as well as other relevant NAICS codes. As noted
above, EPA estimates that approximately two-thirds of the reporters
required to report under the GHGRP are also required to report to TRI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
code(s) are defined as the six-digit code(s) that represents the
product(s)/activity(s)/service(s) at a facility or supplier as
listed in the Federal Register and defined in ``North American
Industrial Classification System Manual 2007,'' available from the
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service.
A reporter's primary NAICS code is the NAICS code that most
accurately describes the reporter's primary product/activity/service
based on revenue. Additional NAICS codes describe the product(s)/
activity(s)/service(s) at the facility that are not related to the
principal source of revenue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA collects some NAICS code information through routine compliance
reporting in multiple programs,\11\ but those programs either do not
require primary and other NAICS codes be designated as such, or they do
not define a primary NAICS code as it is defined in this rule. In
addition, none of the compliance databases provide complete coverage of
the facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ List of Programs Collecting NAICS: AIR Facility System
(AFS); Facility Response Plan (FRP); Integrated Compliance
Information System (ICIS); National Emissions Inventory (NEI);
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES); Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo); Risk
Management Plan (RMP); and Toxics Release Inventory System (TRIS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cogeneration:
There are currently no EPA programs that require facilities or
suppliers to identify and report the use of cogeneration units located
at the facility. EPA's Combined Heat and Power Partnership, a voluntary
program, requires that partners agree to provide data on existing
cogeneration projects to help EPA determine climate benefits.\12\
However, this is a voluntary program and does not provide coverage of
all cogeneration units. The Energy Information Administration collects
information on cogeneration from utility and non-utility power
generators greater than 1 megawatt,\13\ but does not collect this
information from all facilities and suppliers subject to 40 CFR part
98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ https://www.epa.gov/chp.
\13\ Energy Information Agency-860, Annual Electric Generator
Report https://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia860.html
and, Energy Information Agency-861, Annual Electric Power Industry
Report https://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia861.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Non-Federal Data Collection Programs
EPA reviewed State and other reporting initiatives or protocols to
determine whether they contain information on U.S. parent companies,
NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that is comparable in terms of coverage
(of facilities and suppliers), and whether the specific information
collected is comparable in data quality and timeliness to that required
under this rule. EPA also considered whether the Agency had access to
and could itself release the data collected under these programs.
In general, the State and voluntary initiatives do not collect
information on U.S. parent company, NAICS code(s), or cogeneration that
is comparable to that required under this final rule regarding coverage
(of facilities and suppliers), specific information collected, and data
quality and timeliness. For additional information on the collection of
parent company, NAICS codes, and cogeneration information by States,
and other programs or initiatives, please see Section I.D. of the
proposal preamble (75 FR 18455) and the following memoranda ``Review of
Non-Federal Existing Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs Requiring
Reporting of Parent Company Ownership'' and ``Summary of Existing State
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Programs,'' located in Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0925.
II. The Final Rule and Reponses to Public Comments
This section of the preamble explains the requirements for the
final rule, describes the major changes to the proposed rule, and
summarizes the public comments and responses.
A. U.S. Parent Company
In the proposed rule published on April 12, 2010 (75 FR 18455), EPA
defined United States parent company(s) as the highest-level United
States company(s) with an ownership interest in the reporting entity as
of December 31 of the reporting year. Although the proposed rule
language included the requirements for only one option, EPA proposed
two options in the preamble for reporting U.S. parent company
information. As proposed, Option 1 would require all facilities and
suppliers subject to 40 CFR part 98 to provide the legal name and
physical address of their highest-level U.S. parent company. Reporters
would then select the appropriate ownership status from a list of three
types of ownership:
``Single ownership'' for entities owned by a single company that
is itself not owned by another company.
``Wholly owned'' for entities owned by a single company that is
itself owned by another company.
``Multiple ownership'' for entities owned by more than one
company).
Alternatively, in the proposed Option 2, reporters would provide
the names and physical addresses of all of their U.S. parent companies
and their respective percentages of ownership.
1. Summary of U.S. Parent Company Reporting Requirements
After considering all the comments received, EPA has selected
Option 2. Option 2 requires reporters to report the name(s) and
physical address(es) of all of their U.S. parent companies and their
respective percentages of ownership. For the final rule, EPA has
defined U.S. parent company(s) as highest-level U.S. company(s) with an
ownership interest in the reporting entity as of December 31 of the
year for which data are being reported. The physical address of a U.S.
parent company is defined as the street address, city, state and zip
code of the U.S. parent company's physical location. Table 2 of this
preamble provides instructions for how facilities or suppliers should
report based on various ownership structures.
Table 2--Instructions for Reporting U.S. Parent Company(ies)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
How to report U.S. parent
Reporting scenario company
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reporting entity is entirely owned Provide that company's legal
by a single U.S. company that is not name and physical address as
owned by any other company (e.g., it the U.S. parent company and
is not a subsidiary or division of report 100 percent ownership.
another company).
The reporting entity is entirely owned Provide the legal name and
by a single U.S. company which is, physical address of the
itself, owned by another company highest-level company in the
(e.g., it is a division or subsidiary ownership hierarchy as the
of a higher-level company). U.S. parent company and report
100 percent ownership.
The reporting entity is owned by more Provide the legal names and
than one U.S. company (e.g., company A physical addresses of all of
owns 40 percent, company B owns 35 the highest-level companies
percent, and company C owns 25 with an ownership interest as
percent). U.S. parent companies, and
report the percent ownership
of each company.
[[Page 57675]]
The reporting entity is entirely owned Provide the legal name and
by a foreign company. physical address of the
foreign company's highest-
level company based in the
U.S. as the U.S. parent
company and report 100 percent
ownership.
The reporting entity is partially owned Provide the legal name and
by a foreign company and partially physical address of the
owned by one or more U.S. companies. foreign entity's highest-level
company based in the U.S.,
along with the legal names and
physical addresses of the
other U.S. parent companies,
and report the percent
ownership of each company.
The reporting entity is owned by a The joint venture or
joint venture or cooperative. cooperative is its own U.S.
parent company. Provide the
joint venture or cooperative's
legal name and physical
address as the U.S. parent
company and report 100 percent
ownership.
The reporting entity is a federally Enter U.S. Government, and do
owned facility. not report physical address or
percent ownership.\14\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Federally owned facilities are not required to report
percent ownership because all federally owned facilities are 100
percent owned by the Federal government. Additionally, the highest-
level U.S. ``parent'' for federally owned facilities is the U.S.
Government, and a physical address is not required to establish a
unique identity for the U.S. Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal
There are no major changes to the proposed rule for U.S. parent
company reporting requirements for Option 2. That option requires
facilities to report the name(s) and physical address(es) of all of
their U.S. parent companies and their respective percentages of
ownership. The rationale for the selection of Option 2 can be found in
Section II.A.3 of this preamble.
3. Summary of Public Comments and Responses
This section provides a summary of the comments and responses on
EPA's proposal to require reporting of U.S. parent company and
ownership information. Also summarized in this section are public
comments and responses on EPA's consideration of reporting numeric
identifiers for parent companies, in addition to parent company names.
General Comments on Reporting of U.S. Parent Company and Ownership
Information:
Comments: One commenter noted that collecting corporate identifier
information only from those facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or
more of CO2 per year would provide only a partial picture of
a company's overall emissions, as some companies may own facilities
with emissions below the 25,000 metric ton threshold. This same
commenter suggested that EPA should encourage company-level data
reporting and require companies to report the relative emissions of
each of their facilities subject to the reporting rule as compared to
total company emissions.
Response: Regarding the first issue, when EPA established the GHGRP
last year, we completed a comprehensive threshold analysis and
determined that a 25,000 metric ton threshold generally suited the
needs of the Agency by providing comprehensive coverage of emissions
with a reasonable number of reporters, thereby creating the robust data
set necessary for the quantitative analyses of the range of likely GHG
policies, programs and regulations. For additional background on
thresholds, please see Section II.E. of the preamble of the final Part
98 (74 FR 56271, October 30, 2009). We did not reopen that decision in
the April 12, 2010 proposal to add U.S. parent company, NAICS codes,
and cogeneration as data elements to the annual report required under
40 CFR 98.3.
Regarding the second issue, EPA interprets the commenter's remarks
to indicate that companies, rather than individual facilities, should
report emissions. This issue was also addressed when EPA established
the GHGRP and was not revisited in the April 12, 2010 proposal. As
described in Section II.F of the preamble of the final Part 98, the
Agency elected to require reporting at the facility level in 40 CFR
part 98 because the purpose of this rule is to collect data from
suppliers and from facilities with direct GHG emissions above selected
thresholds for use in analyzing, developing, and implementing current
and potential future CAA GHG policies and programs. Facility-level data
are needed to support analyses of some types of potential GHG reduction
programs, such as New Source Performance Standards. Corporate-level
reporting was not selected because corporate reporting without
facility-specific details would not provide sufficient data to assess
many potential CAA GHG policies and programs. For additional discussion
of the level of reporting, please see Section II.F of the preamble of
the final Part 98 (74 FR 56273, October 30, 2009).
Moreover, as explained in the proposal and earlier in this
preamble, EPA determined that reporting of all U.S. parent companies
and their percent ownership will provide the Agency with necessary data
to develop and improve emission inventories and to enhance EPA's
implementation of various nonregulatory programs aimed at encouraging
voluntary reductions of GHG emissions. Requiring individual facilities
to report how their emissions compare to the total emissions of their
parent companies would be burdensome, because it would require each
facility to obtain information from all the other facilities (including
those located overseas) owned by their parent company(ies) in order to
make this type of comparison. EPA has concluded that the benefit of
this information does not outweigh the additional burden to the
regulated entity because the Agency and the public can compile similar
information at a much lower burden by analyzing all GHG reports
submitted by facilities with the same reported U.S. parent company.
Furthermore, as stated above, the GHGRP is a facility and supplier
level program designed to inform future programs and policies under the
CAA. EPA does not consider a full corporate footprint analysis to be
necessary to meet the goals of this program at this time.
Comment: A commenter from the offshore operations sector requested
that EPA clearly define the parent company reporting requirements
specific to offshore petroleum and natural gas facilities. In
particular, the commenter noted that while the offshore facility itself
may have a single or multiple owners, each development and/or
production field associated with the facility may have multiple owners.
The commenter added that this situation could complicate the
determination of
[[Page 57676]]
percentage of ownership interest for each reporting entity.
Response: Reporting entities (facilities or suppliers) are required
to report information on their own parent company or companies, as
described in Table 2 of this preamble. Parent company reporting is
limited to information on the parents of the reporting entity itself,
and does not include parent company information on any associated
entities or customers that are not part of the reporting entity. The
facility definition for an offshore petroleum/natural gas operator in
the proposed 40 CFR part 98, subpart W: Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems rulemaking (75 FR 18608, April 12, 2010) is limited to the
offshore platform. Production fields and development fields that
produce oil or gas sent to the platform are not considered part of the
facility. Therefore, the facility reports the parent company or
companies for the platform and secondary platform structures connected
to the platform via walkways, storage tanks associated with the
platform structure and floating production and offloading equipment,
and does not include company information for any associated entities,
such as production or development fields.
To further clarify, the rule language was modified to include the
phrase, ``of the reporting entity'' in paragraph 98.3(c)(11), which
requires that reporting entities report ``Legal name(s) and physical
address(es) of the highest-level United States parent company(s) of the
reporting entity and the percentage of ownership interest for each
listed parent company as of December 31 of the year for which data are
being reported * * *.''
EPA understands that operations at facilities in the oil and
natural gas sector can be complex with many partners working together
to explore for, produce, process, transport, and distribute oil and
natural gas products. Given the commenter's use of the term ``owner'',
EPA clarifies here that requirements to identify the ``owner'' of an
affected facility are different from the requirements to report U.S.
parent company. For example, ``owner'' refers to the person or legal
entity that owns the facility and its productive infrastructure. Under
this final rule, U.S. parent company means the highest-level U.S.
company(s) with an ownership interest in the reporting entity. A
regulated entity may report ``owner'' differently than U.S. parent
company in some cases. For example, a facility may report ``owner'' and
U.S. parent company differently if the legal entity that owns the
facility is a subsidiary to a U.S. parent company. A facility may also
report ``owner'' and U.S. parent company differently if an individual
with no company affiliation has an ownership interest in a facility,
since ``owner'' covers persons while U.S. parent company does not.
Proposed Options 1 and 2:
Comments: EPA received comments supporting both options. Comments
favoring Option 1 (i.e., requiring reporting the legal name and
physical address of the reporter's highest-level U.S. parent company
with the largest ownership share and the selection of the ownership
type that best describes the ownership structure for the reporter),
noted that Option 1 is the less burdensome option and questioned
whether the potential benefits of Option 2 outweighed the burden of
collecting the information. Furthermore, the comments stated that
complex ownership structures make it unlikely the person completing the
form would be able to provide the information on all parent companies.
The comments also noted that identifying the general corporate
structure (as proposed in Option 1) should provide the information
required by EPA and that submission of the name of the highest-level
U.S. company with the largest ownership interest is consistent with TRI
reporting requirements.
Commenters favoring Option 2 (i.e., requiring reporting of the
legal names, physical addresses and respective percent ownership of all
companies with an ownership stake in the regulated entity), noted that
Option 1 would overstate the GHG contribution of the largest ownership
interest and omit the contribution of the smaller ownership
interest(s). The commenters stated that this bias could limit the
usefulness of the parent company data and that Option 2 provides a more
complete picture of reporters' ownership, thereby providing greater
transparency regarding corporate GHG emissions. Some commenters added
that Option 2 would be more effective in terms of corporate
accountability. In addition, commenters noted that Option 2 complements
recent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Interpretive Guidance
on certain existing disclosure rules that requires public companies to
disclose the impact that climate change or regulation related to
climate change may have on their business. An industry commenter stated
that reporters should not have difficulty completing the reporting
under either option.
Response: After reviewing the comments received, EPA selected
Option 2 because it provides more complete information on parent
company ownership for reporters with multiple parent companies, thereby
providing greater accuracy in aggregating emissions to the parent
company level.
EPA acknowledges that there is a modest additional burden
associated with Option 2 for those reporters with multiple owners and
that Option 1 would be the lower cost Option.\15\ The additional total
national cost of Option 2 however, was estimated to be less than two
percent greater than Option 1. The burden estimate for Option 2
incorporates the additional effort associated with reporters asking
legal or management staff for information regarding complex ownership
structure. Option 1 supporters neither offered supporting information
or estimates of the additional burden nor refuted EPA's burden
estimates. EPA concluded that the additional benefits of Option 2
compared to Option 1 outweigh the potential costs of collecting more
comprehensive parent company information because the additional cost of
Option 2 is minimal while the additional benefit is substantial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ EPA's estimate of the burden of Option 1 versus Option 2
was presented in the Economic Impact Analysis for the proposed rule.
An updated estimate of the burden associated with Option 2 was
included in the Economic Impact Analysis for the final rule. These
documents are available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0925.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Authority to Collect Parent Company Information:
Comments: Two commenters questioned the need for EPA to collect
parent company information. One commenter stated that company
affiliation should not be used as a factor in policy development. The
other commenter's primary objection was that EPA had been vague and
non-specific in justifying collection of parent company information.
The commenter stated that EPA's authority to collect information under
CAA section 114 is limited by the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320), under which EPA must demonstrate that the
requested information has ``practical utility.'' The commenter stated
that EPA had not met the definition of ``practical utility'' in its
justification for collecting parent company information. The commenter
added that because practical utility is necessary for the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to grant an Information Collection Request
(ICR), EPA should not finalize this requirement until it has identified
and solicited comment on a practical use.
Response: As explained in the Section I.C of this preamble, CAA
section 114 is
[[Page 57677]]
sufficiently broad for EPA to collect this information. Section 114 of
the CAA generally authorizes EPA to gather information from any person
who owns or operates an emissions source, who is subject to a
requirement of the CAA, who manufacturers control or process equipment,
or who the Administrator believes has information necessary for the
purposes of CAA section 114(a). EPA may gather information for purposes
of establishing implementation plans or emissions standards,
determining compliance, or ``carrying out any provision'' of the CAA.
For these reasons, the Administrator may request that a person, on a
one-time, periodic or continuous basis, establish and maintain records,
make reports, install and operate monitoring equipment and, among other
things, provide such information the Administrator may reasonably
require. This language has been interpreted to grant EPA broad
authority. See, e.g., Dow Chemical Co. v. U.S., 467 U.S. 227, 233
(1986) (``Regulatory and enforcement authority generally carries with
it all modes of inquiring and investigation traditionally employed or
useful to execute the authority granted''). This information is
included in the existing ICR.
It is reasonable for EPA to request the parent company information.
Once EPA has this information, EPA will be able to immediately use it
to assist in implementation of agency policy and program goals
including developing and improving emission inventories and enhancing
the implementation of programs aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs. For
more information, refer to Section I.C of this preamble, where EPA has
further explained the immediate usefulness of this information under
the CAA.
Definition of U.S. Parent Company:
The proposed rule included a definition of ``United States parent
company(s)'' as follows: ``United States parent company(s) means the
highest-level United States company(s) with an ownership interest in
the reporting entity as of December 31 of the reporting year.''
Comment: One commenter requested that EPA clarify that ``reporting
year'' means the year for which emissions data are being reported and
not the year when the report is submitted to EPA.
Response: The intent in the proposal was for ``reporting year'' to
be interpreted as the year during which GHG data are monitored and
collected. The language has been clarified in the final rule. The
revised definition of U.S. parent company in the final rule reads:
``United States parent company(s) means the highest-level United States
company(s) with an ownership interest in the reporting entity as of
December 31 of the year for which data are being reported.''
Reporting by Foreign Owned Companies:
EPA solicited comments on whether facilities and suppliers owned by
foreign companies always have a U.S.-based parent company as defined in
the proposed rule. EPA was interested in receiving comments, data, and
analysis on whether there may be instances in which foreign-owned
facilities and suppliers do not have a U.S. parent company because we
wanted to determine if U.S. parent company reporting would be
appropriate for all reporters subject to 40 CFR part 98.
No comments were received on this topic, but some minor clarifying
changes were made in the final rule requirements for parent company
reporting for foreign corporations. For consistency, some of these
minor clarifying changes were also made in the final rule requirements
for parent company reporting for multiple U.S. companies. In the final
rule, if the reporting entity is entirely owned by a foreign company,
reporters must provide the legal name and physical address o